Rhonda, you wrote: ". . . I received an email from someon Gutierrez campaign regarding Treatheway not appearing to the GNNA homeowners meeting a did not approve of what I read. I don't approve of what Ashby has said also regarding Treathe attending." Is that in response to this excerpt that Angelique wrote? "Last week I attended a Gardenland Northgate Neighborhood Association meeting where they told the candidates about specific concerns in their community (gang violence, graffiti, clean parks, access to a medical clinic, etc.). The incumbent did not even attend." Is your issue with the word "even"? Remember, our understanding is that he confirmed he would be there, but then he did not show up. I think it might have something to do with the fact that Tretheway performed very poorly and Angelique performed brilliantly at a councilmember candidate debate held at Heritage Park last month... That's not just my opinion -- ask any of the residents who attended at night and I'm confident they would concur. Honestly, I thought Angelique's statement ("The incumbent did not even attend.") put it MILDLY.

Rhys02, as someone with fiscally conservative values, I agree that govermnent employee pension liabilities, especially those associated with law enforcement and fire, are indeed putting an unsustainable strain on our state and local govermnents and that taxpayers are at great risk if/when the dam breaks (figuratively). But this story isn't about that, and to use a single issue, such as associating the police officer and firefighter union endorsements as the sole reason NOT to vote for someone, is missing the greater picture. You suggest that the reason the public safety associations' decisions to endorse Angelique Ashby is due to an assumption that a quid pro quo pact between them that trades the endorsements for fighting to ensure their retirement plans never change that is completely false and without any basis whatsoever. I'm not suggesting that never happens with any candidate (particularly incumbents), but I am saying that has not happened in this case. The reasons they endorsed Angelique are many and based on the successes that can be demonstrated under her leadership -- the incumbent and other challengers, past and present, have nothing to cite on those fronts except cheap lip service and in fact have bones in their closets that show how their actions or inactions have made District One a LESS safe place for the people who choose to live here. By your logic, Angelique should have rejected the highly valued public safety endorsements, in spite of her many impressive accomplishments on public safety issues. Sorry, that makes no sense. Rather than ignorant speculation about what those endorsements mean and suggesting they are the be-all/end-all negative decision factor in this election, I suggest you check out Angelique's Web site (http://www.AngeliqueAshby.com) to see what she has written on these and many other subjects relevant to District One voters, and if you are unclear on any position, you should have the intellectual integrity to send her an email and ask your question.

Rhonda, when you do meet Angelique in person (and I'm sure you will one of these days), where you can have some quality conversation, you'll be convinced she really IS all about the community and not about herself. I know you want to be fair so I hope you will keep an open mind and form your opinion on the totality of the information and experience. Angelique's "I will listen to whoever has something to say" response is genuine. I have seen it first hand and I have experienced it myself. I was one of those with something to say and it felt like nobody was listening, except others like me trying to be heard, and it was extremely frustrating. She actually helped to transform me from being an agitator fueled by anger to an advocate fueled by passion and input from those around me. She actually inspired me to be a better listener as a leader in my own leadership positions here in the community (I'm a neighborhood association co-founder and a member of the crime and safety team she co-created). I hope that helps to put that remark in perspective. As for your comment about being "selective in her appearances," I can tell you that her appointment calendar is beyond crazy these days, figuring raising a family, running a business (involving frequent travel), and running the campaign. But she's out there and you'll catch her eventually. Oh, one last thing: I heard the incumbent confirmed his attendance at last week's GNNA candidate forum, but then no-showed, citing a fundraiser conflict. Go look at the schedule for that fundraiser -- he could have made an appearance at both events. It's clear to me and many others that he blew off GNNA. Whether out of arrogance or concern for competing with Angelique is open to speculation.

The reason this comment cites no evidence to support the claims is because there is no evidence to support the claims, so he fills the void with sexist and insulting remarks. Having the support of the police officers is something that she earned honestly with her impressive track record of partnering with our police department on a variety of initiatives.

Ashby has my support and I think we all are very fortunate that she is running. She truly has the community behind her, proven by her mile-long listing of personal endorsements from leaders in the community (see http://www.AngeliqueAshby.com/endorsements). The vast majority of Ashby's campaign contributions in 2009 have come from community members and partners within the district, while the incumbent's came primarily from special interests based outside the district (often outside city limits), and the other challenger raised only $100 and cannot gain any traction on his divisive platform. She is a collaborator, not an agitator. She approaches problem-solving with an open mind and intent to build upon strengths. The mistakes and broken promises in District One and the City of Sacramento as a whole didn't happen overnight and won't be solved overnight, but having an energetic, intelligent, articulate, and collaborative representative as our representative on the council going forward is a must, and Angelique Ashby exemplifies those traits.