Dear Sac Press Staff:

This article violates the Terms of Service of this website. This article includes false information and is misleading, it should be removed.

Tom Hiltchak did not create this proposal, all he did was to help write the language of the proposal, because he was hired for his expertise in writing initiatives. The implication that this initiative came from "Republicans" is knowingly false information. Kevin Johnson is a Democrat.

The proposal came out of many discussions Kevin Johnson had about future of Sacramento. It was Kevin Johnson who "created" the strong Mayor proposal. I should add, after he had been contacted by many members of the public over this issue.

From what I understand Mr. Meade is a union member who is opposed to the Mayors plan.

If Sac Press is going to allow this type of intentional misinformation to be posted... I will be posting some real doozies...

Hello...

I'm not a union member - not sure where you got that from. I find it a little interesting that you accuse me of sharing knowingly false information, yet I have no idea how/why you would think that I am a member of a union.



All of the information I shared was also reported in other publications/sources: KCRA, Sac Bee, and SNR. What information is false?

I would be more than happy to provide detailed references for everything included in my story.

Sac Press Staff - If I have violated any TOS, I apologize. Please let me know what I need to do to correct it.

Mr. Meade, NOWHERE in the Bee article does it say REPUBLICAN or anything about Mr. Hiltchak "creating" this proposal..

If you wanted to editorialize about the Bee's article and your personal dislike for the proposal.. then feel free to do so on the Bee's website.

As it is you posted an article that tries to come off as legitimate and it includes knowingly false information to mislead voters.

Below are some references proving the information contained in my article. I have included selected text, as well as links for the entire articles, so that readers can determine the truth for themselves. If you are going to accuse someone of knowingly spreading false information, I would double check your facts first.


1. Please see this line in the article below - "The draft's author, attorney Thomas W. Hiltachk, said the measure would give the mayor more power than counterparts in Oakland and Fresno."

How Sacramento strong mayor plan stacks up
By Ryan Lillis (mailto:rlillis@sacbee.com) Sunday, Jan. 11, 2009
http://www.sacbee.com/ourregion/story/1532584.html

As strong mayor systems go, the one proposed for Sacramento by Mayor Kevin Johnson is about as muscular as they get.
The initiative drafted by Johnson's attorneys gives the mayor powers equal to chief executives in the largest cities in California and other parts of the country, according to outside observers and the lawyer who drafted the measure.
Notably, the Sacramento plan would greatly reduce the city manager's influence, from controlling city policy to acting as the mayor's administrator. And, according to a summary of the initiative written by the Sacramento City Attorney's Office, the measure would also reduce the City Council's power.
The draft's author, attorney Thomas W. Hiltachk, said the measure would give the mayor more power than counterparts in Oakland and Fresno. The City Council, however, would gain controls not seen in other strong mayor cities, including power to confirm mayoral appointees, Hiltachk said.


2. Mr Hiltchak was one of the leaders of a GOP group that sought to the change the "winner takes all" presidential election process in California.

GOP electoral effort founders
By Dan Morain, TLA Times Staff Writer
September 28, 2007 - http://articles.latimes.com/2007/sep/28/nation/na-initiative28

Two leaders abandon an initiative that would change the state's winner-take-all rule in presidential voting.
SACRAMENTO — A proposed California initiative campaign that could have helped Republicans hold on to the White House in 2008 was a shambles Thursday night, as two of its key consultants quit.
Unable to raise sufficient money and angered over a lack of disclosure by its one large donor, veteran political law attorney Thomas Hiltachk, who drafted the measure, said he was resigning from the committee.
Hiltachk's departure is a major blow to the operation because he organized other consultants who had set about trying to raise money and gather signatures for the initiative. Campaign spokesman Kevin Eckery said he was ending his role as well.
There remained a chance that the measure could be revived, but only if a major donor were to come forward to fund the petition drive. However, time is short to gather the hundreds of thousands of signatures needed by the end of November. And backers said Thursday that they believed the measure was all but dead, at least for the 2008 election.
Intended for the June 2008 ballot, the proposed initiative sought to change California's winner-take-all system to require that electoral votes be awarded based on how individual congressional districts vote.
Democrats were alarmed by the measure because they assume the Democratic nominee must capture all of California's 55 electoral votes to win the presidency. With Republicans holding 19 congressional seats in California, the GOP nominee would be expected to capture at least 19 of the state's electoral votes, nearly as many as are in Ohio.

3. Mr Hiltachak is clearly identified as a Republican leader by Capitol Weekly.

Capitol Weekly's Top 100 List, Part II
04/23/09
http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=xxebzaroirtenr

68. Tom Hiltachk, managing partner, Bell, McAndrews & Hiltachk
Hiltachk is more than an attorney, he’s a political animal. Never one to shy away from a partisan or political fight, Hiltachk was the man behind a plan to split California’s electoral votes (which would have significantly eased the Republican path to the presidency). Though the plan never went anywhere, the plan showed Hiltachk’s true colors – a political warrior who is not afraid to use the judicial branch to help achieve Republican goals.

Jim: Are you claiming that an article entitled "How Sacramento strong mayor plan stacks up" has nothing to do with the strong mayor initiative? By saying that the law firm "may" include a Republican, are you trying to suggest that Tom Hiltachk might not be a Republican?

It sounds like maybe you do work across party lines, Jim...sounds like you've been learning how to spin lies from Steve Maviglio himself!

Some more articles that mention Hiltachk:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rick-jacobs/ny-times-republ_b_61599.html

http://thegiulianipapers.typepad.com/the_giuliani_papers/rudys_money/

http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/content?oid=896279

http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:qGI2S7i9xrYJ:www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/crt_irs.pdf+%22Tom+Hiltachk%22&cd=11&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

http://mediamatters.org/research/200709260008

Hiltachk has done an awful lot of work for initiatives that are Republican-backed--and some that were allegedly non-partisan but were intended to benefit the Republican Party. He was even involved with a nonprofit that lost its nonprofit status due to explicitly partisan political activity.

Normally I try to ignore the Bee comments section, but there was an interesting response to the Bee article about the return of the "strong mayor" petition: apparently the City Council created an "independent auditor" position on May 19. The sole dissenting vote was Mayor Johnson. Apparently he didn't like the idea of having some city departments audited?

Report Back: Creation of Office of the City Auditor
Location: Citywide

Action: Moved/Seconded: Member Ray Tretheway/Member Lauren Hammond
Yes: Members Steve Cohn, Robert King Fong, Lauren Hammond, Kevin McCarty, Bonnie Pannell, Sandy Sheedy, Ray Tretheway, and Robbie Waters

No: Mayor Kevin Johnson

A motion passed directing the City Attorney to return with a proposed Ordinance
creating the Council appointed Office of the City Auditor and 1) approved bringing the Ordinance directly to Council bypassing Law & Legislation Committee review; 2) requested suggestions for mechanics and timelines regarding the hiring process; and 3) requested a Resolution creating a Standing Audit Committee.

http://www.sacbee.com/ourregion/story/1914040.html

Video of the meeting:
http://sacramento.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=8&clip_id=1935

Larry,

Thank you for writing about this issue. I was unable to fact check it late last night so I did not lay it out on the front page of The Sacramento Press. Overall, this article comes across as slanted against the initiative and includes possibly misleading party labels and wording. For example, drafting and creating are are quite different processes. I think on a hot button topic like this careful wording is important unless you intend this to be an opinion piece. Finally, thank you for responding with sources defending your words.

Jim,

Thank you for pointing out possible inaccuracies. I will have a staff member do some follow up and fact check. This is the kind of interaction that will lead to better and more accurate writing on our site.

Jim Knapp: The complement to the "strong mayor" initiative is an initiative to create an elected city auditor--thus, a very political position, requiring the approval of local moneyed interests in order to gain office. Johnson was the one who proposed having his buddy's company audit the city, and yes, that's why he opposed creating a new auditor position answerable to the council--if the auditor is answerable to the Council rather than the City Manager, the City Manager and Mayor would have no ability to influence the audit. The current city auditor position is answerable to the City Manager, and thus, yes, unreliable, because the City Manager can pressure the auditor to not audit certain departments (such as, for example, Develompent Services.)

This isn't an article; this is a biased, one-sided perspective trying to disguise itself as a news article.

Mr. Hiltachk is a Republican indeed. But the overwhelming majority of organizers and proponents of modernizing Sacramento's government are Democrats and Independents. Kim Mack, as mentioned in this piece, spoke strongly for this, and Obama supporters (like Mayor Johnson) did as well. The "guilt by association" here in this faux "article" is a thinly-veiled attempt at personal character assassination.

"Stop the Power Grab" is not a grassroots organization. It was formed by Local 39, the union that opposed the Mayor in the election and former Mayor Anne Rudin, who was an attack dog for Mayor Heather Fargo during the last campaign.

This "article" violates the Sacramento Press guidelines; it's a press release for opponents of having a mayor and council that are accountable to voters.

The Sacramento Press contacted Tom Hiltachk to verify whether or not he created the strong mayor proposal and this was his response via email:

I assisted in the research and drafting of the charter reform proposal, as did many other community members and leaders. As for as my "alignment" with certain groups, I am a lawyer and represent many clients. Some of those clients are "aligned" with one political party and others are "aligned" with other political parties. Most are not "aligned" with either, they are simply trying to navigate their way through the political process and I help them. The merits of the charter reform proposal should and can stand on their own.

So basically you're freaking out over the word "created" (vs. the word "written.") Change that one word and it's a fairly objective little piece. The reaction is far out of proportion to the article's use of language--Larry Meade isn't a spin-meister like Steve Maviglio, or a lawyer trained on how to say things that don't mean anything like Tom Hiltachk.

This isn't a Democrat or Republican initiative, it is a "developers with lots of money" initiative. They don't really care what party the electeds belong to as long as they're pulling the strings.

In response to Steve and Jim's responses Here's some background of how the "Mercenary" signatures gathers were advertised for on Craigslist back in Januray and February-check out the strongsac.com website and the fact that all the contact persons on this craigslist ad were Orange County phone #'s-real local grass roots-LOL

Don't forget to check out Hiltachk's testimony at council...more links to follow

I think we all await Steve's euphemistic spin on this...

The craigslist ads-

Collect Signatures for mayor (Sacramento)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: gigs-985688146@craigslist.org
Date: 2009-01-08, 6:24PM PST



call me at 9497354460
within the next ten days the mayor needs to collect at least 60,000 signatures.
pay is 1.50 per signature.
fast and easy way to make money.
call me if you are interested and want to get started right away and i will tell you what you need to do.



Get paid=20-$30 an hour!!! (Sacramento)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: info@strongsac.com [?]
Date: 2009-01-15, 12:45PM PST




Get paid to gather signatures in the city of Sacramento. Easy work for getting paid very well.

We only have FIVE days to meet our goal so jump on the opportunity NOW!

contact:

Gilanie (661) 312-6152
Sabrina(949) 212-8181
Melinda (619) 417-8277
Ed (949)701-6912


or visit www.strongsac.com for more info.

Wow - I had no idea that my article will spark such a response!

I just want to be very clear - I'm not a union member, a political consultant, or a political insider. I don't work for the city, county, or state. Outside of Prop 8/marriage equality groups, I don't belong to any political organizations. I have never written an article like this before. I wasn't expecting career political spinsters to come out swinging so hard. The great thing about telling the truth is that is horrifically disarming to those that want to discredit your argument. You can try to spin truth, but you can't beat it.

I also wanted to thank Colleen & Ben at the Sacramento Press who were very helpful in sharing resources and ideas that I will use in my next article. I've enjoyed reading Sacramento Press the last few months and look forward to getting more involved.

I firmly stand by what I originally wrote, although I understand the slight modifications that the staff here made. I am in the process of doing some research that will hopefully shed more light on this situation.

Speaking of mercenary actions, don't forget how the "Sac for Accountable Govt" 'stole' oh I mean borrowed the Sacramento for Obama mailing list - dirty tricks all around.

Steven Maviglio: Kim Mack may not have been the one who stole the "Sacramentans for Obama" list, but it was stolen, and Kim Mack used it to promote the "strong mayor" events under the guise of "Sacramentans for Obama." So while Kim Mack may not have been the thief, someone was--maybe it was you?

Mayor Fargo may have supported Clinton in the primaries, but so did a lot of Democrats, until Obama secured the nomination. Hillary Clinton wasn't running for office in last November's election.

Oh, and fifthgensacramentan's point was that all the contact numbers for petitions were in Orange County--seems kind of unusual for a "grass-roots" measure in Sacramento to be run out of southern California, doesn't it?

It would be much appreciated it accusations of theft - a crime - were left out of this discussion. Please.
Unless, of course, you have PROOF of this, which we would be very happy to see.

Please note the attempts by Hiltchak and Maviglio to carefully sculpt and control media around Kevin Johnson's power grab.

Hiltchak is a Republican. Their firm, Bell, McAndrews, et al., specializes in electoral law, and has represented numerous GOPsters efforts, including election lapses and dirty tricks at the hands of Republican candidates and their supporters. Charles Bell, the firm's name flagship lawyer, is a long-time member of the super secretive Federalist Society, which Mr. Maviglio voiced certain objections about when it was learned that the Inspector General, in charge investigating fiscal malfeasance allegations against Kevin Johnson's St. Hope organization and cabal, was himself also a member of the Society. I guess it's all right for such membership when they support Johnson, and not okay when they see through his ethical lapses.

The SAG's own regulatory submissions have shown that the organization's most generous donors are old guard area real estate developers and corporate interests whose motivations are obviously questionable. The strategic intent of the organization was to paint itself as some form of 'grass roots' operation, when nothing of the sort was its reality. The facts of its support have been widely reported in the News & Review and (when they had decent reporters) the Sacramento Bee.

As to your editing, at some point it becomes incumbent upon even smallish li'l webbies like this to take notice, a presumption of awareness of widely published information, instead of attempting to silence opposition to the presentation of negative information about a minor local pol whose backstory is at least controversial, if not downright lurid. In the legal profession, the concept of 'judicial notice'' is relevant -- that it is assumed that a judge is aware of certain issues and facts and cases and statutes that are relatively obvious and germane to an issue at controversy. At some point it becomes an editor's responsibility to be aware enough of what is being presented in a story to accept the author's assertions rather than using the device of strikeouts to dilute a story's impact and truth.

I would also suggest holding das mayor's shills to the same accountability and fact checking them as well, for their assertions are equally as challengeable, especially given the history of this proposal and its proponents. Thus far, in the small sample of articles I have read about the mayor that your site has carried, it appears that you do not challenge them to the same extent that you do critics. This inequitability is not how to grow an audience or cultivate their trust. Though those who may post here may not have legal or press credentials, especially when taking on the machine that insulates this mayor from those who question the motivations and backstory behind these proposals, what such critics have to say is at least as important as the tripe put forth by the mayor's sycophants and suckups. Please apply your editorial hand equitably, lest losing any credibility you have accrued.

On a related/unrelated note, SAG had a fundraiser tonight at Mason's. Unfortunately, I was not invited, but I heard that real estate interests were well represented. I also heard that there was a minor conversation about this article!

The city announces that over 160 employees will be laid off and what do those closest to Johnson (and some of his largest financial supporters) decide to do? Hold an expensive fundraiser at a downtown restaurant. Let them eat cake! Perhaps the republican leanings of Hiltchak are rubbing off on Johnson!

Steven M - I don't not have the years and years of political insider experience you have. I'm simply a citizen that loves his city and is concerned for it's future. Regardless of perspective, I would think that you would foster a healthy, civic debate - but instead, you have accused me of spreading false information and violating the Sacramento Press Terms of Service. I'm disappointed.

bbbbmer - I enjoyed reading your comments and wanted to state again that the people at Sacramento Press talked with me twice before touching my article - they provided objective, constructive feedback. This was my first time doing something like this, so I definitely appreciate their assistance. I hope to post a new article next week.

Regaring fund raising effort mentioned by Larry

From Sacramento BEE 05/06/2009-Ryan Lillis-Inside City Hall

Strong-mayor group has weak bank account

The group spearheading Mayor Kevin Johnson's strong-mayor proposal, Sacramentans for Accountable Government (a.k.a. SAG), has a sagging bank account.

According to a campaign disclosure statement filed last week, the group is $94,992.72 in debt – and has $769.54 in the bank.

Most of the debt is from $75,000 in unpaid bills for legal work and petitions....

Read the article at:
http://www.sacbee.com/ourregion/story/1837243.html

Additional Commentary
SAG in debt and fading fast,...

http://www.joesacramento.com/2009/05/06/sacramento-bee-gives-sacramento-mayor-forum/#more-1053

So today's SN&R mentions some of the same things mentioned in this article, in the weekly Bites column:

http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/content?oid=1009835

A quote from that article:

"The guy who wrote Johnson’s strong-mayor plan, Republican political consultant Tom Hiltachk, has been openly hostile to the commission—saying it’s biased because some of its members were publicly critical of Johnson’s power play early on."

So, apparently for the SN&R, it is okay for a columnist (paid staff, in fact) to describe Tom Hiltachk as a Republican, and the writer of the strong-mayor initiative, but for a citizen writer on Sacramento Press it's not okay?