Vote Yes on Ballot Props to Protect Your Family, Money, and Voice

Print Share on LinkedIn Comments More

Scott Ball / Rivard Report

Reinette King

Proposition A

Tired of unresponsive, out-of-control leadership with no transparency and your money being spent recklessly? How do we get City Hall’s attention and a debate/vote on issues? Referendum is a “common sense” reform needed to question the mayor and council when they support and fund controversial and costly projects for power brokers and developers over basic needs, such as relocation of the Cenotaph, the Alamo Plaza expansion, the land bridge in Hardberger Park, and the Vista Ridge Pipeline.

Voting Yes would require 20,000 signatures to put an issue on the ballot, the same number required for charter amendments as set by the Texas State Constitution. Voting yes would also allow 180 days to collect them. The existing requirement to collect signatures from 10 percent of registered voters (about 70,000) in just 40 days is an unreasonable hardship with established “free speech zones” under threat of arrest.

Why is the City on the side of the “moneyed interests” trying to silence the voice of the people? Are they an exclusive club into power and control? Isn’t it the “vote of the people” that elects the council and mayor? Isn’t it our money and our city where we make our living and raise our children? Thirteen years of Sheryl Sculley has taken its toll, and City leadership – both elected and unelected – needs to put the people first. Citizens don’t hire lobbyists but rely on elected representatives to protect them, while exercising fiduciary care. How is that working for us? What is the motive behind power brokers contributing huge sums of money for a campaign to confuse, mislead, and scare us into voting their way? Why have personal attacks replaced facts?

City Hall belongs to you. It’s not a piggy bank for selfish interests. Vote yes on Proposition A to protect your family, money, and voice.

Proposition B

This is about the failure of council to “manage the manager” whose compensation is more than the governor and president combined – she could earn up to $575,000 in 2018. Our city manager’s compensation is among the highest in the nation. So why, according to Wallet Hub, does San Antonio rank only 99th out of 150 best run cities and only 48th in quality of city services? What kind of management is this?

Sculley has been in power so long, it has become more of a city for her and power brokers than one for the people. She names her price and gets it. And why not? Council has had no metric by which to evaluate her performance.

Voting yes will not jeopardize our bond rating. A bond rating and bond elections are about debt that affects our taxes. Promoters of bond debt are giving money to oppose these amendments. While increasing our taxes, they develop at no risk to themselves. Meanwhile, citizens lack EMS vehicles, police personnel, street repairs, and sidewalks. Vote yes on Proposition B for accountability to the taxpayers.

Proposition C

This proposition is needed to break the four-year stalemate that exists between the City manager and the firefighters. City Council would rather litigate than negotiate, making it look like the firefighters’ fault. The City has wasted more than $1.5 million in tax dollars suing the firefighters repeatedly over the evergreen clause, and each time the lawsuits were thrown out of court. Though the City lost its appeal for summary judgment, it still has not dropped the lawsuit and could change the arguments and file it again at any time.

As a last resort, the firefighters proposed binding arbitration to stop the waste of tax dollars they want spent on the people’s needs. Arbitrators would be chosen by both sides to consider what other cities pay firefighters, the consumer price index, the revenue available, and the impact any arbitration ruling would have on taxpayers. Let’s treat our first responders fairly. Vote yes on Proposition C for a fair resolution.

8 thoughts on “Vote Yes on Ballot Props to Protect Your Family, Money, and Voice

  1. Vote no. Period.

    Anyone who thinks these propositions will help San Antonio or its citizens is incorrect in their beliefs and anyone who tells you these propositions will help our city or its people is a liar and con artists. Do not be fooled by these Trump like tactics. Be a smarter individual than they believe you to be.

    • To say they are lies and to bring no solutions or facts to the table is not helpful. If you would back this up with facts instead of opinion and name calling it would be helpful and not divisive. I am proud that we live in a country that allows us to have different views and opinions; even prouder of the politicians who state their views with dignity while offering those who have counter views that same dignity. Thanks for being involved but please bring solutions and peace to the table when you choose to engage in the political realm.

  2. Facts matter. The land bridge WAS voted on by the people – it was in the last city bond issue. Plus, it was vetted by a committee of citizens before even appearing in on the ballot.

    Paid lobbyist vs. elected official. Hmm… I think I will go with the one who can be held accountable by the public. Vote no.

  3. I am definitely voting “No” on all 3 propositions. Ms, King’s defense of these propositions make absolutely no sense and it’s obvious she’s in the pocket of the fire union. Passage of these amendments would be disastrous to our city.

  4. If I hear one more time out of the ‘yes’ campaign…… A blog with disputed methodology, who ranks Nampa, ID (pop 90k) as the #1 best run city in America. It’s really sad. There is no validity behind their talking points.

  5. I voted NO on all 3 props. I vote for City Council reps so that I don’t have to micro-manage every decision the city makes with a ballot. This city is on the rise after being this sleepy big city and the laughing stock of so many other big cities for years. The rise happens to coincide with Sculley’s tenure. I can’t say if she’s the reason for the rise but her efforts have definitely not hindered the ride. I wonder what kind of manager we get with half-ass pay. I think anyone who has been a small business owner, a hiring manager or in any supervisor role would say you get what you pay for when it comes to hiring. Plus this cause lost my vote when I found out the reasons I was asked to sign the petition were not at all what the petitions were actually about.

  6. I am voting yes. Like this report said. It is about managing the manager.

    A few business interests currently manage the manager.

    City council members are not in office long enough to balance the influence of the few business interests. Perhaps lots of yes votes will help to improve the process for managing the manager.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *