When a group of opponents to the “strong mayor” initiative talked to reporters earlier this month, a spontaneous debate over the initiative took place between two local veteran politicos. Steve Maviglio, public affairs consultant and Mayor Kevin Johnson’s unpaid spokesman, sparred with Phil Giarrizzo, a political consultant who is working for the camp that opposes the strong mayor initiative. Johnson, who leads the campaign for the initiative, would attain new powers if it passes. He would a... KathleenHaley Marion Millin comment-19795 2009-12-24T06:41:02Z 2009-12-24T06:41:02Z The exchange in this article is a good example of the slimy, slippery tactics that are used to get people to buy a greased pig in a poke ... without ever having a firm grasp on facts or the "quid pro quo" to follow, if the slime masters have their way. The 32,000 estimated valid signatures applied to a petition to put the Strong Mayor Initiative on the ballot -- which is not the same as endorsing or voting for the Strong Mayor Initiative. None of those people knew that the "public participation" ended where their signature did. Marion Millin 2009-12-24T06:41:02Z William Burg comment-19794 2009-12-24T03:00:02Z 2009-12-24T03:00:02Z StellaM: No, but he is hoping that at least 51% of us are completely uninformed idiots. He'd call 32,000 signatures on a ballot measure a purple-buttocked baboon if you paid him to do so. And yes, he thinks that if he continues to claim 50,000 signatures, we'll all magically believe it--it's called the "Big Lie" theory. William Burg 2009-12-24T03:00:02Z William Burg comment-19793 2009-12-24T02:57:36Z 2009-12-24T02:57:36Z TomRunge: One assumes that money given for the SMI by suburban developers like AKT and Friedman is given with the intent that the "quid pro quo" would come after the SMI actually goes into effect (assuming it does) rather than before, so it's a bit premature to assume that they would have gotten their quid pro quo already, isn't it? William Burg 2009-12-24T02:57:36Z Marion Millin comment-19792 2009-12-23T23:12:50Z 2009-12-23T23:12:50Z That's all he's got. Without those games, he and the SMI are lost. Marion Millin 2009-12-23T23:12:50Z Marion Millin comment-19791 2009-12-23T23:11:40Z 2009-12-23T23:11:40Z Ah, now we see why Runge is fallaciously trying to hang all of Natomas development on Heather Fargo, who wasn't in office when Angelo and his cronies got their hooks in the floodplain... Another soundbite, misleading propaganda like Maviglio delivers above. More reversals of fact and trying to hang " environmentally destructive development " on opponents of the SMI. Simultaneously ignoring the influence of AKT $$ in Kevin's coffers and AKT groundbreaking in Natomas and Federal environmental rulebreaking in development. What's IN that KoolAid, anyway? "So? I guess you're suggesting a quid pro quo from the Johnson administration." You guys can't play it both ways. The public is not as stupid and misinformed as you are counting on, despite your disinformation. Marion Millin 2009-12-23T23:11:40Z Stella M. comment-19790 2009-12-23T22:10:41Z 2009-12-23T22:10:41Z My god. Does Steve Maviglio (et al.) think we're all just completely uninformed idiots? He calls 32K signatures on a ballot measure (that not one of them read prior to signing) "public participation"? At least the Charter Review Committee had the integrity to go out and face the public as they carried on their (thankless, volunteer) efforts. At least they had the integrity to stand by their recommendations and present the minority/dissenting opinions for all to see. Does he think that if he continues to claim 50,000 signatures, we'll all magically believe it? And it will magically make it so? And that each and every one of those mythical persons had all the facts at hand and believes most emphatically that this initiative is right and good? I suppose if the SMI gang believes that if they continue to divert all legitimate questions thru sleight of hand, the public will never even notice. Stella M. 2009-12-23T22:10:41Z fifthgensacramentan comment-19789 2009-12-24T17:02:01Z 2009-12-24T17:02:01Z Tom, you cite a lot of opinions about Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) rules and Regulations. Being so engaged in the process-here’s some reading for you The IE stands for Independent Expenditure-Guess who is almost the biggest exploiter of that Process-Check out page 22 of the report #2 & #8 on the list. http://www.fppc.ca.gov/ie/IEReport2.pdf Then go to page 41- Californians for Better Government-at least Angelo’s a Californian…The IE Committee name has a familiar ring to Sacramentans for Accountable Government. Now about FPPC rules, that you seem to have a lot of understanding about…How about the name of an IE as it relates to it’s major contributors? Let’s first state that AKT was not disclosed by SAG as the money behind two different LLC’s North Natomas 575 Investors, LLC $25,000.00 West Lakeside, LLC $25,000.00 You would need to go to the Secretary of State’s Campaign disclosure filings, 1) Look up Angelo under their Major Contributor filing number, 483152, then 2) Use the historical search for the years 2007-2008 of contributions made to actually see the two separate contributions to SAG being attributed to AKT. Perhaps that's the guidance one receives when one of the lawyers associated with the initiative served on the FPPC. There are specific FPPC regulations regarding independent committees and their major contributors. From the FPPC Site Primarily Formed Ballot Measure Committees. Each state or local primarily formed ballot measure committees must list the economic or other special interests of their $50,000 donors in descending order in its committee name. This list must precede and not be interspersed with constituencies such as “concerned citizens,” or “taxpayers.” The Ballot measure for the SMI is specifically a City of Sacramento Initiative-The term “Sacramentans” is at the very least misleading. Mark & Angelo are both major donors-Mark lives in the County-not a City Resident and with regards to Angelo-Living in Place County- Is down right ....! So where’s the list in the name? Expressly Advocating a Ballot Measure Advertisements: If a contribution totaling $50,000 or more is made to a committee primarily formed to support or oppose a ballot measure, the name of the major donor must be included in the primarily formed committee’s advertisements if the major donor is one of the two highest contributors to the committee. Is a website and advertisement? I believe I have seen you infer so previously. Where are Angelo’s and Mark’s name? fifthgensacramentan 2009-12-24T17:02:01Z bbbbmer comment-19786 2009-12-23T19:49:52Z 2009-12-23T19:49:52Z AKT does NOTHING without a quid pro quo... bbbbmer 2009-12-23T19:49:52Z bbbbmer comment-19785 2009-12-23T19:48:20Z 2009-12-23T19:48:20Z As usual Mr. Maviglio exhibits pathological passive/aggression in baiting nonexistent issues and comparisons avoiding any reference to the factual representations of his opponent. bbbbmer 2009-12-23T19:48:20Z TomRunge comment-19782 2009-12-23T18:22:24Z 2009-12-23T18:22:24Z Gotcha. So no quid pro quo from Johnson, but plenty of evidence that the Building Trades are looking to keep their stranglehold on Sacramento so they can further destroy our environment. Thanks. TomRunge 2009-12-23T18:22:24Z William Burg comment-19756 2009-12-23T15:31:05Z 2009-12-23T15:31:05Z Johnson also pushed the Nestle Waters deal, and spoke strongly in favor of the Bob Leach/Mo Mohanna hotel project at 8th and K, just to name a couple. Incidentally, Friedman started the "Ice Blocks" development project idea while Fargo was still in office--it didn't lay fallow, he did preliminary clearance/cleanup work and even held two events inside the Crystal Ice building. The lot next door was also cleared by a separate developer. There was plenty of downtown infill during the Fargo administration, and pretty much every infill project that has happened since Johnson took office started under her watch. William Burg 2009-12-23T15:31:05Z TomRunge comment-19754 2009-12-23T08:16:38Z 2009-12-23T08:16:38Z So? I guess you're suggesting a quid pro quo from the Johnson administration. Please tell me what they've gotten out of him. The only development I've seen him push is infill development at the Railyards and DTP and urge Friedman to apply for Prop. 1C money to redevelop the the Crystal Building on R Street that sat fallow during the entirety of the Fargo years. The Building Trades are bankrolling the effort to stop the SMI. The Building Trades made a killing off of Sacramento by paving over Natomas during the Fargo years. The Fargo clan on the DCCC and the folks at the Building Trades would love to see that type of enironmentally destructive development continue. It looks like you do too. TomRunge 2009-12-23T08:16:38Z William Burg comment-19753 2009-12-23T06:49:26Z 2009-12-23T06:49:26Z Tom, you do know that suburb developer Tsakopoulos pumped $50,000 into the SMI, right? And so did suburban mall owner Mark Friedman? And if you look at the list of other donors, the only one who actually lives in the city of Sacramento is Kevin Johnson? Kind of makes you wonder. William Burg 2009-12-23T06:49:26Z TomRunge comment-19749 2009-12-23T04:10:00Z 2009-12-23T04:10:00Z Phil Giarrizzo has been hired by by the Building Trades Union to try and defeat the SMI. The Building Trades are the same folks who made a bundle off of destroying Natomas by turning it into an endless suburb. Pill Giarrizzo and the building trades would like to finish the job on our city and put in more tract homes. That's why they're pumping so much money into trying to defeat the SMI. TomRunge 2009-12-23T04:10:00Z