Plastic bag ban to be discussed by Internal Affairs committee June 12

In the agenda for the upcoming Sustainability Task Force meeting on Monday, June 4, we see that the “single use” plastic bag ban will be tossed to the Internal Affairs committee at their June 12 meeting.

Now, this should be interesting. The Sustainability Task Force meetings are held in the afternoons and evenings. When the STF heard this issue, the room was packed. And not just with ban supporters, so nya, nya, nya.

Internal Affairs committee meetings are held at 8am. And the coffee, well, it is free, so who in the hell am I to gripe. But, we’ll have to see how many of these passionate planet protectors will show up for an 8am meeting. I’m just sayin’.

I hope some of you cons will come down – this is our chance to get a negative recommendation out of the Internal Affairs committee. I think all it would take is a couple of rational comments to turn this buggy around. No nasty accusations, no dramatic speeches, just some basic questions about the implementation and cost of this feel-good bullshit. It’s better if you read the reports before the meeting – all the stuff you want is available at the city website:

The more I think about this thing, the dumber is seems. I can’t go into it right now, I got to roll out some tortillas for dinner.



Mr. David Guzzetti, Chico Conservation Voters – REDACTED!

Generally, the word “redact” means to edit a document. In this case, it means Guzzetti is being called on the carpet by the Fair Political Practices Committee for failing to properly file his campaign expense reports.

“Dear Mr. Guzzetti:

The Fair Political Practices Commission (“FPPC”) enforces the provisions of the Political
Reform Act (“Act”),1 found in Government Code section 81000, et seq. This letter is in response
to a complaint filed against you by the Office of the Secretary of State that alleged you failed to
file campaign statements in electronic format.

The FPPC has completed its investigation of the facts in this case. Specifically, the FPPC
found that you failed to file your semi-annual campaign statement for the January I, 20 II
through June 30, 20 II period in electronic format by the August I, 20 II deadline.”

A “redaction” in this case means, he’s been warned, next time he’ll be fined.

“Since you subsequently submitted this statement on February 2,
2012, we are closing our file on this matter.

This letter serves as a written warning. The information in this matter will be retained
and may be considered should an enforcement action become necessary based on newly
discovered information or future conduct. Failure to comply with the provisions of the Act in the
future will result in monetary penalties of up t0 $5,000 for each violation.”

This is not Chico Conservation Voters first violation. According to documents filed by the FPPC (FPPC #09-537), CCV treasurer Michael Worley was fined $5,000 in 2008, not only for failing to file reports properly, but for sending out a “mass mailing” under a fake name. This is what the Chico Democrats do in every election – I’ve got their last minute “hit mailers” in past. They use a fake name – in 2008, they used a name  that referenced the organization “Mothers Against Drunk Drivers.” They send out postcards with all kinds of made-up accusations about their opponents. They send out lies about their competition, and they don’t include a real name on the postcards because they know they’re lying and they don’t want to be traced.

I’ll tell you what they do that’s perfectly legal – they file their reports with the county instead of the city. Under intense pressure from bee-atches like myself, county clerk Candace Grubbs has only recently started posting campaign reports so the public can actually read them. The city clerk’s office has been doing that for years now, so Guzzetti has been filing at the county, even for things like his campaign against last year’s Measure A, to switch city of Chico elections to June. Why would he file those at the county? Because at the time Grubbs was not posting them, you had to go to O-ville, make a formal written request giving personal information for the documents, and then stand around til they felt like digging them out (at that time, records were kept in sagging cardboard boxes strewn around the office floor).  If you wanted copies you had to PAY FOR THEM. You were only allowed to look, don’t touch. A friend of mine was kept waiting so long one day, they told her it was closing time and she’d have to come back and refile her request the next day. And, when she asked for copies, she was made to take copies of EVERY PAGE, and pay for them, even though she was only interested in three or four specific pages.

Now, the county clerk is posting reports, thankyouverymuchbitch, so don’t forget to check them out:

It still sucks compared to the city clerk’s page – you have to know the name of the organization, and there’s too many links, opportunities to get lost and wander around their website. Oh well, it’s better than nothing, and if you hit it regularly, it will keep old Candy on her toes.

Guzzetti will use whatever tactics it takes to keep the liberals in power, and pissant fines aren’t going to stop him.