Newest articles and comments on The Sacramento Press written by Steven Maviglio

Steven Maviglio on "Johnson: People are ready to talk about strong mayor initiative"

2011-11-26T00:42:43Z

Every poll -- including Sandy Sheedy's -- shows the Mayor with a strong job approval and re-elect numbers. But hey, since you're wrong about everything else you posted above, why get that right either? And while you are out it, how about letting sacpress readers know your real name.

Steven Maviglio on "Johnson: People are ready to talk about strong mayor initiative"

2011-11-26T00:40:44Z

Actually, your victory was simply not allowing citizens like yourself to vote on the concept that is in place in most American cities the size of Sacramento. Mayors in these cities (like Jerry Brown, Gavin Newsom, or Jerry Sanders in San Diego, which went to a strong mayor system) are held accountable for their government. They hire folks to run the city, with the difference being that the Mayor is held accountable. In our current system, the city manager reports to city councilors instead of voters. It's pretty clear this is a failed experiment in Sacramento given the turnover in the city managers office lately.

Steven Maviglio on "Johnson: People are ready to talk about strong mayor initiative"

2011-11-26T00:36:49Z

I guess the difference, Mr. Fifth Generation, is that in those cities, voters actually get to vote for the person in charge (the Mayor). So if they are doing a bad job, they actually can hold them accountable for it. As you point out, Mayor Johnson supported keeping more police on the streets and fire stations open, while the City Manager favored a budget cutting them. In San Francisco, Mayor Ed Lee was just elected by a significant margin. So I guess I'm in favor of having citizens having a government that's accountable to them, not a city manager accountable to other politicians.

Steven Maviglio on "Johnson: People are ready to talk about strong mayor initiative"

2011-11-25T15:48:52Z

Voters. Because you can't vote for a city manager.

Steven Maviglio on "Johnson: People are ready to talk about strong mayor initiative"

2011-11-25T15:47:53Z

As a self-proclaimed "historian," Mr. Burg, I would expect you to know that : (1) Ballot measures are written by attorneys because they require changes in the law. So that an attorney wrote the measure shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. (2) Nearly all ballot measures require paid signature gatherers to reach the ballot. Not a single ballot measure in recent memory has been put on the ballot without them, either on the state or local level. And thanks for yet another personal attack. Classy as always.

Steven Maviglio on "Johnson: People are ready to talk about strong mayor initiative"

2011-11-25T15:45:07Z

When the facts aren't on your side, you have to engage in personal attacks. Glad you always keep it classy, Mr. Burg.

Steven Maviglio on "Johnson: People are ready to talk about strong mayor initiative"

2011-11-25T15:43:44Z

Lisa, I'm not a registered lobbyist and never have been. And there was nothing incorrect about what I wrote. Indeed, most major American cities the size of Sacramento have a "strong mayor" form of government. Here's a list: http://strongmayorcouncil.org/25largestcities.html City managers aren't elected by voters; they aren't accountable to us. These type of governments work best in smaller cities without full-time elected officials.

Steven Maviglio on "Johnson: People are ready to talk about strong mayor initiative"

2011-11-24T04:10:23Z

Actually, Mr. Burg, most of California's major cities have this system of government, including LA, San Diego (which recently switched to it), San Francisco, and Oakland (thanks to Jerry Brown). The reason is simple: it brings accountability to government. You actually can vote for the person in charge, as opposed to a city manager who does not report to the voters.

Steven Maviglio on "Johnson: People are ready to talk about strong mayor initiative"

2011-11-24T04:03:51Z

Isaac, I'm pleased you support allowing a vote on changing the city charter. Unfortunately most of the City Council didn't want to give you that right. If you'd bothered reading the article the above before venting, you'd know that the initiative would appear on the ballot, and you'd be able to vote on it as you wished. And "You Want What" .. the Charter Commission on this issue was not elected, it was appointed. As in unaccountable to the voters.

Steven Maviglio on "Johnson: People are ready to talk about strong mayor initiative"

2011-11-24T04:00:02Z

Actually, it's about making the city work. That's why nearly every city the size has it. It's also about accountability. Citizens don't vote for the city manager nor have any say in his performance. Contrary to your statement above, a system where you elect the person in charge not only gives you "access to the decision maker," he allows you to hold him/her accountable.

Steven Maviglio on "Johnson: People are ready to talk about strong mayor initiative"

2011-11-24T03:57:26Z

Actually, Mayor Johnson spoke about having the "strong mayor" form of government during his first run for office. It's even in his campaign brochure. But hey, why let the facts get in the way of your rage? Jerry Brown was a strong mayor. Gavin Newsom was a strong mayor. In fact, nearly all of California's large cities have this system of government rather than the chaos that now is common practice at City Council meetings.

Steven Maviglio on "Education reform issues voiced at Latino Town Hall"

2011-11-24T03:51:00Z

It's unfortunate Joe that you don't believe that having good schools is central to having a strong city. Around the nation, Republican and Democratic mayors alike are making that connection. As you probably know, Mayor Johnson has consistently supported higher budgets for public safety (he was outvoted on the City Council on that ) and has played a key role in helping win federal grants from the federal community policing program.

Steven Maviglio on "Education reform issues voiced at Latino Town Hall"

2011-11-24T03:48:33Z

Wow, Isaac, sorry you have so much pent up hostility. I hate the let the facts get in the way of your rage, but the Mayor actually has consistently worked to put more cops on the streets (and has helped get several grants to do just that), pushed for an independent auditor, and is working closely with the business community on long-term plans for riverfront development. I'm glad you posted the link about the issues as well, because it shows that the Mayor was actually working for the city in venues where it matters. It also points out that none of those meetings had any major votes. The Mayor's poll ratings are high because he's put a ton of energy into being Mayor, holds regular community meetings with citizens, and has accomplished a lot despite not enjoying the governing structure that the mayors of LA, SD, SF, and the state's other large cities have.

Steven Maviglio on "District One: A Look Back at the First 365 Days"

2011-11-21T17:06:14Z

Happy anniversary. What a breath of fresh air on the City Council!

Steven Maviglio on "The influence of Yelp on Sacramento restaurants "

2011-11-21T17:02:10Z

Nice article. I've been hearing more and more, though, that restaurants themselves are "yelping" and boosting their own scores thru fake names and such. Same with TripAdvisor and other rating sites. The New York Times had a story about that not long ago. So buyer beware!

Steven Maviglio on "DWB: All things must pass "

2011-09-23T03:33:41Z

Bummer. Hope we can find your insight on Insight and elsewhere. A big loss to the Sac Press. Hope you can back to doing your thing real soon.

Steven Maviglio on "DWB: Redistricting and election 2012 "

2011-09-13T06:59:44Z

What the city council did is exactly why they should continue to have control over redistricting rather than a citizens committee (and I served on the City of Sacramento's Redistricting Advisory Committee). Voters will be able to hold council members who supported a redistricting plan they don't like directly accountable for their actions if they wish. We can't do that with what happened at the state level -- the state redistricting commissioners aren't accountable to voters, and were appointed by the State Auditor -- someone else not accountable to voters. It would be healthy for the electoral process if city council members up for election this year had opposition. That way, voters will have a choice to express their views and preferences, and perhaps this issue could be one where voters can weigh in.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Board Incumbents Roll to Victory; Measures Win Approval"

2011-09-12T14:47:34Z

Sadly, Paul, the local BDS leader says she will not rule out future litigation against the Co-op and issued a press release yesterday with a laundry list of complaints against the Co-op, including attacking our store once again.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Board Incumbents Roll to Victory; Measures Win Approval"

2011-09-11T01:23:23Z

Error in link: should be www.sacfoodcoop.com And thank you Co-op owners for your strong support!

Co-op Board Incumbents Roll to Victory; Measures Win Approval

2011-09-11T00:59:01Z

In a record turnout, Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op Board members Ann Richardson and Alicia Dienst were overwhelmingly re-elected, and two Board-backed ballot measures also won lopsided victories in a hotly-contested election where a proposed boycott of Israeli products was a major issue. The two board candidates elected had strongly opposed the boycott, proposed by the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction (BDS) group of Sacramento.

Richardson received 1,338 votes and Dienst snared 1,328 ballots, far outpacing BDS-backed candidates Susan Bush (442) and Cody Potter (424). A fifth candidate, Phyllis Ehlert, received 251 votes.

Measure 2, which bans the Co-op from discriminating in its practices based on political opinion or the national origin of products, was approved by an 83.3-16.7 percent margin.

Measure 1, a technical bylaw change that will allow the Co-op to offer preferred shares, also won, approved by a 76-24 percent margin.

Both measures were supported by the Board of Directors and opposed by BDS.

The vote signals clear support for the Board's position to focus on the store's mission of providing natural foods, supporting local growers, encouraging the development of the cooperative movement, and community education.

On Friday, the Sacramento Superior Court dismissed a lawsuit against the Board by two BDS members.

The official results will be posted on the store's website, www.sacfoodcoop.com and in the store near the customer service desk.

Disclosure: Steven Maviglio is President of the Board of Directors of the Sacramento Natural Foods Cooperative.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op lawsuit dismissed"

2011-09-09T23:54:25Z

The Court dismissed the dismissed the lawsuit because BDS didn't pursue it, as there was no merit in their case that the Board had violated its Bylaws. There is a clear and strong win for the Coop and confirms the BDS claims are bogus.

Steven Maviglio on "Why am I running again for Co-op Board?"

2011-08-29T05:55:36Z

Well put Alicia. Please vote for Alicia and Ann Richardson, and for Measures 1 and 2. Thanks. Go Co-op!

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Peace: Recipe for an Ethical Feast?"

2011-08-27T05:46:17Z

It should be noted that the Israeli boycott at the Olympia store was not put to a vote of the members. In fact, it was done without notice to owners. So much for the BDS version of "democracy." The Sacramento Natural Food Coop trusts our owners and our shoppers to make their own decisions on what products they buy. That's why there is such strong support for our Board members Alicia Dienst and Ann Richardson, who are running against two candidates that support an Israeli foods boycott. And one other thing: If you support our Coop, join it!

Steven Maviglio on "League of Women Voters Rejects BDS Co-op Debate"

2011-08-23T06:39:47Z

Your defense of failing to patronize our store is quite amusing, I must say. It's right up there with your colleague that is suing the Co-op: neither of you can admit that you don't support the Co-op with your grocery dollars. Is it really that difficult to admit you rarely patronize our store and have rediscovered the store because of your interest in bashing Israel? Facts are stubborn things.

Steven Maviglio on "League of Women Voters Rejects BDS Co-op Debate"

2011-08-22T05:31:45Z

I'm glad you finally have rediscovered the Coop. And I'm glad you're not suing the Co-op, harassing shoppers or disrupting meetings, but since you coordinate your every move with someone who is, I guess it's difficult to distinguish your actions from hers. But oh yeah -- you denied that BDS even exists in Sacramento so it's difficult to take anything you say seriously, as another reader pointed out. If you read the Bylaws (which apparently you have trouble doing), you'd know that Co-op members can be expelled for lack of shopping activity. And since you proudly boast you care so much about the Co-op, perhaps you can share with SacPress readers how much you've spent their over the last couple of years (with the exception of the last 24 hours since I noted this). To really support and care about the Co-op, put your money where your mouth is.

Steven Maviglio on "League of Women Voters Rejects BDS Co-op Debate"

2011-08-21T06:28:09Z

Actually, the Co-op was doing just fine -- strong growth, record membership, committed to doing what it's supposed to do in supporting our community, local growers, and sustainable agriculture. That is, until the BDS began harassing our shoppers, disrupting meetings, and filing lawsuits against it. Ellen, if you were remotely serious about our cooperative, you might actually do your shopping there. Sadly, that's not the case.

Steven Maviglio on "League of Women Voters Rejects BDS Co-op Debate"

2011-08-19T17:30:59Z

Thank you, Mr. Samuels, for your accurate comments. Since Ms. Levy continues the tradition of other BDS supporters with negative attacks on the Coop and on me personally, I'd be interested if she considers the following "extreme, ugly, inflammatory speech," which was written by prominent Sac BDS supporter Dan Bacher, who also is a co-op member and supporter of the BDS-supported candidates. It was sent to the listserv of the California Democratic Party's Progressive Caucus. * "If it wasn't for the Zionist complicity with Nazi Germany and the Zionists actually had fought the Nazi oppression of the Jews, the Holocaust may not have proceeded so smoothly. But the Holocaust fit nicely into the Zionist plans of a 'Greater Israel.' * "Israel, the U.S. and Nazi Germany were founded on a common principle - the removal of what they considered "inferior" indigenous peoples from what they considered their "homeland." * "Many Zionist leaders openly admired Hitler and Mussolini." * "This is a state that would not hesitate to kill 3,000 of its own people in cold blood like the Cheney/Bush regime may have done, according to the preponderance of emerging evidence, during the 911 attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center." * "The U.S. is the world center of State Terrorism - and will not hesitate to do everything it can to cover up its many terrorist plots to further its imperialist goals."

Steven Maviglio on "City Council chooses surprise new redistricting map"

2011-08-10T21:12:31Z

As a member of the Redistricting Committee, I think it is indeed important to know that the committee was indeed created to be "advisory." The Council ultimately had the power to make the decision on a final map. And I support that: so now we can hold the Council accountable through our votes for what they've just done and they way they did it.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Campaign is about Democracy and Human Rights"

2011-08-09T15:27:13Z

Not a stretch at all. The Coop is a retail operation in a competitive business with small profit margins. We can't afford to make our customers unhappy or they will shop elsewhere. We have received repeated emails and comments from customers on both sides of this issue threatening to stop doing business at the Coop if it does/does not get on the ballot. The proposal put forth by BDS has NOTHING TO DO WITH FOOD. It has nothing to do with the Co-op's mission, and the Coop is not going to be used by BDS as a soapbox to get attention to its causes. Furthermore, the proposal would violate our Bylaws, the Cooperative Principles, and the law. The Board has a duty to reject it.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op candidate forum focuses on boycott"

2011-08-09T04:34:49Z

Exactly, David. So if you want the change the Bylaws to delete the sentence that requires compliance to the Election Code (which has been on the books since the Coop was founded), then by all means go ahead and try. In the meantime, to pretend it doesn't exist is inaccurate. And name-calling? Really? I guess when the facts aren't on your side, this is the kind of negative campaigning you need to resort to. Sad.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op candidate forum focuses on boycott"

2011-08-06T04:49:52Z

Susan Bush and her supporters that are suing the Co-op are dead wrong about what the Bylaws say. And so that it's clear, here's exactly how they read (without Susan's editing): From section 10.06 of the Bylaws: "Any official act, either proposed or taken, at a membership meeting or a Board of Directors meeting, shall be submitted to a referendum or initiative of the Membership UNDER THE PROCEDURES OUTLINED IN THE ELECTION CODE in any of the following situations..." And so here's the Co-op's Election Code: "The Policy Committee reviews bylaws amendments as required in SNFC Bylaws section 10.05b. In addition, the Policy Committee will review all proposed ballot measures (initiatives and referendums) to ensure clarity and alignment with Federal Law, California Law, SNFC Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation, and the Rochdale Cooperative Principles". If Susan were correct, the sentence in the Bylaws wouldn't have the words "UNDER THE PROCEDURES OUTLINED IN THE ELECTION CODE" after the initiative section. They are there for a reason: to make sure that initiatives aren't an end-run around the Bylaws (which require 2/3 approval for changes) and are legal. Exhibit A is a recent suggestion by the BDS that initiative could be to lower store prices or require the payment of dividends. The first would have a serious financial impact on the store, and the second is in direct violation of Bylaws. Ultimately, because of the BDS lawsuit, a court will decide this. But the Board, GM, Policy Committee, and past five presidents of the Co-op disagree with the Bush/Potter/Coulter interpretation of this, as well as their attempt to divide our co-op.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op candidate forum focuses on boycott"

2011-08-06T04:33:21Z

David, is the truth really "pathetic, ugly, and untrue"? Apparently you think so. And no how many times you say it, the Bylaws clearly state that initiatives are put to a vote of members under the procedures of the Election Code. And the Election Code has long had a review by the Coop's committee as part of the process -- even for the Board's own proposals. I know it's inconvenient for you to understand that, but that's what it says. The reason is simple: so nothing gets on the ballot that's illegal, violates our Bylaws (like both of the initiatives you and BDS want), or the Cooperative Principles. And you really ought to look in the mirror when it comes to "ugly shouting matches." Because until BDS targeted our store, we never had any. When BDS decided to use our store as a political soapbox (as they did in Davis before us), customer complaints soared, we've had to eject BDS members from our meetings because of their disruptive behavior, and BDS has filed a lawsuit against the store. In Davis, their sales dropped 20% because of this type of activity. What's worse, actually, are David's outright lies about Measure 2. But then again, when facts get in the way of his stories, that's what he has to resort to. He likes to write about "food fights" and stand up and disrupt meetings. Talk about sad.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op candidate forum focuses on boycott"

2011-08-04T18:41:13Z

Actually, David, your BDS organization tabled outside our store for six months before it has banned for harassing our customers. There also were multiple discussions on the Coop's Facebook pages, discussions at two member meetings, letters to the editor in the Coop's newsletter, and information on our website. So much for your inaccurate and bogus comment that "denying them their right to learn about the issue." And for the 100th time, the Bylaws -- written well before you joined the Co-op and the BDS targeted our Co-op, require ALL measures (including those proposed by the Board itself) to be vetted for compliance with California law, our Bylaws, and the Cooperative Principles. This process has been in place for many, many years. It's pretty sad that you and the BDS continue to launch a negative campaign, file lawsuits, and harass our customers. I'm pretty confident owners that patronize our Co-op (which you should actually try sometime) care more about food than Middle East politics.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op candidate forum focuses on boycott"

2011-08-04T02:49:51Z

Thanks for your support of the Board. We don't own because we don't have that much capital. The Co-op has grown significantly (thanks to your support), but buying a grocery store is big business. Even most of the major supermarkets don't buy the property; they lease in malls.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op lawsuit won't be heard until after election"

2011-08-01T21:41:13Z

It's unfortunate that Mr. Mandel has stooped to the same level of personal and negative attacks as the others have that are suing our store, harassing our customers, and disrupting Co-op meetings. The Board has never, ever squelched member rights, violated bylaws, or subverted the election process. What it has done is followed the Bylaws and Election Procedures and following the advice of our legal counsel in doing so. It should be noted that both the Board, and its Policy Committee (which is dominated by non-Board members) has unanimously rejected the effort by BDS to politicize our store. Instead of respecting that decision, Mr. Mandel & Co. continue to spread misinformation and attack the Board. I have no problem with BDS candidates Susan Bush and Cody Potter running for the Board. I actually encouraged it. That's what democracy is all about -- not a misguided effort to ruin our Co-op's prosperity.

Steven Maviglio on "Sacramento Co-op Board publishes phony ballot argument, refuses legitimate ones"

2011-08-01T21:32:29Z

The above is false. The facts are simple: Mr. Mandel was not a voting member of the Co-op until July 1, 2011 and submitted a ballot argument within days of his becoming a member. There are many, many households that have more than one family member as owners to show their support of the Co-op. And in a personal conversation with me, Mr. Mandel told me he rarely patronizes the Co-op. Mr. Mandel wants the Board to censor and remove a ballot argument because he doesn't like it. The Board has no power to do such a thing.

Steven Maviglio on "Sacramento Co-op Board publishes phony ballot argument, refuses legitimate ones"

2011-08-01T21:30:00Z

No one is trying to silence anyone. But your incorrect interpretation of the Bylaws deserves to be challenged. And the facts are that you didn't attend a single Board nor Committee meeting in the five years I've been on the Board until you took up the cause of the BDS. That's not an attack; it's a fact.

Steven Maviglio on "Sacramento Co-op Board publishes phony ballot argument, refuses legitimate ones"

2011-08-01T21:28:18Z

Ms. Bush is, as usual, is inaccurate in her attacks on the Co-op and on me. Mr. Mandel was never told by me or anyone on the Board that he couldn't submit his argument as a household shopper. In an email to me, Mr. Mandel discovered for himself that he wasn't a member with eligibility to vote in the election, and that, in turn, means he couldn't submit an argument. The facts are that Mr. Mandel discussed this issue with me and another Board member months ago. At that time, Mr. Mandel mentioned to me that he had not patronized the Co-op in a long time. I think his sudden interest in the store, and his past experience in Israeli-related issues, are something that other owners should know about when reviewing what he writes about our Co-op. Apparently Ms. Bush disagrees. This was never a "simple initiative drive." This is part of a national effort by BDS to try to get a victory notch in their belts for their cause. It has failed at every other Co-op in American except one, where the Board of Directors voted for the boycott without any member participation or notice. Perhaps that's Ms. Bush's idea of "democracy." On the other hand, our Co-op has had multiple discussions of this, published material on our website and in our newsletter, and it has been the subject of more than a dozen meetings in the past year. The Board is following the Bylaws that require review of owner initiatives by the Co-op's Policy Committee (dominated by non-Board members) to ensure that what is on the ballot complies wit the cooperative principles, our Bylaws, and California law.

Steven Maviglio on "Sac Bee Blasts Boycotters Lawsuit Against Sacramento Natural Foods Coop"

2011-07-31T18:56:52Z

The Bylaws say that any initiative needs to follow the procedures in the Election Code. The code only allow votes on measures are comply with the Cooperative Principles (open membership, no discrimination), our Articles of Incorporation, and California law. This measure fails on all counts. The bottom line here is that this measure has NOTHING to do with food or our mission.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Campaign is about Democracy and Human Rights"

2011-07-30T00:07:25Z

Let's be very clear here: Maggie Coulter is suing the store, pickets outside, harasses owners, and interrupts meetings. She has launched a propaganda campaign against the Board and our General Manager. She is running two candidates for the Board (Susan Bush and Cody Potter) and opposing a measure that would ban discrimination in the Co-op's practices. The editor of SacramentoPress.com, in his commentary, accurately describes what she is doing to our store. Ms. Coulter's response lacks any foundation in truth. I am gratified that the Superior Court has sided with the Board in the first round of Ms. Coulter's lawsuit against our store. And I am hopeful that owners will reject her political agenda in elections coming up later this month.

Steven Maviglio on "Sacramento Co-op Board publishes phony ballot argument, refuses legitimate ones"

2011-07-28T21:33:47Z

The fact is that Mr. Mandel joined on July 1, 2011. There is no dispute about that. And his actions speak for themselves, including his negative attacks on the Board and the Coop. It's not surprising that Ms. Bush -- who has never participated in the governance of the Co-op by serving on a committee or in any other capacity -- was unaware of the basic fact that says only primary members can vote. I'm glad that Ms. Bush, who is running for the Board of Directors, is finally becoming aware of the basic rules of membership. Now if she would only become familiar with the Co-op's Bylaws, of which she also shows a basic lack of knowledge, she would understand that the Board is obligated by those rules to not allow measures onto our ballot that are illegal, don't comply with the Cooperative Principles, or with our articles of incorporation. Our legal counsel agrees. But somehow, because Ms. Coulter and Ms. Bush and Mr. Mandel aren't getting their way, the Co-op has become "undemocratic." The one name that Ms. Bush shares with the others who are suing the store, harassing our customers, and disrupting our meetings is that they are associated with BDS, a group that has targeted Co-op's nationwide for their activities. The only time Ms. Bush has ever showed up to a Coop event or Board meeting was when the BDS attempt to inject politics into the Coop was on the agenda. Yet strangely, it's the one name that Ms. Bush doesn't include in her campaign literature or on her website. Talk about a smokescreen. Ms. Bush also knows, having been to Coop events, that there has been ample discussion of their attempt to impose their political views. These include numerous meetings, Facebook discussions, letters in the Co-op Reporter, and the Co-op website. And I have no problem with disagreement with the Board. It's healthy. But what Ms. Bush and Maggie Coulter are trying to do is force their political views down the throats of Co-op members. And in accordance with our Bylaws and the Co-operative principles, the Board has rejected their attempts with the overwhelming backing of Coop owners. So now they are trying to sue their way onto the ballot, costing the Coop energy and resources that should be devoted to helping local growers and the operation of our store. Lastly,

Steven Maviglio on "Sacramento Co-op Board publishes phony ballot argument, refuses legitimate ones"

2011-07-28T16:50:08Z

Exactly. The Co-op's General Manager stopped BDS from tabling after repeated complaints about their violations of the store's Tabling Policy. BDS and its candidates have campaigned on the public sidewalk for weeks and several times have been issued warnings for hassling our customers in the parking lot.

Steven Maviglio on "Sacramento Co-op Board publishes phony ballot argument, refuses legitimate ones"

2011-07-28T16:48:32Z

It's important to note that Mr. Mandel joined the Sac Natural Foods Coop on July 1, 2011. Use your own judgment to determine the motivation behind his sudden interest in the store. Mr. Mandel's argument is completely bogus. He proposes to censor the argument of another owner, also opposed to Measure Two, because he doesn't think it's good enough. How outrageous. Imagine for a second if his argument had qualified (it didn't) and the Board censored it for the misinformation it contains. I'm sure there would be even more outrage from Mr. Mandel. Apparently that argument wasn't in line with the extremist positions of the BDS group that Mr. Mandel has chosen to associate himself with -- the same group that is suing the Coop, has harassed our customers, and disrupted our Board meetings. The argument submitted by Ms. Schwartz was nearly double the length detailed in the Co-op's election code. It was submitted before the 2011 rules were published and thus ineligible. This group (which its ever-changing names, but it's really BDS) was aware of this change in the rules, which is why it submitted Mr. Mandel's argument. Now they want it both ways. Thankfully the Board is following its rules and Bylaws, just as it always has.

Steven Maviglio on "What the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op is All About: Food, Not Politics"

2011-07-28T05:14:57Z

Thanks for your comments. Good stuff! Hope you still shop at the store and are an owner. We've come a long way since then but our mission is the same: supporting local growers and promoting cooperative economics in our community.

Steven Maviglio on "What the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op is All About: Food, Not Politics"

2011-07-28T00:37:45Z

You're welcome. Head down to the Co-op and get some of their fruit. It's good stuff!

What the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op is All About: Food, Not Politics

2011-07-28T00:03:15Z

I was reminded today -- despite the divisive controversy generated by the political group, Sacramento Boycott, Sanctions, and Divestment (BDS) at our grocery store -- what the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op is all about.

The event was a "Growers Lunch" that the co-op puts on for its hardworking staff every month. Designed to better connect the organic farmers that supply our co-op with our store, today's lunch featured the D.E. Boldt Family http://www.deboldt.com/, a five-generation grower of peaches, plums, and nectarines based in Parlier, California (a rural community outside of Fresno).

Begun in 1912, the farm is certified organic and sells approximately 2,000 lbs. of fruit to the co-op each week during its seasonal harvest. The farm boasts some tasty varieties: from early season Spring Flame peaches to the exquisite Black Splendor plum that is filling the bins at the co-op right now. It's a small operation by today's standards, but produces much of the stone fruit that is gobbled up by co-op shoppers every summer.

At today's session, farmers David and Dorothy Boldt (and two of their sons who work the farm with them) talked about the connection to the land, their workers, and their appreciation of the co-op for nearly an hour. Instantly, you could feel how much they love their farm, and how much they respect the earth.

"You can tell by my hands that I don't sit at a desk," said David. "I know every tree intimately. I look at every tree in our operation a dozen times a year." That's something, he says, large-scale commercial growers don't do. And he has to deal with many more weeds because the farm has sworn off RoundUp, and he now substitutes manure for commercial fertilizer.

The Boldts love working with the co-op because "it gives us hope that people still really care about food," notes Dorothy. She praised the efforts of the co-op to educate Sacramento area families about food and organics.

"When you grow for the wholesale market, it's a triangle of having fruit that's big, tastes good, and is priced right," she said. Selling to the co-op, she says, allows them to focus on the fruit -- spending less time worrying about how large it is and what it looks like, and selecting varieties not found in large supermarkets that have outstanding flavors.

The Boldts employ 12 workers to maintain the farm, most of whom work year-round. Nearly all are originally from Mexico, put down roots, and now have become legal residents and earn a fair wage. Their average age is 50; that compares to about 20 years old for most contract laborers who work large commercial farms.

"Our farm is as much their farm as it ours," said Dorothy.

Organic farming is tough work, and the business has struggled through some lean years ("You are a fish in a smaller pond when you are an organic farmer," says David.) Just a few years ago, their major purchaser, a Texas retailer, halted its orders on July 5th -- the heart of the stone fruit season--because it got a better price from a competitor. The farm has survived, however, and they hope to pass it along to their three sons -- if they'd like. I got the feeling from the two sons they brought along -- who were beaming with pride while their parents talked about their farm -- will be the next generation of Boldts to farm that land.

All in all, it was heartening to hear about how this family operates is business, and how the co-op supports it. It also made me realize -- despite the recent negative attacks and lawsuits by BDS on our store -- what the co-op is all about: supporting local growers and providing organic food to the Sacramento community.

Disclosure: Steven Maviglio is President of the Board of Directors of the Sacramento Natural Foods Cooperative -- and an avid fan of the Boldt's peaches!

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Members Decry Fraudulent Ballot Argument "

2011-07-21T16:35:08Z

Actually, what the Bylaw amendment does say is that we dont discriminate because of political opinion. In other words, no one will be standing by the store and asking customers what their political opinions are, nor standing at the loading docks asking the distributors of products what the policies of the governments are where those products come from. Our merchandising policies are ingredient based and have a preference for local products. And that's actually why the GM -- who oversees this policy -- supports the Bylaw amendment. The term we use "political opinion" is already in our Bylaws, under open membership. Your broader interpretation of "inherently political" is a red herring.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Members Decry Fraudulent Ballot Argument "

2011-07-20T17:49:19Z

After failing at the Davis coop and an attempting to put a measure on the California ballot, Ms. Coulter and the BDS group has targeted the Sacramento Natural Foods Coop for its efforts. As Ms. Coulter told the Sacramento News and Review, she doesn't care if she's successful; she just wants attention for herself and her political issue. The Board of Directors is rightly refusing the Coop to be used as a soapbox for Ms. Coulter and her political agenda. So now she's trying to sue her way onto the ballot. Sad and divisive.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Members Decry Fraudulent Ballot Argument "

2011-07-20T17:41:38Z

Our Coop has never purchased products based on politics in its history. Most boycotts, like the above, are consumer boycotts. Shoppers don't buy the products and then stores don't stock them. Coops are open to everyone regardless of their political beliefs.

Steven Maviglio on "Disgruntled Minority Attempts to Play Politics at the Co-Op"

2011-07-20T04:59:09Z

Thanks, Lloyd, for your take on this attempt by some to divide our Coop and put its success at risk. Please vote in the upcoming elections for Alicia Dienst and Ann Richardson, Board members who want us to focus on our mission, not politics. And vote YES on Measures 1 and 2 on the ballot.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Members Decry Fraudulent Ballot Argument "

2011-07-20T04:21:27Z

After filing a lawsuit against the Coop and harassing our customers, It's sad and unfortunate that Ms. Coulter continues her misinformation campaign here on SacPress.com. The attack du jour is on another owner who also believes politics should be part of the buying decisions of the Coop. Contrary to Ms. Coulter's assertions, the Bylaw Amendment is designed to prevent discrimination based on political opinion. That is why it is supported by the Board, our Policy Committee, as well as our General Manager. Here is the ballot argument in favor: Argument in Favor of Measure 2 submitted by the Board of Directors. For nearly 40 years, the Sacramento Natural Foods Cooperative has been a leader in our community in fighting discrimination. Indeed, one of the principles of our cooperative is that we are open to everyone -- no matter what you believe, where you worship, or what the color of your skin is. We do our best to operate in a way that respects the earth, people, and our community. We buy our products based on sustainability practices, and believe in fair trade and supporting local growers. And we don’t allow political opinion to interfere with our buying decisions, trusting each member to make their own decision about the products they buy. We are proud to have a diverse membership with a variety of political perspectives that allows us to focus on our mission of benefitting our owners, supporting local growers, participating in our community, and protecting the environment. This ballot language incorporates into our Bylaws – the Co-op’s “Constitution” – a straightforward statement that our Co-op will not tolerate any discrimination of any form in the way we operate. It is modeled after language at other co-op’s and utilizes language from our Bylaws about our open membership policy. This amendment is strongly supported by the Board of Directors, the Coop’s Policy Committee, and our General Manager. We urge you to VOTE YES and incorporate this simple statement -- “The Sacramento Natural Foods Co-operative shall not discriminate in its employment, purchasing, or any other practices on the basis of race, sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, disability, political opinion, or national origin”-- into our cooperative’s bylaws. Thank you!

Steven Maviglio on "Taking the politics out of redistricting"

2011-07-14T05:27:17Z

As a member of the Redistricting Committee, I can tell you that we did our best to be blind to where the incumbents lived. We did our best to keep neighborhoods together, as well as communities of interest. We served as an advisory committee, but council members have the final say. I think that's the way it should be: council members are accountable to voters for what they do. That's a big difference from the state redistricting commission, which isn't accountable to anyone -- not voters, not the Legislature, not the Governor.

Steven Maviglio on "Group of shoppers takes co-op to court"

2011-07-10T23:43:02Z

I'd agree with you. However, Ms. Coulter is the organizer/leader of an anti-Israel group who is now passing herself off as just a member without identifying herself with the group. It's dishonest since the pro bono effort is being used to help BDS, not her and the other person filing the lawsuit.

Steven Maviglio on "Sac Bee Blasts Boycotters Lawsuit Against Sacramento Natural Foods Coop"

2011-07-08T21:17:49Z

"Extremist membership"? Our coop is proud to have owners who have varying political points of view.That's what makes our Coop strong and why politics have no place at the Co-op. It is a shame, however, that Ms. Coulter, who barely shops at the Co-op at all, is forcing the Co-op to waste its funds on a meritless lawsuit rather than on sustainable agriculture.

Sac Bee Blasts Boycotters Lawsuit Against Sacramento Natural Foods Coop

2011-07-08T16:38:01Z

In a strongly worded editorial, the Sacramento Bee blasted attempts by a political group to sue the Sacramento Natural Food Coop and its Board of Directors, saying the move is "unnecessarily dividing a flourishing local institution." http://www.sacbee.com/2011/07/08/3755093/co-op-shouldnt-be-in-the-boycott.html

"Co-op members ought to be able to make their own shopping decisions. If some feel strongly about the Palestinian cause, then they can opt not to buy matzo, or even bath salts sourced from Israeli waters," says the Bee. "Besides, there are more proper – and far more effective – forums for presenting views on the Mideast than the aisles of a grocery store. Not everything has to be about politics. Sometimes, food should just be food."

The newspaper also supported the Board's decision in rejecting a vote on the boycott, which its Bylaws require it to do if a proposal is in conflict with the Cooperative principles, its articles of incorporation, and state and federal law.

"Co-op leaders make a persuasive case that a ban on Israeli products could lead to a never-ending cycle of boycotts and litmus tests over any number of issues.Should the co-op shun products made in China, which jails dissidents and has an abysmal human rights record? Should it ban products from rural parts of California that voted for Proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage? Should it ban products from Arizona, since it passed an immigration law that is widely viewed as hostile to Latinos? Where does it stop?"

The Bee also effectively countered the argument by boycotters that since the Co-op already is political since it carries sustainable products and products that are not tested on animals.

"...Those causes are right in line with the mission of an organic food store that aspires to offer healthy products and to be environmentally conscious. They are of a different order entirely from an issue like the Mideast conflict."

According to an article in the Sacramento Press last week, two local leaders of BDS, a national organization that has targeted co-ops across the United States to promote its political agenda, has sued the Co-op. The Co-op says it may need to expend "tens of thousands of dollars" to counter the lawsuit, funds its leaders say should be devoted to helping local farmers and providing owners with dividends for their patronage.

Disclosure: Steven Maviglio is President of the Board of Directors of the Sacramento Natural Foods Cooperative, long-time political activist for progressive causes, and an organic gardener.

Steven Maviglio on "Group of shoppers takes co-op to court"

2011-07-06T05:53:07Z

Note: the lawsuit is not from a "group of members." According to a press release issued by Ms. Coulter, it is from just two owners, one of which is Ms. Coulter.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op bylaw amendment stirs debate"

2011-06-17T05:55:35Z

"The Sacramento Natural Foods Co-operative shall not discriminate in its employment, purchasing, or any other practices on the basis of race, sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, disability, political opinion, or national origin." That's the entire Bylaw amendment. "Political opinion" is a term used from another section of the Co-op's Bylaws -- the one that says that Co-op membership should be open to anyone (and enjoyed by anyone) regardless of their political opinion. The Co-op's general manager, who is responsible for product selection, also supports this amendment. Also, it's unfortunate that the sensationalist headline about a "controversy" is included. A disagreement in opinion does not a controversy make. It should also be noted that the Board's Policy Committee (which is dominated by non-Board members) voted unanimously to send this measure to the Board for consideration to the Co-op membership.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Members Sing for Democracy"

2011-06-16T20:53:14Z

Josh, your memory fails you. Maggie Coulter has been kicked out of TWO Board meetings for her disrespectful behavior to the Board and other owners. The store manager issued the no trespassing order against you and Ms. Coulter after repeated customer complaints.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Board Rejects Democracy Initiative; Puts Bylaws Amendment to Restrict Purchasing Criteria on Co-op Ballot"

2011-06-16T04:15:15Z

I disagree. This is a biased propaganda by a self-interested party not based on facts trying to be passed off as "citizen journalism." i dont think SacPress would publish what would appear to be a review of a restaurant by its owner; thats exactly what this is here. In an interview with the News and Review, the author all but admitted her effort is essentially a publicity stunt for her political group. SacPress is legitimizing this by publishing articles that don't clearly label this as opinion. The bio for the author lists a group not registered with any governmental authority. SacPress did the right thing by assigning a reporter to cover this but errs by allowing the promoter of this cause to try to pass off her opinion as a news report.

Steven Maviglio on "Controversy at the co-op: Boycott Israel?"

2011-06-15T06:27:06Z

Amen!

Steven Maviglio on "Controversy at the co-op: Boycott Israel?"

2011-06-15T06:26:48Z

Exactly --if you don't want to buy Israeli products, then that should be your personal choice. But don't force that view on others.

Steven Maviglio on "Controversy at the co-op: Boycott Israel?"

2011-06-14T17:51:33Z

The Coop's Bylaws clearly state that all initiatives must follow the Election Code. For more than a decade, that Election Code has required that the Co-op's Policy Committee review them for compliance to Bylaws, our Articles of Incorporation, and California law. Ms. Coulter knows that but chooses to ignore it. She also knows that it has been the Board of Directors at the Davis Food Coop and the Port Townsend, Wash. food coop -- the last two coops to reject the boycott -- and not membership. The Cooperative Principles and the Sacramento Food Coop's Bylaws give the democratically elected Board the responsibility of governing the store for the interests of ALL owners. Since their founding, Co-ops have been free of international politics that have absolutely nothing to do with food or our coop's mission. Let's keep it that way. The Board of Directors has received strong support for its decision to reject this attempt to make our store a soapbox for Ms Coulter's politics. We thank our owners and shoppers for their strong support.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Members Sing for Democracy"

2011-06-06T20:33:31Z

It's unfortunate that "Accurate Reporting" doesn't have the courage to list their real name before attacking the Co-operative once again. Facts are stubborn things. The facts are that two members of BDS have been served with no trespassing notices by staff . Also, the Sacramento Police have been called to the Co-op several times because of customer complaints about BDS members. The author of this "article" has been removed twice from Board meetings because of her behavior. Our General Manager has halted their ability to table after numerous violations of our Tabling Policy. The facts also show that the Bylaws require member initiatives to be reviewed by the Policy Committee so that they conform to our bylaws, the cooperative principles, and our articles of incorporation. This policy has been in place long before BDS targeted the Co-op for its political activities. Once again, the author is more interested in pitting owners of the co-operative against each other rather than promoting our mission of sustainable agriculture and natural foods.

Steven Maviglio on "It’s Still Back-of-the-Bus for Human Rights Advocates at the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op"

2011-05-24T06:06:28Z

The author of this post, who fails to identify herself to Sacramento Press readers as someone who is threatening the Co-op with a lawsuit and is the chief proponent of a ballot measure that seeks to ban any product from Israel or produced by a company with Israeli ownership, once again deliberately publishes erroneous information about the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-operative and its Bylaws. The Co-op's Bylaws specifically require any owner initiative to apply to the Co-op's Election Code. That election code requires initiatives to comply with the co-op's bylaws, the cooperative principles, and the co-ops articles of incorporation. The democratically-elected Board of Directors of the Co-op is simply following what our Bylaws require. And we have, like nearly every other co-op in America, rejected an initiative that violates our Bylaws. As the Davis Co-op put it in their resolution opposing Ms. Coulter's efforts: "...modern cooperatives, particularly food cooperatives, that have failed to abide by [the] essential principle of political neutrality have been harmed by the divisiveness that such issues cause among members and shoppers, including: an unwelcoming atmosphere for all, reduction in shoppers and sales, member resignations and return of capital, staff layoffs, disrupted operations, distraction from priorities." We agree. Never in our Co-op’s long history have we boycotted products based on the politics of the government in which they were produced. We believe each of our owners can make their own decisions about which products they want to buy, and if they want international political disputes to figure in their buying decision. Ms. Coulter is welcome to hand out information about a boycott on the public sidewalk, as is anyone who believes in their political cause.

Steven Maviglio on "Democracy at the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op? You Bet!"

2011-05-24T00:17:17Z

As been explained to you repeatedly and as cited in your own post , this section a refers all matters on the ballot to be ruled by an Election Code (see above, "under the procedures outlined in the Election Code). The Election Code clearly requires any initiative to be reviewed by the Coop's Policy Committee for compliance with bylaws, articles of incorporation and the cooperative principles.

Steven Maviglio on "Democracy at the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op? You Bet!"

2011-05-20T23:30:21Z

Thank you. This will likely be discussed at our Co-op Owner Meeting on June 7th at 7 p.m. in the Community Learning Center if you would like to share your views.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Board Policy Committee Says No to Restore Co-op Democracy Initiative "

2011-05-19T20:20:50Z

Thank you. No, they use volunteers of their group to obtain signatures. I very much respect those who are passionate about their cause and comply with the limited restrictions we have on signature gathering on Co-op property. Unfortunately, however, the behavior of at least two of the signature gatherers has resulted in calls to the Sacramento Police Department from the store manager and numerous complaints from our customers.

Steven Maviglio on "Co-op Board Policy Committee Says No to Restore Co-op Democracy Initiative "

2011-05-19T07:12:56Z

It's unfortunate that the author continues her misinformation campaign here on Sacramento Press after her repeated attempts to inject politics into our co-op have been rejected by unanimous votes of the Sacramento Natural Foods Cooperative's Board of Directors and its Policy Committee (which includes three former Board presidents and long-time owners as well as an attorney). It is clear that the author has no interest in advancing the purpose of a cooperative -- to bring people together -- and instead is engaged in unproductive dialogue and most recently, threatened legal action, designed to hurt one of the most successful consumer cooperatives (and thereby local farmers and suppliers) in California. As repeatedly pointed out at numerous Board and Policy Committee meetings, the Co-op's Bylaws and Election Code require review of member initiatives. This allows the Co-op to ensure that member initiatives are legal, comply to our Bylaws, and the Cooperative Principles. The measure written about here fails that test miserably, as does the author's previous attempts to turn the Co-op into a soapbox for her political cause. The author also fails to note that the Coop's Bylaws also specifically direct the Board to set policies of the Co-op. Her initiative violates that Bylaw, as well as the Rochdale Co-operative Principle that specifically says that the Board of Directors should administer the policies of the cooperative. That's why co-ops have Boards of Directors which, by the way, are democratically elected by owners. It's important to note the Boards of Directors (not owners) at the Davis Food Cooperative, as well as the Port Townsend, Washington cooperative both also have rejected similar efforts. The Co-op's Board of Directors is committed to democratic member control of our business. We will continue to respect the cooperative principles and our Bylaws, and ensuring that no matter what your political or religious views, the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op will continue to provide the benefits of natural foods and products, economic cooperation, and sustainable practices to as many people as possible in the communities we serve. (For those interested, all Bylaws and Codes of the Co-op are available at the Coop's website: http://www.sacfoodcoop.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=261:co-op-policies-and-bylaws&catid=51:ownershipbod&Itemid=82.)

Democracy at the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op? You Bet!

2011-05-19T06:08:10Z

For nearly 40 years, the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op http://www.sacfoodcoop.com/ has been a strong asset to our community. A fundamental principle of our owner-governed cooperative is that anyone in our community can become an owner without gender, social, racial, religious discrimination — and no matter what their political opinion is. It is in our Bylaws, and, in fact, is one of the Rochdale principles that lead to the founding of the first Co-ops in England more than 100 years ago.

Unfortunately, a local group political group, Sacramento Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Working Group (SacBDS), has targeted our Co-op in attempt to change the core principle of keeping political opinions out of our cooperative. Their action at our coop, part of a national effort, comes after similar efforts have failed at the nearby Davis Co-op http://theaggie.org/article/2010/04/02/davis-food-coop-directors-vote-against-boycott, Port Townsend (Washington State) Co-op, and at other co-ops throughout the nation. (The group also attempted to put a measure on the California ballot. It also failed.)

At each of these cooperatives, their Boards of Directors rejected BDS attempts to inject international politics into their cooperative. Our Board has done likewise in an open and democratic fashion, and after hearing from hundreds of owners.

As the Davis Co-op’s Board of Directors put it in voting their measure down: "...modern cooperatives, particularly food cooperatives, that have failed to abide by [the] essential principle of political neutrality have been harmed by the divisiveness that such issues cause among members and shoppers, including: an unwelcoming atmosphere for all, reduction in shoppers and sales, member resignations and return of capital, staff layoffs, disrupted operations, distraction from priorities."

We agree. Never in our Co-op’s long history have we boycotted products based on the politics of the government in which they were produced. We believe owners can make their own decisions about which products they want to buy, and if they want international political disputes to figure in their buying decision.

Why did our Board, as well as other Boards, make this decision instead of owners? Two reasons.

First, our Bylaws http://www.sacfoodcoop.com/images/board/SNFC_Bylaws_Sept_2010.pdf require us to do so. Member initiatives are directed to the Policy Committee (which has both Board and non-Board owners on it) for review. The Committee and the Board make sure the initiative complies with our Bylaws (such as non-discrimination in membership), our Articles of Incorporation, and the cooperative principles. The BDS measure failed on all counts.

The other reason is that owners elect us, the Board of Directors, to make decisions about governance policies such as this. In fact, the second Rochdale Cooperative principle notes that in co-ops, affairs should be administered by persons elected or appointed in a manner agreed to by the members and accountable to them.”

In a recent Cooperative Grocer magazine article www.CooperativeGrocer.coop, two national expert co-operative attorneys, Dave Swanson and Thane Loyal, point out that “The members’ authority is typically limited to major decisions, including election of directors, changes in bylaws, and liquidation or sale of the cooperative. The board can be thought of as the brain of the cooperative — it thinks and plans and decides.”

That’s just what we did in this instance.

Unfortunately, BDS has threatened the Board with legal action — which will require us to take much-needed funds we planned to use to help save farmland and spend it on a lawsuit. We are saddened and disappointed that this political group is taking this action, an affront to our mission of community cooperation.

The Co-op's Board of Directors is committed to democratic member control of our business. We will continue to respect the cooperative principles and our Bylaws, and ensuring that no matter what your political or religious views, the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op will continue to provide the benefits of natural foods and products, economic cooperation, and sustainable practices to as many people as possible in the communities we serve.

Steven Maviglio on "We don't need no stinking badges?"

2010-02-08T19:12:02Z

It's unfortunate, Geoff, that you don't raise your standards to the quality of letters to the editor in newspapers and other quality online publications. You would find that the quality of comments increases and you will have a civic forum. As even the comments on your post indicate, these new guidelines don't do anything to increase the level of discussion.

Is the Sacramento Press Fostering Civil Debate -- Or Encouraging Hate Speech?

2009-10-23T19:51:23Z

Since the Sacramento Press made its splash on our city's media scene, I've contributed a dozen or so articles and made somewhere in the neighborhood of 125+ comments. I've written about the best burger in town, the arts, and, of course, politics. I've worn my Sacpress.com T-shirt proudly (thanks guys!) and patronized advertisers. But you won't see my contributions here for awhile because of the Sacramento Press' "terms of use" policy regarding comments. Let me explain.

The Sacramento Press allows comments to be made by the site's visitors with screen names, not their real names (though some, like me, use their real names).

This hides the identity of comment posters, and, as a result, gives them virtual carte blanche to post virtually anything they want. There are some limits, as their should be. And, by and large, most commenters -- with screen names or their actual names -- are respectful.

For example, I have had significant disagreements with commenters when I respond to articles and comments on the strong mayor initiative. There's some good back-and-forth, and we agree to disagree without name-calling or insults or questions about our motivation. It's free speech -- the kind of debate that is good for this website and good for our city.

However, there are some, who typically hide behind screen names, that think name-calling and obscenities are effective ways to make their point. Unfortunately, Sacramento Press, in most instances, allows these comments.

It's not that I have a thin skin -- in my role as a spokesperson for elected officials I've been vilified by the best of them, and actually hung in effigy -- but I believe this website needs to have a policy that promotes civil discourse instead of publishing rants, expletives, and comments not based in truth.

That's the way it usually is in print. When you write a letter to the editor, your real name is used and your identity is confirmed. (That's the way it continues to be in our local newspaper of record, The Sacramento Bee, as well as our alternative newspaper, The Sacramento News& Review.)

Yet when it comes to commenting online, the rules change. No name required. No verification required. And you can write whatever you damn well please for the most part.

Of course, readers can "flag" comments for abuse. But what's abuse in print online, and what's abuse on paper, appear to be two completely things.

And that's a shame.

I don't think it's appropriate for a comment like "don't let the ass hit you on the way out the door" to be published or to be called an endless string of insulting names. But apparently the Sacramento Press (and the Bee) does. "It's free speech," they argue -- especially when it comes to public figures.

There certainly is some truth to that argument. But is this "free speech" appropriate? Should it be "censored"? Should a news-based website "let it all hang out" in the spirit of discussion, hoping that most readers will recognize that juvenile name-calling and inappropriate language is just that, making the comments less effective?

It's my sense that insults, name-calling, and hate speech don't contribute to civil dialogue, much like the ranting of right-wing radio hosts. Sure, it's great entertainment (for some) and boosts the page clicks for advertisers. But is it a good thing for our community? I think not.

I believe the Sacramento Press should find a balance between pure "free speech" and what's appropriate for publication. So far it hasn't.

Managing editor David Watts Barton wrote about this subject not too long ago (sorry, can't find the link!). And it's a tough job to find that appropriate balance. But it has to be done.

I love this site, but if contributors and those who comment have permission to insult and heckle, it's not the kind of forum I want to contribute to. I am hopeful the editors of this site develop a policy that demands respect of all of us who read, write, and contribute. And I can't wait to read the comments -- unless, of course, there's insults and name calling involved :).

Steven Maviglio on "Charter Committee meeting provides constructive forum to answer citizen's questions"

2009-10-14T16:57:09Z

Your name calling aside, the Charter Commission's lack of work was cited by the Sacramento Bee editorial board as well.

Steven Maviglio on "La Bonne Soupe reopens Wednesday"

2009-10-14T16:54:19Z

Awesome news. I'll be there on opening day!!

Steven Maviglio on "Town hall suspicious of strong mayor proposal"

2009-10-13T17:43:53Z

Actually, you are basing your example on the City Attorney's review. The City Attorney cherry-picked cities instead of providing an unbiased review. You are simply wrong that the City Council won't be able to override the Mayor's "will." Read the initiative. It's no different than most cities. You can read more about other strong mayor initiatives at the unbiased, nonprofit: http://strongmayorcouncil.org/

Steven Maviglio on "A 10-Step Plan To Fix K Street, Or: The Legend of the Skyscraper Fairy"

2009-10-13T07:50:26Z

Absolutely. Portland's public transit system is simply amazing. And there's no reason we shouldn't pattern ours along the same lines. But heck, we don't even have public transportation to our airport. I don't think we need to bulldoze downtown either. Nor do I think we should have a "no skyscrapers" attitude. It's a blend. I'm not a fan of the buildings that block out light and are out of scale, but let's face it: a lot of the buildings downtown aren't worth saving (though many are). I'd prefer to see the development you suggest, but wouldn't rule out bigger buildings if they are a valuable asset.

Steven Maviglio on "Town hall suspicious of strong mayor proposal"

2009-10-13T07:44:49Z

Anthony, with all due respect, this budgeting system is quite common in municipal governments. And it gives the Council a powerful incentive to produce a budget on time and balanced. And so it is with this initiative: the council can produce and pass a budget that differs from the Mayors. What typically happens at the federal level if there is a disagreement on a budget is that the Congress passes a "continuing resolution" -- putting the previous year's budget forward until an impasse is reached. It's quite rare that governments "shut down." In my lifetime, I can remember it happening only once.

Steven Maviglio on "Town hall suspicious of strong mayor proposal"

2009-10-13T07:41:08Z

Local 39 put out a statement crowing about their influence on the selection of the commission. Mr. Edgar, a former city manager, was a financial contributor to the Fargo campaign. He also was appointed by Mayor Fargo to the Citizens Compensation Commission, which recommended raises for the mayor and city council. Do you really think a former city manager would favor changing the city's government to a strong mayor/council system given his background? I'm sure he's an honest guy, but there's an inherent bias there. You are welcome to review the contributions to the Mayor's campaign. it's a public record. What I was saying was that the Commission members had an initial bias from the get-go.

Steven Maviglio on "Town hall suspicious of strong mayor proposal"

2009-10-13T07:37:47Z

Actually, this is the way most American cities of Sacramento's size are run. Nothing revolutionary, just evolutionary.

Steven Maviglio on "Town hall suspicious of strong mayor proposal"

2009-10-12T23:19:15Z

Political appointees = hand-selected by a City Council opposed to the initiative. Did you really expect to get a result other than opposition to the initiative put on the ballot by CITIZENS other than "we hate it" when the chairman was a contributor to Mayor Fargo's campaign and was appointed to the commission that gave her pay raises by her? When local labor unions tried to pressure each council member to appoint their favorites? I would urge you to check the contributions/endorsements of each of the commission members and you'll get a more accurate picture of the fairness of their viewpoints. I admire them putting in the time, but let's call that kettle black on the political connections. As for initiatives, you might want to re-think what you wrote. The overwhelming number of initiatives proposed never make the ballot. And you're wrong about the city manager being able to be "fired at any time." It takes five or six votes (depending whether you go with existing law or the proposed charter commission law) to do that. Have you ever tried working for 9 different bosses? That's what the city manager has to do now under the current system. And that's why there's no bold vision for our city. Ray Kerridge does the best he can under the current system of governance, which, by the way, has been chucked by most cities our size (an inconvenient truth for you, I know).

Steven Maviglio on "Town hall suspicious of strong mayor proposal"

2009-10-12T23:12:01Z

No, that's not how it works. I would suggest you read the initiative. The way it works is just like when the President or Governor introduce a budget and the legislative branch (Congress/Legislature) work amend it. If they DON'T agree, then the Mayor's budget moves forward. Pretty much the way most of America works.

Steven Maviglio on "A 10-Step Plan To Fix K Street, Or: The Legend of the Skyscraper Fairy"

2009-10-12T15:25:53Z

Some good thoughts here but ... Many other urban cities have revitalized their urban core. When I was in Denver last summer, I was amazed by the pedestrian mall. It's served by free rapid transit that promotes mobility. The city also was experimenting with free bicycles to use in the downtown (you return them when you're done). There were lots of small businesses, but lots of national chains too (let's face it, most people like them). And yes, there were skyscrapers that house thousands of workers that patronize these businesses during the day.

Steven Maviglio on "Town hall suspicious of strong mayor proposal"

2009-10-12T15:21:06Z

It's pretty amazing that what was supposed to be an explanation of the Charter Commission's work has turned into a bash-a-thon of the strong mayor initiative. Perhaps that's because the Commission's recommended changes were business-as-usual and nothing more than that. The article is wrong in suggesting that the Commission was formed to develop an alternative to the strong mayor/council initiative. Actually, it was created (with the support of Mayor Johnson) to look at a comprehensive review of the city charter, including governance. Unfortunately, the Charter Commission -- composed of political appointees and many members who had donated to Mayor Fargo's campaign -- has decided instead to assail the proposal put forward with the support of more than 33,000 Sacramento voters. A couple of points: Ms. Hastings notes that the initiative doesn't have term limits. She fails to point out that neither does the Charter Commissions. Voters can end a mayor's term at any election if they so choose. Mr. Newland wrongly suggests that City Councils don't have power under a strong mayor system. He ought to check in with New York, Los Angeles, and other major cities, where city councils and city council presidents (which Sacramento would have under the initiative) actually are empowered and do things other than approving what the city manager tells them to -- which is the case in Sacramento.

Steven Maviglio on " Strong-mayor idea scoffed at town hall"

2009-10-09T16:07:11Z

Typical that the Charter Commission wanted a year to do its work. That's just what business-as-usual types are used to in Sacramento. Congress will have enacted national health care in a faster time than the charter commission wanted to change a few paragraphs in the city charter.

Steven Maviglio on " Strong-mayor idea scoffed at town hall"

2009-10-09T16:05:58Z

The Mayor DID open the proposal to public input. More than 55,000 people signed the petitions. In comparison, these town hall meetings are attracting 10-20 people, and the commission meetings themselves less than that. Now tell me -- which has had more public participation? The Fresno strong mayor proposal has proven successful -- no deficits while Sacramento and your business-as-usual allies on the Sac City Council piled up millions in red ink. There have been NO attempts to repeal the system in Fresno.

Steven Maviglio on "Charter Committee meeting provides constructive forum to answer citizen's questions"

2009-10-09T16:03:02Z

Well, congratulations. That makes you and our City Attorney, who is more interested in preserving her job than properly advising the Council, who think so.

Steven Maviglio on "Charter Committee meeting provides constructive forum to answer citizen's questions"

2009-10-09T16:02:07Z

Actually, the "purpose" of these meetings was to explain what the Charter Commission did. Unfortunately, they didn't do much, as the Sacramento Bee pointed out.

Steven Maviglio on " Strong-mayor idea scoffed at town hall"

2009-10-09T05:10:33Z

The strong mayor system allows the mayor to introduce a budget and lay out a vision. Right now, the city manager (non-elected) does that. As for "world class city" ... I happen to love living in Sacramento. But I know it has the potential to be an even greater city. And so do the overwhelming majority of folks who live here.

Steven Maviglio on " Strong-mayor idea scoffed at town hall"

2009-10-09T05:07:07Z

Actually, there wouldn't even have been a charter commission if it wasn't for Mayor Johnson's initiative. The business-as-usual crowd that dominates the commission believes that Sacramento doesn't need to modernize its government in the way most cities our size have to allow for a strong mayor/council system.

Steven Maviglio on " Strong-mayor idea scoffed at town hall"

2009-10-09T05:05:35Z

I hate to let the facts get in the way of your personal attacks but ... The city does NOT have constant audits. Previous articles here on Sacramento Press indicated that the city's internal auditing is minimal, and that the council had rejected Mayor Johnson's suggestion of external audits that would be paid for with cost savings. Municipal deficits in Sacramento have absolutely nothing to do with federal deficits. Over the past few years, the City of Fresno (similar size, same valley) had a SURPLUS while the City Council led by Mayor Fargo piled up massive budget deficits here in Sacramento. And, by the way, Fresno has a strong mayor/council form of government.

Steven Maviglio on "Mayor in favor of Nestlé water bottling plant"

2009-10-09T04:57:03Z

It is simply amazing that your personal attacks on the mayor continue on this website. Disagree with him. Fine. But leave it at that.

Steven Maviglio on " Strong-mayor idea scoffed at town hall"

2009-10-08T00:18:01Z

The current system is a disaster: record deficits, no accountability from elected officials, no real auditing, and no ability to create a vision to make Sacramento the world class city it should be.

Steven Maviglio on ""Slow Money" Charitable Effort Gets Boost in Sacramento"

2009-10-07T17:11:58Z

I apologize for a typo. The spelling of the name of Co-op General Manager is Paul Cultrera.

Steven Maviglio on " Strong-mayor idea scoffed at town hall"

2009-10-07T16:11:55Z

The headline(s) on this story are misleading. The Town Hall didn't "reject" the initiatives; some citizens attending had questions about it, and the Charter Commission (not exactly the most neutral source on the issue) answered them. In fact, your article cites at least one audience member who disagreed. These sessions are designed to educate citizens about the charter commission's proposals to change the city charter, not to approve or "reject" them nor any other proposal that might be on the June 2010 ballot.

Steven Maviglio on "Don't Send Money to the Business Filings Division"

2009-10-07T04:58:00Z

Thanks for this article. I recently received the same solicitation after filing LLC forms. It is totally deceptive -- and there are several other companies doing the exact same thing. You should also complain to the Attorney General's office by filling out this form: http://ag.ca.gov/contact/complaint_form.php?cmplt=CL. Hopefully Jerry Brown will get on their tail.

"Slow Money" Charitable Effort Gets Boost in Sacramento

2009-10-07T04:50:06Z

The Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op www.sacfoodcoop.com/ is helping the "slow money" movement -- a grassroots effort modeled on the Obama campaign's effort to get small donations ($5 in this case) to help seed a new economy.

SNFC General Manager Paul Cultera told the Co-op's Board of Directors at its meeting Tuesday night that he recently spoke at the first Slow Money conference, which attracted more than 450 attendees from 34 states and six countries. The Slow Money effort, he said, is modeled on the "Slow Food" movement, which promotes local farms and keeping money in the local economy. Its goal, he explained, is to link Americans together to fund local food systems, improve health, reduce environmental impact, support tens of thousands of small food enterprises across the country and take control of our money in radical new ways.

TIME recently featured the Slow Money movement www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1921889,00.html. According to the magazine, "Slow Money differs from traditional socially responsible investing in that the partnerships are deeper, as the Alliance works to build not just a firm's profitability but also supportive structures. For example, rather than just lending money for, say, a farmer's barn, they would look at the farmer's other infrastructure needs, such as storage, retail outlets, transport to markets, etc. Also, inherent to the model is the notion that part of the 'return' is the social and environmental benefit a company represents."

Cultera noted that there's a drive this week to get 5,000 people nationwide to chip in $5. Those contributions will be matched by an additional $1 by friendsofslowmoney.com/.

Can your five bucks make a difference? The Slow Money folks seem to think so. For more information (and to watch a video), click www.slowmoneyalliance.org/

(Full disclosure: I serve on the Co-op's Board of Directors).

Steven Maviglio on " Strong-mayor idea scoffed at town hall"

2009-10-07T04:06:37Z

Amen, Tom. The Charter Commission had an opportunity to move Sacramento forward and recommend significant changes in our city's governance, much like nearly every other city in California the size of Sacramento. Instead, it punted. From this article, it now appears the Charter Committee is acknowledging its own failure and wants to become a taxpayer-financed attack dog. Sad, indeed.

Steven Maviglio on "City Charter Review Committee Holds Meeting in District Seven"

2009-10-07T03:59:01Z

Brushing aside your personal attack, let's look at the facts. The Charter Commission's proposal is a disaster. It currently takes five members of the City Council to hire a city manager and six to fire (a super majority). In other words, even though a majority of the council wants the city manager to move on, a handful of city council members can block the move. The strong council/mayor initiative would give the Council the power to reject the Mayor's city manager nominee. That, of course, means that Mr. Burns' comments are inaccurate. I would disagree with my friend Alan LaFaso about the need to change Sacramento's form of government. Our "system" hasn't been changed since the 1920s. Our city has. The inertia that has led to the city's largest-ever deficit, inaction on K Street, and a lack of vision about our city's future are three good reasons we need to catch up to the rest of California's cities that are our size and have a strong mayor/council form of government.

Steven Maviglio on "Naked Lounge downtown to open music venue"

2009-10-07T03:51:37Z

This is awesome news for this part of the city. Beer license has been approved too!

Steven Maviglio on "Committee supports current council/manager system"

2009-09-20T06:17:20Z

Poor guy, can't even admit he's wrong. And yes, the initiative IS a public process. When tens of thousands of citizens sign a citizen petition, that's a public process. Compare that to the 10 folks who attend the commission meetings, most of whom are special interests.

Steven Maviglio on "Committee supports current council/manager system"

2009-09-20T06:15:52Z

And there are people who voted for Fargo who are for the strong mayor/council initiative. What's your point?