Wow, check out this video by "Yes on H": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5TFqFRa8So
0 Kudo
Does PG&E Want To Screw San Francisco? Videos Seems To Say So
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 diggsbs |
Does PG&E Want To Screw San Francisco? Videos Seems To Say So |
Lead | |
|
Ward Heeler
Posts: 11 (10/09/08 6:27 PM) |
|
||
|
Able Dart |
|||
|
Ward Heeler
Posts: 5374 (10/09/08 9:56 PM) Administrator |
I love it how diggsbs comes on here and pimps his latest projects without adding anything meaningful to the discussion. Oh well. He does improve our search
results.
The Wall Commentary on Public and Private Life in San Francisco
http://www.sfwall.net
|
||
|
ivoteinsf |
|||
|
Ward Heeler
Posts: 28 (10/10/08 12:28 AM) |
Well, diggsbs might be shilling, but that video is kind of upsetting. Or am I a prude?
|
||
|
PHLemingo |
an alternative to the alternative | ||
|
Ward Heeler
Posts: 3962 (10/10/08 7:15 AM) Ward Healer |
The thing I don't like about Prop H is that its basicly a deception (trumpeted Green Energy quotas) in order to facilitate a back-door buyout/takeover of
the PGE system. Like the movie said -- no one will be hosed for not meeting the 100% ?Green energy "goals" (specially if its run by SFGOV).
However, I'm ticked at PGE, and I just may just vote for this thing. OTOH, it seems to be cost-neutral, at least for what I can see. OTOH, we may never see that buyout (at least not in the next decade or two) -- due to the current and coming Credit Crunch and the inevitable appeals. Municipal bonds are a non-starter these days. And an enterprise shrouded in lawsuits looks even less worthy of credit in a tight market. I don't think PGE has been a particularly good steward of the system. And with the Progs jsut itchin to get their paws on it, I figure it may jsut take leting them tank the grid before we can finally find an impartial and efficient operator. If this passes, I'm sure PGE will sponsor a measure that sets limits on how much "screwing" up the Progs can do, before its taken out of their sticky little hands. I think History is jsut sometimes like that. -P |
||
|
el Greco SF |
|||
|
Ward Heeler
Posts: 1692 (10/10/08 8:41 AM) |
There might be plausible reasons for publicly owned power in SF. And a regulated monopoly as we have now might be fine. But I choke on this statement in
Propostion H: "..allow the Board of Supervisors to approve the issuance of revenue bonds to pay for any public utility facilities without voter
approval."
I think not. Revenue and G.O. bonds, in the entire United States, have been subject to voter approval for decades. Get out of my ballot box, Supervisors. |
||
|
bunkee |
video battle | ||
|
Ward Heeler
Posts: 660 (10/10/08 8:41 AM) |
I see one guy spouting off his own opinions and an attempt to incite anger at PGE. there were no stats, no facts, nothing that gave me any useful information.
|
||
|
PHLemingo |
your cutoff notice | ||
|
Ward Heeler
Posts: 3962 (10/10/08 5:38 PM) Ward Healer |
Revenue and G.O. bonds, in the entire United States, have been subject to voter approval for decades. Get out of my ballot box, SupervisorsGO bonds may be suspect. But RBs need a proven steam of income. But don't worry -- betweeen tight credit and SFGOV beign able to make an enterprise work (plus, that snow-storm of lawsuits), I doubt we'll see any changes. Of course, Grec, the downside is PAYING for all those lawsuits. Guess we'll need a Prop B-2, a set-aside for utility-buyout legal fees. Contact your supervisor for more details. -P |
||
