A special recall election will cost the RLECWD $50,000! The recalls now being signed are strictly personal vendettas against three Board members. If that's not true, and it really is the "rate issue", then why wasn't a referendum action taken rather than three recall actions? A referendum would require the collection of only 497*signatures instead of the 6021 required for the recalls. A referendum would require the Water Board to rescind its action or to call an election; the $50,000 cost of a special recall election could be avoided.
But rather than embark on a referendum to force the Board to reconsider the rate issue, the ten proponents who signed the recall notices chose to attack three Directors, and not all of them voted the "wrong" way! A referendum would have addressed the issue to which they object. Instead they mounted a recall that attacks personalities and individuals that will force a $50,000 expense on our Water District should they obtain enough signatures.
A RECALL gives the voters an opportunity to rid themselves of officials they have elected who show themselves to be thieves or other criminals. By their recall action, the proponents are so charging Mel Griffin, Jerry Wickham and Jay O'Brien, yet they provide no facts substantiating any criminal activity.
A REFERENDUM, had the proponents chosen that option, would have addressed the issue without dividing the community. A referendum is for "bad decisions"; a recall is for "bad people." Calling the Directors "bad people" has divided this community. Issues can be debated with respect; there are two or more sides to issues. An attack on an individual, such as a recall, is either right or wrong. These recalls are wrong.
The ten recall proponents, by signing the recall notices, are now fair game for criticism. They are now politicians as attested by their signatures. What they are doing is ILLOGICAL. They are throwing away the Water District's money, and they are diverting everyone's attention from the real issue, the needed raise in water rates.
Of course there could be another reason. I understand that one of the proponents, who is also on the Water District Rate Committee, has oft expressed her desire to run as a replacement Director, should the recalls succeed. Can't she wait for the elections next year? What a waste of $50,000 to satisfy an ego.
Get off it water board recall advocates; if you really want to address the issue, use a referendum and stop the recall NOW. And then, attend the water board supported citizen's rate committee meetings and participate in the rate deliberations that are now in progress.
*The required number of 497 signatures is 10 percent of the entire vote cast within the boundaries of the RLECWD for all candidates for Governor at the last gubernatorial election.
Talk about rubbing salt in the wound or adding insult to injury- can you imagine how Jerry Wickham felt when he discovered that a sign stand he had loaned to Mary Harris of Mary's Hair Salon for her to use for a Grant Reorganization Drive sign turns up holding up a big sign on property across from Archway Auto Supply that Jerry believes belongs to Carl Brothers that accuses Jerry of being a "Good Old Boy" and a "Money Waster" and stating he should be recalled off the Rio Linda/ Elverta Community Water District Board of Directors. Jerry said, "boy, that takes the cake". Jerry did get his sign stand returned [click here to learn how] and I agree with him that it's a pretty low blow. Talk about ethics!
Well anyway, once again it's time to get to press, so, it's 30 for me and 73 to you.