Amen, Lisa. Ever since it arrived I have had that flyer sitting by my computer, waiting for a chance to write City Hall to express my dismay to see such a slick (as in slippery) and grossly biased piece being presented with a straight face as "not intended to support or oppose the ballot proposition." Trying to label that piece as neutral suggests one of two things about the person who approved that piece of propaganda:
(a) either they were fine with making flat misrepresentation about neutrality and they don't care how the voters respond, or
(b) they have no business in a position that requires good judgment.
I started out a few months ago completely ignorant of the RFA issue, but since then a lot of reading and the tactics of the "pro" campaign -- tactics like sending out a clearly "pro" mailpiece at taxpayer expense and claiming that it's neutral -- have convinced me to vote no and to encourage others to do the same.
In my day job, I help people who have been ripped off by con men and shady businesses. It's striking to see a political campaign like the yes campaign here use so many of the same sales tactics that the worst used car dealers and high-pressure sales folks use: lots of appeals to emotions, a false sense of urgency being pushed, and an absolute refusal to discuss weaknesses and alternatives to the proposal being pushed on the marks (in this case, us, the voters). I hope the proposal fails so that we can get past the false binary of this one proposal and go back to the drawing board and really look at our options.
The no camp's website, SaveOurFD.org, is a wealth of information, and it's all pretty carefully sourced and footnoted. I urge any voter to review it before voting.
Please explain the inappropriate content below.
