Tony Sheppard comment-63325 2012-02-05T22:46:36Z 2012-02-05T22:46:36Z The fact that your car is like your office and you do this a lot makes it worse not better, and is a strong argument for police cars to be fitted with hands-free kits so that you don't need to use a hand to dial and hold the phone. Tony Sheppard 2012-02-05T22:46:36Z Tony Sheppard comment-62914 2012-01-30T19:30:33Z 2012-01-30T19:30:33Z The John Hancock Tower in Boston had to have all of its glass replaced (and it's entirely clad in glass) because of falling panels. Here's a wiki image of the building during the period in which glass was being replaced temporarily with plywood: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Plylwood_palace.jpg Tony Sheppard 2012-01-30T19:30:33Z Tony Sheppard comment-62911 2012-01-30T19:21:10Z 2012-01-30T19:21:10Z The fact that the public, through a government entity, owns a building does not make it accessible at all times to the public or preclude it being illegal to enter it or stay in it. Try camping in the Oval Office. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-30T19:21:10Z Tony Sheppard comment-62780 2012-01-26T20:15:37Z 2012-01-26T20:15:37Z That's not what Sheedy is quoted as saying with regard to layoffs - her quoted concern has to do with fairness in the layoff process, not with minimizing layoffs. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-26T20:15:37Z Tony Sheppard comment-62721 2012-01-25T06:55:48Z 2012-01-25T06:55:48Z I think this is an interesting question and not easily defined. Clearly there are decisions made on a regular basis that have enormous financial implications over decades, such as salary and benefits negotiations with employee unions - just as there are smaller and equally routine decisions having to do with one-time equipment purchases and short-term lease agreements. But I think the key characterization of what the City Council does on a regular basis is just that - the regularity of it. They are elected with every expectation from both the electors and the elected that decisions of this kind will have to be made - the normal and anticipated decisions that go with the normal and anticipated running of a City. But the counterpoint is the decision that is neither normal nor regular in nature. And I don't think anybody can reasonably suggest that the kind of decision that is involved with the possible leasing of City parking facilities for as many as 50 years is in any way normal or regular. And if Councilmember Sheedy believes that major decisions that are neither normal nor regular and that have multi-decade-long implications in revenue reduction for the City should be addressed in a non-normal and non-regular manner, then she should act on that belief. You may not agree with her, but it's not an especially unreasonable position for an elected official to take. I agree, there has to be a line somewhere. I'm not sure where that line might be but I'm not surprised or alarmed that a Councilmember thinks this is a decision that exists on the far side of it. I think it's actually quite reassuring that there isn't an assumption that anything goes once elected. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-25T06:55:48Z Tony Sheppard comment-62718 2012-01-25T05:52:43Z 2012-01-25T05:52:43Z So would that be a $25.5m shortfall if we gave up $9m in parking revenue? Tony Sheppard 2012-01-25T05:52:43Z Tony Sheppard comment-62606 2012-01-22T21:53:23Z 2012-01-22T21:53:23Z And we get these upbeat stories about the city suspending parking fees for a few days around the holidays to encourage downtown/midtown shopping - but a parking contractor doesn't have any great reason to do that. The city gains from the activity, a parking contractor doesn't. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-22T21:53:23Z Tony Sheppard comment-62605 2012-01-22T21:51:33Z 2012-01-22T21:51:33Z Agreed - I think there's a good chance that ten years from now we could have a nice, shiny, empty arena and a parking contractor who's posting record profits from the highest parking rates Sacramento has ever seen. We're not going to get an arena that's at the top of the list of desirable venues for 50 years and we're not going to get a 50 contract from a sports team/league, so why would we give up something known for 50 years to get an unknown in return? Tony Sheppard 2012-01-22T21:51:33Z Tony Sheppard comment-62592 2012-01-21T22:14:21Z 2012-01-21T22:14:21Z Also, what's the lifespan of an arena? The current one is apparently woefully inadequate after 23 years of operation. So even IF one wanted some kind of mortgaged financing, a 20-25 year outlook would seem to make more sense than 50. And the problem with increased parking rates isn't just for visitors and attendees - employees park downtown also. That's a double whammy for stores and venues if their customers are less inclined to visit and their staff need to be paid more so they can afford to come to work. And taxpayers are paying the salaries of city and state workers, for whom increased parking costs would become a bargaining issue. This isn't a simple problem. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-21T22:14:21Z Tony Sheppard comment-62573 2012-01-20T23:49:12Z 2012-01-20T23:49:12Z That's great - if the downtown core's businesses and venues can be sustained exclusively by those within walking distance. They seem to be struggling on an ongoing basis even while doing business with people coming from further away - I simply worry about what might happen if that opportunity is compromised. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-20T23:49:12Z Tony Sheppard comment-62572 2012-01-20T23:46:12Z 2012-01-20T23:46:12Z “It doesn’t affect us at all,” Trumm said. “We’re covered under contract with the city (for parking validation) until about 2055.” Note that they're not really saying that it doesn't affect them, just that they are covered by their pre-existing, long-term contract. But it also worth noting that what seems like a long contract isn't as long as the proposed lease. And I have no idea if smaller retailers and venues (smaller than an entire mall) have contracts that go that far out. I'm not anti-arena or anti-Kings, but I do think we need all the pieces of the puzzle on the table. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-20T23:46:12Z Tony Sheppard comment-62571 2012-01-20T23:41:43Z 2012-01-20T23:41:43Z Sure - but the lightrail isn't. And for some people the lightrail is a far away as a downtown garage. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-20T23:41:43Z Tony Sheppard comment-62570 2012-01-20T23:40:05Z 2012-01-20T23:40:05Z Thanks for this Melissa and SacPress - nobody else is even looking at this kind of detail. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-20T23:40:05Z Tony Sheppard comment-62491 2012-01-19T06:50:43Z 2012-01-19T06:50:43Z Almost all of those would get an answer that started "it depends,..." and then yield a very long response. This probably isn't the venue for it. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-19T06:50:43Z Tony Sheppard comment-62480 2012-01-19T03:47:42Z 2012-01-19T03:47:42Z There are a great many people who have expertise in this area who have been tackling this problem for years - with some interesting and innovative approaches being tried and developed along the way, including some significant success stories here in Sacramento. And while it is true that it's possible to distribute content with low overhead, the overhead is in the film production and that upfront outlay still needs to get recouped. Whatever your model is, however low your distribution overhead is, free distribution of this kind of content still undermines the ability to recoup production costs (without even getting as far as profit). Frankly, many/most are failing already from a business perspective and any extra hurdle (whether it be lost sales or time spent fighting against copyright infringement that precludes that time being spent in further production or promotion) will cause others to fail. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-19T03:47:42Z Tony Sheppard comment-62456 2012-01-19T02:37:21Z 2012-01-19T02:37:21Z As a film festival director, I work with true indie filmmakers, people whose work is likely to only be seen on the festival circuit and through very limited forms of distribution, including self-distribution. These folks don't have any margin of error in their business models, they don't have broad distribution on multiple platforms, and their work isn't always easy to find by legitimate purchasers. They also don't have vast catalogs of work, across which to spread their risk. if you spend three years of your life writing and making a feature film, and then you see it being made more readily available online on free sites than it even is on the limited pay sites you have the means to coordinate with, it's rightfully alarming and threatens your livelihood. I'm engaged in another online discussion with somebody who fits this description exactly - and he would lock doors and throw away keys. He would make the equally strong claim that piracy hurts his income on a daily basis, that SOPA might save it, and that SOPA couldn't hurt your business in practice - you are on diametrically opposite sides of the same issue and you're almost certainly both wrong. He also has horror stories about enforcing his own rights with online outlets. He has had to fight with youtube, for example, to have a feature film removed, only to end up with a message that says (paraphrased) "content removed because person x complained" - which makes him look like an ass - and without any comment about the fact that the user who originally posted it had no right to do so. And that's a legitimate, US-based outlet that's relatively responsive to complaints. It's virtually impossible to do anything to sites overseas that make content available online. The MPAA and RIAA can bring in armies of lawyers but the small, independent content creators simply don't have those resources. Protecting your content aggressively can end up stopping you from creating it as you simply have no time to do so, which also destroys your business model as you end up without content to sell. Enforceable laws are needed to protect intellectual property rights and creative content of all kinds - but SOPA is appallingly broad and, in my opinion, you are right to both fear it and campaign against it. As a festival director, I would be concerned about simple acts like linking to a filmmaker's online film trailer for fear of simultaneously linking to illegal content that might be carried on the same site - or the almost impossible to police risk that the filmmaker themself has included material they don't have rights to in their own work. The downside risks are suddenly alarmingly high, as you have suggested - in that we agree completely. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-19T02:37:21Z Tony Sheppard comment-62454 2012-01-19T01:51:24Z 2012-01-19T01:51:24Z I think the basic points about doing more harm than good are well made. But I don't think you serve your own ends well by questioning the costs associated with piracy. Piracy can put small businesses out of business just as easily as this legislation could put you out of business, and it's not especially beneficial to simply pit one set of businesses against another. I agree with you about SOPA being bad for assorted reasons, but the "...problem that possibly doesn't exist..." type of comments just leave me with spinning eyeballs. As you mention, there are far more fundamental problems with the legislation, including the stifling of permitted activity in the process of targeting the non-permitted activity - it's a baby with the bathwater approach that also happens to toss in the bathtub, the bathroom, the house, the street,.... Current copyright laws and protection don't work and content creators need protections that do work - but SOPA is like ordering a drone attack with cluster bombs to take out a shoplifter. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-19T01:51:24Z Tony Sheppard comment-62437 2012-01-18T20:00:57Z 2012-01-18T20:00:57Z Two separate articles/columns in the Bee today make it sound more like unconditional support for the idea - without mention of this qualifying sentence. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-18T20:00:57Z Tony Sheppard comment-62378 2012-01-17T23:24:53Z 2012-01-17T23:24:53Z "If Sacramento uses the resources of private enterprises such as the Sacramento Kings and other corporations along with some public funds that do not impact the city’s general fund, Baer said, it can get support." He's probably right - but we haven't seen a proposal that doesn't impact the city's general fund. The parking lease would impact the city's general fund for as long as 50 years by removing that revenue. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-17T23:24:53Z Tony Sheppard comment-62273 2012-01-15T07:30:58Z 2012-01-15T07:30:58Z It's not the purpose of a disclosure statement to tell readers that the person who posted the article is also the author - that's the default assumption. It would make more sense to tell readers if that wasn't the case - although there's no need for anybody to be posting anybody else's work. The more relevant disclosure in this case would be to explain your position with HPI and your connection to the people involved in the interview. Also, in the body of the text, you shouldn't be throwing around acronyms without introducing what they stand for the first time they appear - you have no reason to expect anybody to know what they mean. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-15T07:30:58Z Tony Sheppard comment-62251 2012-01-13T22:13:43Z 2012-01-13T22:13:43Z Wine Tourism is taught at Sac State. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-13T22:13:43Z Tony Sheppard comment-62094 2012-01-10T23:55:09Z 2012-01-10T23:55:09Z It's a neat renovation and a nice hotel with great staff. But this is a poorly written article with much repetition. For example, the sentence "Historically, the travel and tourism industry has proven to be resilient." probably doesn't need to appear twice - nor do you need to tell me the hotel has over 500 rooms when you've just said it has 503. I hope this isn't your press release copy. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-10T23:55:09Z Tony Sheppard comment-62009 2012-01-09T11:02:12Z 2012-01-09T11:02:12Z Are we now disguising established authors? Tony Sheppard 2012-01-09T11:02:12Z Tony Sheppard comment-61938 2012-01-05T23:09:12Z 2012-01-05T23:09:12Z I didn't think the script was quite that opaque - but it's certainly less spoonfed than most of what we see these days - not a good film during which to take a bathroom break. And Smiley isn't brought back into the Circus to run the investigation ;) Tony Sheppard 2012-01-05T23:09:12Z Tony Sheppard comment-61914 2012-01-04T23:42:58Z 2012-01-04T23:42:58Z So not a farm, or a sports arena, or a car factory, or a ... Tony Sheppard 2012-01-04T23:42:58Z Tony Sheppard comment-61870 2012-01-04T02:22:28Z 2012-01-04T02:22:28Z "We had taped this section off, as to keep folks closer to the stage for the Q&A that followed the short film. So, no one was sitting up there during the film." I sat up there for the screening - although I didn't type any ghostly messages to the best of my conscious recollection. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-04T02:22:28Z Tony Sheppard comment-61830 2012-01-03T08:30:26Z 2012-01-03T08:30:26Z is this being re-posted? i feel like i've read it before Tony Sheppard 2012-01-03T08:30:26Z Tony Sheppard comment-61820 2012-01-02T00:32:50Z 2012-01-02T00:32:50Z There should be extra points for finding errors in the story about the competition to find errors. Tony Sheppard 2012-01-02T00:32:50Z Tony Sheppard comment-61383 2011-12-15T06:23:19Z 2011-12-15T06:23:19Z Great - so we're possibly going to promote one specific business and location at the possible risk of dozens of others that have been struggling to keep themselves and downtown alive for years. If people think that places like the Downtown Plaza are dead now - wait until people have to pay to park there to buy the same stuff they can get with free parking at Arden Fair. Tony Sheppard 2011-12-15T06:23:19Z Tony Sheppard comment-61342 2011-12-14T20:13:31Z 2011-12-14T20:13:31Z If we're talking simple economics, then one has to assume that a private business is only going to bid for the parking concession if they think it's worth more over time than they will pay for it. otherwise why the hell would they do it? Even if the City wanted to tap this revenue stream (which is still a huge if), it would make more sense to borrow against it and use it to service the debt than to arrange in advance for a significant portion of that revenue stream to be skimmed of by an outside entity in the form of profit. The only way that the City could possibly yield as much in advance as it would over time, would be for the outside business to offer full value based on current/projected rates that the City would charge for 50 years, and then increase them at a higher rate in order to produce the necessary profit to both service their own debt on the advance payment and also make a profit on the back end. Anybody feel confident predicting parking rates and occupancy 50 years in advance? Tony Sheppard 2011-12-14T20:13:31Z Tony Sheppard comment-61319 2011-12-14T10:04:51Z 2011-12-14T10:04:51Z Did anybody at the meeting address what would happen to parking validations for downtown businesses, venues, restaurants, events? Tony Sheppard 2011-12-14T10:04:51Z Tony Sheppard comment-61310 2011-12-14T05:45:57Z 2011-12-14T05:45:57Z The City already has the ability to host large conventions - the limitation in that regard has tended to be centralized hotel space. So unless the arena plan includes an extra1,000+ hotel rooms.... Tony Sheppard 2011-12-14T05:45:57Z Tony Sheppard comment-61286 2011-12-13T19:40:26Z 2011-12-13T19:40:26Z "Patino" Tony Sheppard 2011-12-13T19:40:26Z Tony Sheppard comment-61282 2011-12-13T19:05:59Z 2011-12-13T19:05:59Z The component that seems to be missing in any article or set of questions on this topic is what happens to the current practice of validating (providing free or reduced cost parking) at local stores, restaurants, venues, and events? We're told a new arena will bring new vitality and revenue to downtown (although much is money that would be spent elsewhere otherwise) and better events. But we also have local businesses, multiple arts festivals, the Downtown Plaza, etc. that rely on the validation program that the City operates, with the City also benefiting from the economic activity in its downtown core. In addition to the lost revenue factor, any plan needs to address how a contracted parking operator would handle validations and/or how to compensate local enterprises if it is discontinued. Otherwise, we're championing one local business at the potential expense of dozens of others. Tony Sheppard 2011-12-13T19:05:59Z Tony Sheppard comment-61234 2011-12-11T21:49:21Z 2011-12-11T21:49:21Z If somebody finds you interesting and attractive and you dismiss that person based purely on their age, favoring instead a completely blind date with an older person who might not share those opinions, then I think the joke's on you. Tony Sheppard 2011-12-11T21:49:21Z Tony Sheppard comment-60611 2011-11-24T06:24:07Z 2011-11-24T06:24:07Z "But hey, why let the facts get in the way of your rage?" Did I miss the rage? Tony Sheppard 2011-11-24T06:24:07Z Tony Sheppard comment-60598 2011-11-24T03:12:36Z 2011-11-24T03:12:36Z The first time I recall reading about the idea was in an editorial in Sactown Magazine - that was before I had heard about it out of City Hall. Tony Sheppard 2011-11-24T03:12:36Z Tony Sheppard comment-60501 2011-11-22T09:26:06Z 2011-11-22T09:26:06Z Yet another example of why we won't gain by selling or leasing our parking concessions. Tony Sheppard 2011-11-22T09:26:06Z Tony Sheppard comment-60476 2011-11-22T02:33:09Z 2011-11-22T02:33:09Z "After that the real key is reading reviews of like minded people." How do you decide who is like minded, versus somebody who sounds like minded but who may be a paid reviewer? Tony Sheppard 2011-11-22T02:33:09Z Tony Sheppard comment-60459 2011-11-21T21:17:15Z 2011-11-21T21:17:15Z This is the least surprising development in the whole arena saga. Tony Sheppard 2011-11-21T21:17:15Z Tony Sheppard comment-60454 2011-11-21T19:42:51Z 2011-11-21T19:42:51Z But there's another complaint that has been made that Yelp tends to be suspicious (for that reason) of people who register and immediately say great things about a business - even to the point of removing those comments - while not being suspicious of immediate negative comments. Which is very one-sided. It's not unreasonable to think that a great experience at a business might prompt somebody to join Yelp and it's not against the spirit of independent reviews for a business owner to encourage happy/regular patrons to post nice things about their establishment. The cynicism directed towards the new user making a highly positive comment has another potential effect: It's actually easier/more reliable for a business owner to register (or hire stooges to register) and make negative comments about competitors than to make positive comments about their own business. So any tendency on Yelp's part to remove positive comments they think are insincere doesn't solve the insincerity problem, it's just likely to make it more negative than positive. Tony Sheppard 2011-11-21T19:42:51Z Tony Sheppard comment-60445 2011-11-21T09:04:48Z 2011-11-21T09:04:48Z Oddly, that rant essentially captures the opinion of a small business owner who was discussing Yelp recently. I'm not suggesting they are related and if anything the comment here is a little tamer. Tony Sheppard 2011-11-21T09:04:48Z Tony Sheppard comment-60439 2011-11-21T00:02:22Z 2011-11-21T00:02:22Z Why would you? It didn't fail for lack of standing, it failed in Federal court for conflicting with Federal control of immigration law - it wouldn't have mattered who brought the appeal. Tony Sheppard 2011-11-21T00:02:22Z Tony Sheppard comment-59965 2011-11-11T02:21:24Z 2011-11-11T02:21:24Z Marc - the City currently gets the parking revenue to use in whatever manner it chooses and, on occasion, it allows free parking to promote an event or a venue. Obviously, that marginally reduces the revenue but the payoff is in promoting the downtown area and helping encourage people to attend downtown events which, in turn, generates more spending downtown. If the City sells the parking garages or leases them for a fixed fee, it gains a lump sum payment from the new operator but it also loses the ongoing revenue from the garages/meters. The operator is only going to enter into such a deal if they can make a profit and the only way they make a profit is to either pay the City the same amount it currently receives in revenues and then increase the fees, or maintain the same fees and pay the City less than they currently collect (or some compromise between the two). The City may gain that lump sum that could be applied towards a project, but it loses the ongoing revenue stream - so it's not found money, it's just money being collected at a different moment in time. If the money is spent on a particular project, then the City also has to make up the new shortfall in general income from the lost revenue stream. In other words, it hasn't actually helped financially - in practice all it means is that the City has borrowed from its future self - and it's still going to have to pay itself back by making up that shortfall. In the meantime, the City loses the control and the discretion to support the local events and venues by offering free or subsidized parking. That could damage multiple arts events and festivals as well as eliminate the revenue stream - which seems like a lose/lose. People seem to be thinking in terms of selling or leasing the parking garages/spaces as though it's an infusion of one-time free cash - like a sudden, surprise bonus at work. But it's not like that at all - it's more like having your employer come along and offer a one-time bonus in return for accepting a lower salary from now on. That's great for people who take the bonus and then quit - but it's not as good for employees who expect to stick around. And those of us who are going to stick around Sacramento might get a new facility of some kind but we're going to have to live with reduced revenues from lost parking income for years to come. The only way to come out ahead in the long run is to be absolutely certain that somehow that new facility is going to generate more from increased local spending than the parking garages would ever have generated. But those other smaller local arts events, venues and festivals still stand to suffer and if they disappear they're also detracting from spending downtown. And, coincidentally, just as people are suggesting using such a deal to finance an arena, with math that relies on a stable basketball income and high attendance figures, we're watching an NBA lockout and seeing other cities with financed arenas threatening to sue teams and/or the league because their basketball revenue is suddenly non-existent. If the arena makes sense, it should do so without gimmicks like selling off future parking revenue and risking damage to existing community organizations, events, venues, and festivals. Tony Sheppard 2011-11-11T02:21:24Z Tony Sheppard comment-59911 2011-11-10T06:27:12Z 2011-11-10T06:27:12Z And the City is offering free parking at the 10th and L garage - a good example of why the City should own and operate its own garages and be able to support local community and arts events with free parking and/or validations. Tony Sheppard 2011-11-10T06:27:12Z Tony Sheppard comment-59651 2011-11-04T02:22:45Z 2011-11-04T02:22:45Z While I might agree with the general sentiment, I don't agree with the last sentence. A polling company is acting on behalf of somebody who pays them to conduct a poll - the content of the poll questions/responses does not belong to the polling company nor is it theirs to disclose. The disclosure, if it comes, should come from whoever paid them to conduct the poll and who owns the resultant data. Tony Sheppard 2011-11-04T02:22:45Z Tony Sheppard comment-59615 2011-11-03T19:22:32Z 2011-11-03T19:22:32Z "November 2, 1:24 p.m.: The Sacramento Press publishes another article saying that the FPPC will not investigate the claims in the Langdon complaint." According to that SacPress story, they didn't just say they wouldn't investigate (which might imply insufficient cause or a flawed complaint), they went on to say that what Sheedy had done was OK: "The letter from Winuk addressed the specific areas of concern in the complaint of misuse of official position and lack of disclosure regarding the use of campaign funds. “The use of campaign funds to conduct a poll is an appropriate use of campaign funds,” the letter stated. “Additionally, since the telephone calls were not for the purpose of advocating a candidate or ballot measure, no identification by the Sheedy campaign was required.”" Which actually sounds like a very brief "investigation" and dismissal of the complaint. Tony Sheppard 2011-11-03T19:22:32Z Tony Sheppard comment-59490 2011-11-02T08:27:15Z 2011-11-02T08:27:15Z Is there a reason why these other authors don't post their own stories? Tony Sheppard 2011-11-02T08:27:15Z Tony Sheppard comment-59489 2011-11-02T07:09:50Z 2011-11-02T07:09:50Z Yes - it sounds like a complaint alleging a lack of full disclosure that doesn't, itself, seem to have any disclosure whatsoever. Perhaps we need to rewrite the old saying about people living in glass houses not throwing stones to one about people living in mirrored houses not pointing fingers. Tony Sheppard 2011-11-02T07:09:50Z Tony Sheppard comment-59425 2011-11-01T20:02:23Z 2011-11-01T20:02:23Z I wouldn't want to be the one who has to argue in favor of a funding formula based on reliable basketball income while the league's in lockout mode and other cities are considering suing the league for lost revenue. Tony Sheppard 2011-11-01T20:02:23Z Tony Sheppard comment-59374 2011-11-01T04:37:13Z 2011-11-01T04:37:13Z she was also asking the public their opinion - and the public aren't "any member, officer, employee or consultant of the agency." And where the complaint apparently alleges it was a "push poll" and the article defines that, there doesn't seem to be anything in the article that supports that there was any "push" in terms of information dissemination. If she's required to say who paid for the poll and didn't say so, then that's an error and a very simple issue and, in the scope of political wrongdoing probably worthy of a "Don't do it again!" Tony Sheppard 2011-11-01T04:37:13Z Tony Sheppard comment-59189 2011-10-26T21:39:18Z 2011-10-26T21:39:18Z Why does it have to be a "SHORT" turn-around time - why can't a prospective homeowner buy the building and do the work themself over a period of time, perhaps while living in the house? If a developer does it first, unless they do it out of the goodness of their hearts for no financial gain, the end result is that the home is more expensive. The developers gain and so do homeowners looking for turn-key homes at higher prices. Again, one could invite developers in at a discount, along with anybody else with the means to fix the property, if it fails to sell during an initial period. But the policy presumes that the property can't be sold as-is and that somebody who hasn't jumped through hoops to be labeled a "developer" can't solve the problem. Some of the worst properties might be better addressed by simply demolishing them and some are so cheap that an investor might simply want to own the vacant lot, with it no longer being an eyesore or a risk to the public, for a future sale. And having it taken off the market in the meantime also reduces excess inventory. If a home can't be sold on the open market, then get creative. But don't assume it can't be sold without even trying. Tony Sheppard 2011-10-26T21:39:18Z Tony Sheppard comment-59179 2011-10-26T08:52:39Z 2011-10-26T08:52:39Z I can see the benefit in rehabbing a derelict home that doesn't sell on the open market, and even permitting a discount or financial incentive for that benefit. But why give developers an advance chance at such properties before even attempting to sell them to a homeowner? Why not let potential homeowners have a crack at some of the distressed buildings and distressed prices? And if they don't receive any offers within 30 days (or whatever number seems reasonable) then discount them and make them available to whomever might want to buy them, developers included, but with specific requirements to qualify for the benefits. This seems to benefit developers more than anybody else - at some point if somebody doesn't move in, then the boarded up ugly house is just a boarded up pretty house still in search of a homeowner. Tony Sheppard 2011-10-26T08:52:39Z Tony Sheppard comment-59026 2011-10-23T04:04:27Z 2011-10-23T04:04:27Z I can't decide if we're supposed to try and figure it out in return for a prize - or if it's actually some kind of elaborate parody of the English language, intended for a performance art reading. Tony Sheppard 2011-10-23T04:04:27Z Tony Sheppard comment-58994 2011-10-21T19:59:18Z 2011-10-21T19:59:18Z The car insurance analogy is bad as car insurance doesn't cover the outcome of not having your oil changed, whereas medical insurance does cover the outcomes of problems not discovered during routine checkups. But the fact that we still get our oil changed on a regular basis demonstrates that we understand the concept of preventative care - most of us actually take better care of our cars than we do our bodies in that regard. We don't wait for our engines to seize up, but we do wait for our hearts and joints to seize up. Preventative care makes sense and is cheaper in the long run, or else we wouldn't have oil change businesses in existence - it simply seems to get ignored by the US medical establishment. And so we have emergency rooms engaging in profound interventions costing tens of thousands of dollars because we don't make it easy to access a brief consultation and five dollars worth of generic anti-biotics. Tony Sheppard 2011-10-21T19:59:18Z Tony Sheppard comment-58776 2011-10-18T05:36:38Z 2011-10-18T05:36:38Z Excellent choice Tony Sheppard 2011-10-18T05:36:38Z Tony Sheppard comment-58386 2011-10-08T22:15:23Z 2011-10-08T22:15:23Z "U.S. Americans have not only the third largest national population behind China and India, but we also have the highest population growth rate of any country in the developed world, which means a higher consumption rate per capita." Yes to both of those facts - but they are somewhat limited in usefulness without also noting that the US is #179 in population density. Tony Sheppard 2011-10-08T22:15:23Z Tony Sheppard comment-58113 2011-10-01T21:42:25Z 2011-10-01T21:42:25Z Was this a class paper written 15 years ago? At least two of the companies (that were retailers not wholesalers) cited for their high stock prices are out of business and have zero stock value. Tony Sheppard 2011-10-01T21:42:25Z Tony Sheppard comment-58111 2011-10-01T21:10:51Z 2011-10-01T21:10:51Z I can't tell if these articles are the product of a random word generator. Tony Sheppard 2011-10-01T21:10:51Z Tony Sheppard comment-57906 2011-09-27T09:26:45Z 2011-09-27T09:26:45Z This has been a mainstay of the film arts community in Sacramento for 12 years and where a lot of local filmmakers got their start. If you've ever wondered if you could make a film, come and check this out - because most of these filmmakers were in that same place, wondering the same thing, a year or three ago. Two years ago, in our respective tenth seasons, we were proud to give Ron Cooper our Film Arts Service Award and the rest of Sacramento should celebrate Ron and "A Place Called Sacramento" also! Tony Sheppard, Co-Director, Sacramento Film & Music Festival :) Tony Sheppard 2011-09-27T09:26:45Z Tony Sheppard comment-57900 2011-09-27T07:41:12Z 2011-09-27T07:41:12Z I'm not sure it's such a great idea to have the financing assessed by a group already involved/familiar with the project - it seems like the point is to bring in some objective eyes (?). Tony Sheppard 2011-09-27T07:41:12Z Tony Sheppard comment-57773 2011-09-23T22:24:09Z 2011-09-23T22:24:09Z At the point that you get paid by others for your calling, it's a profession - whether you're preaching, painting, teaching, acting.... Tony Sheppard 2011-09-23T22:24:09Z Tony Sheppard comment-57766 2011-09-23T21:49:37Z 2011-09-23T21:49:37Z I don't think your last point is either accurate or fair. Speaking about one politician's perceived wrong actions and speaking about another politician's perceived right actions are, generally, the same thing as they tend to be two sides of the same coin. And it isn't that somebody is stripping a group of their rights, it's that as a group members of the clergy and their churches agree in advance to behave a certain way in return for a very special set of tax benefits that most of us don't receive. It's a known tradeoff that they willingly undertake. So when I see a group of people who are identified not as citizens but repeatedly (almost twenty times in a single article, including the title of that article) as pastors interviewing potential candidates and targeting other sitting politicians, as opposed to speaking purely on issues, I don't think it's unfair to question their actions in the context of the agreement they voluntarily undertook. I would think the same thing regardless of whether or not I agreed with who they did or didn't like - that to me is entirely irrelevant. If I was campaign manager for Candidate X and they stood up in their professional capacity and campaigned for Candidate X, I would still be concerned and question that action because it would still violate their contract with the IRS (essentially with all of the rest of us as taxpayers). The rest of us have said, you can have these tax benefits, but only if you behave within a certain set of narrowly defined parameters. It has nothing to do with picking sides, it's the underlying principle that I'm addressing. Tony Sheppard 2011-09-23T21:49:37Z Tony Sheppard comment-57764 2011-09-23T21:34:40Z 2011-09-23T21:34:40Z So we might still have a team and yet not actually have a team that plays. Tony Sheppard 2011-09-23T21:34:40Z Tony Sheppard comment-57758 2011-09-23T19:30:59Z 2011-09-23T19:30:59Z And who will rescue you from your "snaps, snarls and bites?" The high horse suits neither you nor your role. Tony Sheppard 2011-09-23T19:30:59Z Tony Sheppard comment-57756 2011-09-23T19:28:15Z 2011-09-23T19:28:15Z I agree that pastors can act as citizens on their own time and that pastors (who also happen to be citizens, assuming they are) are citizens too with the rights of citizens. But this isn't a group that is referred to as citizens who also happen to be pastors in their day jobs. This is a group that is specifically referred to as pastors - i.e, being identified primarily by their church-related role. The title introduces them that way, as do seven photo captions, and at least ten uses of the word in the body of the text (plus two in your own disclaimer). Meanwhile I don't see them ever described as citizens or concerned citizens. And they are interviewing/screening potential political candidates because they don't like existing politicians. That's activity defined by candidate(s) not activity defined by an issue or cause. If we had heard about this group of "concerned citizens" undertaking this activity and only after x articles on their actions did we happen to find out, by chance, that they were all pastors, it would be quite different in both tone and context, and most likely also in perceived legality or appropriateness. But that's not the case. And as for the wonderfully charitably finger-pointing Pastor Fogle, the reason I'm not registered to vote is because I'm not eligible to vote. I have lived in this country for over 20 years and in Sacramento for 14, I'm an active and concerned member of the community - as much as you are, I have paid taxes "religiously' throughout my time here (a lot of taxes), I serve in multiple unpaid capacities for the City, but I am not a US citizen and so I am not permitted to vote. I do, however, believe that I have more than earned my right to voice my opinion on matters such as this, aside from having my own right to speech. And the right to vote in this country, for citizens, is a right to vote not a requirement to vote. So even citizens who, for whatever personal set of reasons choose not to vote or to register to vote, have the same rights as you do to speak on these matters. You may choose not to listen to them, for valid reasons or not, just as they may choose to listen to or to ignore you. Similarly, non-citizens, including legal residents such as myself, have a right to speech even if we are disenfranchised at the voting booth. Tony Sheppard 2011-09-23T19:28:15Z Tony Sheppard comment-57708 2011-09-23T07:06:00Z 2011-09-23T07:06:00Z How does that represent accountability? Unless I'm running around berating people for not registering to vote, and/or basing some kind of campaign on the need to register to vote, that has no bearing on anything. Let me answer your direct, entirely irrelevant, inaccurately characterized, and at least borderline rude question by saying no. And I'll let you ponder the reason why not. Tony Sheppard 2011-09-23T07:06:00Z Tony Sheppard comment-57705 2011-09-23T06:07:48Z 2011-09-23T06:07:48Z Are all these pastors, who are engaged in this overt political activity, also renouncing their churches' tax exempt statuses? Tony Sheppard 2011-09-23T06:07:48Z Tony Sheppard comment-57535 2011-09-21T07:19:44Z 2011-09-21T07:19:44Z Well at least they won't be arguing about whose district it should be in. Tony Sheppard 2011-09-21T07:19:44Z Tony Sheppard comment-57374 2011-09-16T20:05:37Z 2011-09-16T20:05:37Z she one of our "go to" singer/songwriters at the sacramento film & music festival :) Tony Sheppard 2011-09-16T20:05:37Z Tony Sheppard comment-57343 2011-09-16T08:17:56Z 2011-09-16T08:17:56Z fresh & easy Tony Sheppard 2011-09-16T08:17:56Z Tony Sheppard comment-57181 2011-09-14T05:24:57Z 2011-09-14T05:24:57Z "Six council-members effectively railroaded what was supposed to be a democratic process right under everyone's noses... and this is okay?" Excuse me - but that IS the democratic process. You may not like the outcome and if you vote against these councilmembers or encourage others to do so, that will also be the democratic process. Like it or not, a vote of 6-3 in an elected, representative body is democracy at work. Tony Sheppard 2011-09-14T05:24:57Z Tony Sheppard comment-57136 2011-09-13T07:34:52Z 2011-09-13T07:34:52Z This seemed like a manufactured crisis of emotions rather than substance - our own debt ceiling crisis perhaps. It's not like the Med Center was lifted up by a crane and moved across town - it's still in the same place and will still affect the communities adjacent to it in the same way(s). The same people will work there and they will still live, shop, park, and spend time and money in the same places. And if your city councilmember just lost a chunk of territory, they still have the same vote on the council and may actually be easier to get a hold of, with attention now focused more directly on a smaller area with fewer distractions. That seems appealing rather than catastrophically bad. Let somebody else worry about balancing those special interests with the interests of their ordinary residents, criticize them if they do it badly, and move on. Tony Sheppard 2011-09-13T07:34:52Z Tony Sheppard comment-56426 2011-09-01T08:47:02Z 2011-09-01T08:47:02Z In looking at their site - I started to wonder if the higher count included the planned locations as well as the open locations. Tony Sheppard 2011-09-01T08:47:02Z Tony Sheppard comment-56419 2011-09-01T07:48:49Z 2011-09-01T07:48:49Z Fresh & Easy based in California? Yes, technically, but they're a subsidiary of Tesco, an English company and the second most profitable retailer in the world after Wal-Mart. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Also, according to wikipedia (accuracy?) the current number of Fresh & Easy stores is 177 - 128 in CA, 28 around Phoenix, AZ, and 21 around Las Vegas, NV. (It's hard to tell from the company site what the correct number is without counting flags on a map.) Tony Sheppard 2011-09-01T07:48:49Z Tony Sheppard comment-56120 2011-08-28T21:57:29Z 2011-08-28T21:57:29Z It works both ways - they're driven harder than most vehicles but also maintained better - and they tend to start out with heavy duty systems (electrical, cooling, etc) that are designed to take such usage. Also, they're often sold simply because of rules about specific mileages being reached, not because of any problems they have. Tony Sheppard 2011-08-28T21:57:29Z Tony Sheppard comment-56078 2011-08-27T04:54:12Z 2011-08-27T04:54:12Z It's good to see somebody thinking collaboratively - not just Hot Italian (and Andrea is great in that regard) but also the folks at FIAT of Sacramento: They sponsored the Sac Film & Music Fest last week and we had a car parked outside the Crest Theatre for almost a week - which is a great location for visibility downtown. Tony Sheppard 2011-08-27T04:54:12Z Tony Sheppard comment-55632 2011-08-23T08:01:22Z 2011-08-23T08:01:22Z It certainly looks like we have too many when the article is accompanied by a photo of a New York street scene - why not a picture of Sacramento? Tony Sheppard 2011-08-23T08:01:22Z Tony Sheppard comment-55094 2011-08-15T08:20:53Z 2011-08-15T08:20:53Z If we have enough of a response, we'll play it a second time at 8pm that same evening :) Tony Sheppard 2011-08-15T08:20:53Z Tony Sheppard comment-55055 2011-08-13T10:20:08Z 2011-08-13T10:20:08Z Crazy amount of talent in that room :) Tony Sheppard 2011-08-13T10:20:08Z Tony Sheppard comment-55038 2011-08-12T18:41:43Z 2011-08-12T18:41:43Z Different guy, similar names - both were at Tule Lake. To add to the confusion, Jimmy Murakami's own brother goes by the name of James Murakami - they were sent to different classrooms at the camp and both told to choose an English name, and one chose Jimmy and one chose James. They also both work in the film industry: Where Jimmy is an animator and film director, James has been an art director (including "Apocalypse Now") and is now a production designer working with Clint Eastwood. Jimmy Mirikitani is an artist and the focus of "The Cats of Mirikitani." Tony Sheppard 2011-08-12T18:41:43Z Tony Sheppard comment-55027 2011-08-12T08:57:04Z 2011-08-12T08:57:04Z Coincidentally, on Wednesday, August 17th at 8pm, the Sacramento Film & Music Festival will open with a screening of "Jimmy Murakami - Non Alien." Jimmy spent four years, with his family, in Tule Lake internment camp. He later went to art school and became an animator and filmmaker, directing amongst other titles, "When the Wind Blows." He has lived for over 40 years in Ireland, having never felt at home in the US after internment, and the film follows him as he travels back to the US and joins one of the Tule Lake pilgrimages. For more information on the film and the trailer, visit: sacfilm.com/nonalien.html Tony Sheppard 2011-08-12T08:57:04Z Tony Sheppard comment-54953 2011-08-11T07:12:38Z 2011-08-11T07:12:38Z Actually, it would cost more as it would also include Cobra health insurance premiums. Meanwhile. when you take into account the difference in the pension contributions, the increase in salary costs over the old position is more like 10.5% rather than 16%. Tony Sheppard 2011-08-11T07:12:38Z Tony Sheppard comment-54943 2011-08-11T01:56:26Z 2011-08-11T01:56:26Z Ben's point is well made - if you think it's in an incumbent's best interest anyway, why attribute it to unions? You might as well say that incumbent council members eat lunch everyday because of the unions - and then, when questioned, draw dots between the fact fact that they eat lunch and the fact that they get union contributions. When it's probably fair to assume they would eat anyway. Tony Sheppard 2011-08-11T01:56:26Z Tony Sheppard comment-54887 2011-08-10T18:41:38Z 2011-08-10T18:41:38Z The paragraph about the $13k "net savings" is unclear and also transposes two numbers from the staff report. [The City would normally have paid about 18k to PERS (instead, he will pay his own contribution) and would normally have paid about10k to a 401a (instead they will pay 15k in deferred compensation). So the "net savings" are 18k+10k-15k=13k (approx figures).] Tony Sheppard 2011-08-10T18:41:38Z Tony Sheppard comment-54885 2011-08-10T18:29:45Z 2011-08-10T18:29:45Z How did you reach that conclusion? Tony Sheppard 2011-08-10T18:29:45Z Tony Sheppard comment-54752 2011-08-09T00:08:44Z 2011-08-09T00:08:44Z The cynic in me suspects the rates are probably because so many rides are connected to the legislature with people who aren't very price sensitive - and one way or another, we're probably paying for them. Tony Sheppard 2011-08-09T00:08:44Z Tony Sheppard comment-54740 2011-08-08T19:45:10Z 2011-08-08T19:45:10Z If anybody knows Jennifer, please have her contact me about a possible benefit screening: tony@csus.edu Tony Sheppard 2011-08-08T19:45:10Z Tony Sheppard comment-54620 2011-08-06T05:25:04Z 2011-08-06T05:25:04Z Playing devil's advocate: Let's accept that much of what McD's sells isn't the greatest, most nutritious food - but in a depressed neighborhood, where there probably isn't a Trader Joe's on every corner, McD's might also represent the cheapest source for salads without, as Michelle Obama might say, having to ride three city buses to buy lettuce. Also, for parents struggling to afford the cost of their children's medical care across the street (for example), and perhaps with other young children in tow, it does represent a very affordable place to eat out - whether everybody else enjoys it or not. Tony Sheppard 2011-08-06T05:25:04Z Tony Sheppard comment-54100 2011-07-29T05:26:38Z 2011-07-29T05:26:38Z The REAL tragedy is the reduction in article and comment writing in the Sacramento Press once this passes. Quick, somebody manufacture a new crisis! Tony Sheppard 2011-07-29T05:26:38Z Tony Sheppard comment-53906 2011-07-26T22:03:02Z 2011-07-26T22:03:02Z I mentioned apartheid previously ( a different article) and was told that those boycotts were just at the consumer level, not organized. Short memories. Tony Sheppard 2011-07-26T22:03:02Z Tony Sheppard comment-53840 2011-07-25T20:08:39Z 2011-07-25T20:08:39Z "Please stop quoting yourself" said Tony Sheppard. Tony Sheppard 2011-07-25T20:08:39Z Tony Sheppard comment-53679 2011-07-21T11:06:11Z 2011-07-21T11:06:11Z I don't hear people saying they want to move/leave that often - I've lived in many places and I probably hear it here less than almost anywhere other than Manhattan. Tony Sheppard 2011-07-21T11:06:11Z Tony Sheppard comment-53674 2011-07-21T06:06:21Z 2011-07-21T06:06:21Z The apartheid era boycotts (which pre-dated Mandela as an elected official - and were targeted at the people he replaced) were not at a consumer level - and they were political in nature (and for good reason) and weren't that controversial (except when athletes were involved). One day you may want to boycott somebody.... Tony Sheppard 2011-07-21T06:06:21Z Tony Sheppard comment-53623 2011-07-20T05:50:26Z 2011-07-20T05:50:26Z Genuine question, because times change: How would this new (proposed) rule have been applied during the boycott of South Africa, for example, during apartheid? Tony Sheppard 2011-07-20T05:50:26Z Tony Sheppard comment-53622 2011-07-20T05:47:39Z 2011-07-20T05:47:39Z Whether it's fraudulent or not, quoting yourself in the third person in an article you write is weird. Tony Sheppard 2011-07-20T05:47:39Z Tony Sheppard comment-53451 2011-07-16T05:54:12Z 2011-07-16T05:54:12Z It seems like a baby with the bath water approach. While it's true that in some instances there may have been some growth in value without the redevelopment activity, it wouldn't be true always. And in some areas, the lack of redevelopment may cause the "blight" to spread and the property values and tax revenues to diminish further, also reducing revenue for schools and causing the state to have to backfill more. It seems like what is needed is a more complex way of calculating how much of an increase in local property tax revenues go to an agency, with a formula that takes into account average property value fluctuations in a region, to ascertain to what extent values were changing even without redevelopment activity. But if you do something like that, you also have to accept that there may be times when redevelopment activity raises values/taxes during a period in which average values were diminishing - which would logically mean that the schools and/or the state would actually owe the redevelopment agency, not the other way around. Tony Sheppard 2011-07-16T05:54:12Z Tony Sheppard comment-53114 2011-07-10T20:28:35Z 2011-07-10T20:28:35Z It's odd how we often rely on references or testimony from people who have a vested interest in an outcome that differs from what an applicant is seeking, including asking for job references from employers who don't really want the employee to leave. It almost guarantees that there will be at least some instances of unfairness. Tony Sheppard 2011-07-10T20:28:35Z Tony Sheppard comment-53083 2011-07-08T23:10:25Z 2011-07-08T23:10:25Z I'm not a member and don't shop at the Coop - but I've been reading these stories for a while. if nothing else, with two opposing groups claiming to be acting in accordance with the organization's own by-laws, while in direct conflict with each other, there's probably cause to re-write at least some of the rules. In related news, every US product should be removed from the shelves as we just executed a Mexican national in violation of international law. Happy shopping. Tony Sheppard 2011-07-08T23:10:25Z Tony Sheppard comment-52787 2011-07-01T08:07:01Z 2011-07-01T08:07:01Z This sounds like the kind of economic impact analysis designed to sell a plan by taking the rosiest possible version of the positives and either ignoring the negatives altogether or diminishing them as much as possible. For starters, we already have an arena - so this isn't something that creates revenues where nothing exists at present. It assumes the arena is running at full speed 200 days/nights a year. It appears to assume that none of this money is currently already being spent within the city - as if the building of an arena magically increases everybody's incomes with new and previously missing, disposable income that they will spend in and around an arena but which they aren't spending currently. It isn't clear that it allows for reduced/displaced spending elsewhere, perhaps also within the city. It isn't clear that it allows for local residents escaping the area during major events and spending money elsewhere, perhaps outside of the city, which might otherwise have been spent locally. It isn't clear that it allows for non-residents who might otherwise have visited and spent money but who might now choose to stay away because of the venue and the crowds - it may simply replace one visitor with a different one. All of which is par for the course. (Edit: I mean to say that these flaws are common in analyses of this nature.) Tony Sheppard 2011-07-01T08:07:01Z