Polls
Login
RSS Feed: Local News
RSS Feed: Sports
RSS Feed: Voice
| Campaign confusion |
|
|
| Written by Eric Firpo | |
| Friday, 05 September 2008 | |
|
Political sign rules come into question in Tracy.
 This sign was spotted today, more than 45 days before the election. Glenn Moore/Tracy Press The City Clerk’s office has apparently received a handful of phone calls about political signs that have been posted around town, a few of which belong to City Council candidate Larry Hite, a local home inspector.
Hite said he’s had about 50 yard signs made and handed several of them out to supporters. A few are in front lawns now. “I’m new at this, and I’ve made a point about asking about everything,” he said. The assistant city clerk told the candidate that as long as the yard signs are on private property in people’s yards, it’s OK to display them, Hite and Fleischmann said. The city’s municipal code says that candidates can erect political yard signs 45 days before an election, which this year falls on Sept. 20, but makes no mention of public property versus private property. The signs also must be taken down five days after the election, the code says. Hite said he even received a call from his friend and fellow candidate Steve Abercrombie, a city councilman, who told Hite he wasn’t supposed to have signs up sooner than 45 days before the election. Marlene Jones lives near Tennis Lane and has volunteered to walk her precinct for mayoral candidate Celeste Garamendi. Jones was a little bothered when she saw Hite signs in front yards on Tennis Lane, because Garamendi told her to wait until 45 days before the election to put up her banners. “I just thought to myself, I understand he wants to get a head start because he’s a new candidate, but it should be a level playing field,” she said. “I’m not anti-Larry Hite. I really don’t know him.” When she heard Hite was told it’s OK to erect signs on private property, Jones said, “If that’s the case, I guess everybody can put them up. I thought we were just following the law.” City building inspector and code enforcement officer Jim Decker said he knows of no complaints to the city about yards signs. Even if it had, code enforcement officers in the city are swamped with vacant properties in foreclosure and abandoned swimming pools that can spread the West Nile virus. “Realistically, political signs are real low on the priority list,” Decker said.
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email This
Hits: 1211 Trackback(0)
Comments
(122)
 written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008
The city code says 45 days, so why isn't the City Clerk telling Hite 45 days? All your signs are supposed to go on private property and you're supposed to get the private property owners permission. You're not supposed to put them on public property, medians, side of the road, etc. That is state law. So because code enforcement is SOOOO busy we'll just let Larry Hite get away with that? And Mike Maciel too, because he has some signs out already too. If they can't follow some basic campaign laws then how are they to be trusted with the really important laws? When you are sworn in to the City Council you swear to uphold the Federal and State constitution and one would assume the laws and regulations of your own municipality. I saw on Maciel's website that he said he did not agree with Measure A but since it was law he would enforce it. Can we trust him and Hite to do that since they can't obey the sign law?
written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008
Remember when Ives, Tucker, Tolbert and Abercrombie decided they didn't want an Ethics ordinance? Will Hite and Maciel follow suit? Seems likely!
 written by Gary , September 06, 2008
Seems to me if it's MY property I can put any sign I want to on it, as long as it not vulgar or offends anyone. Thanks Malcolm for the attempt at the civics lesson, but re-read the first amendment.
 written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008
Who Cares:
Hite as Tolbert know the rules of campaigning. They signed a document regarding the rules of the FPPC about politial campaigning. Rules about signatures, fileing, bank accounts, committies, signage,name and committee number on signs, transfer of coffer money and so on. Signs are the most simple rules to follow, a city race is 30 days before the election. It's not outside the county so it all city rules. Larry Hite knows those rules. He just wants the advantage, do we want someone to represent our city who breaks the rules? No. As for the Tracy Press Eric Ferpo, did the article to give his support to HITE. PRETTY SNEAKIE ERIC? We already have Tucker, Ive's, Tolbert, who broke the rules. t. b written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008
Who Cares:
I believe in the past most signs we not allowed before 45 days and some years it was 30 days. City County and State, are different then congressional and presidential races. t. b written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008
Sure Gary, it's your property. So if YOU want to make a sign, poster, etc. to put on YOUR property supporting Hite or Maciel that's fine. But the sign is HIS property, in this case campaign property that HE gave out after knowing it was 45 days regulation. HE broke the law, not YOU. What I can't tell from the article is if THEY (Hite and Maciel) are going to go around and ask for THEIR signs back until the 45 day mark.
 written by what? , September 06, 2008
Classic case at city hall- One hand doesnt know what the other is doing!
Election rules are black and white - Using the clerk to blame, premature campaigning is LAME! Will the code enforcement do anything to prevent the signage? Or are they friends of Larry Hite and turning a blind eye to this problem? Who is in charge of city elections? Who polices the rules in regards to the campaign? This is an election issue not city code..  written by Observer , September 06, 2008
The point is all elected officials and those seeking election should have known the city codes if they want to run for any office. If they don't know their own city code, how will they lead effectively???
Up to you voters. -amy written by Observer , September 06, 2008
Why should "they" decided on whether they want it or not. PEOPLE MUST DEMAND IT! YOU WANT ETHICS ORDINANCE? DEMAND IT! Don't vote in anyone who does not want ethics ordinance, sunshine law, brown act, open transparency and so on. Why are they being allowed to dictate to you on what they want or don't want, Tracyites?
Demand the same of all running candidates, start with clean plate at election time, do things right the first time! -amy  written by Dale Cose , September 06, 2008 written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008 Don Benigno, your knowledge of rules regarding campaign signs vs property... If I may, during the last Supervisor Race for District 5, the also-ran (the Benigno) littered the private/public property along 11th St (among other places) with his campaign signs. Some of the property owners were irate because no placement permission was given and they immediately removed Benigno signs (the Perkos Shopping Center for one) Some of the Benigno signs were placed in the sidewalk tree wells clearly with-in the City Right-of-Way which along 11th St is public property (the Smart&Final Shopping Center for one) Don Two-Face, please give me another lecture about signs being the most simple rules to follow and how you are released from those simple rules. Thank you in advance, as ever your buddy, Dale  written by fortheunderdog , September 06, 2008
"written by Gary , September 06, 2008
Seems to me if it's MY property I can put any sign I want to on it, as long as it not vulgar or offends anyone. Thanks Malcolm for the attempt at the civics lesson, but re-read the first amendment." While I appreciate you advice the 1st Amendment has nothing to do with the placing of political signs. The rule reads 45 days. What do candidates who have signs up think that means? If they think they can overrule the rules now, what do you think they will do if they're elected? written by Dale Cose , September 06, 2008 written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008 written by Dale Cose , September 06, 2008 cont. STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF TRAFFIC OPERATIONS OUTDOOR ADVERTISING PROGRAM Dear Candidate or Committee Member: As a candidate or campaign worker for either office or a ballot measure, this reminder about State law governing campaign signs should be helpful to you. Section 5405.3 of the State Outdoor Advertising Act exempts the placing of Temporary Political Signs from normal outdoor advertising display requirements. A Temporary Political Sign meets the following criteria: A. Encourages a particular vote in a schedule election. B. Is placed not sooner than 90 days prior to the schedule election and is removed within 10 days after that election. C. Is no larger than 32 square feet. D. Has had a Statement of Responsibility filed with the Department certifying a person who will be responsible for removing the sign (Attached). A completed Statement of Responsibility must be submitted to: Division of Traffic Operations Outdoor Advertising Program P.O. Box 942874, MS-36 Sacramento, CA 94274-0001 Temporary Political Signs shall not be placed within the right-of-way of any highway, or be visible within 660 feet from the edge of the right-of-way of a classified “Landscaped freeway”. State law directs the Department of Transportation to remove unauthorized Temporary Political Signs and bill the responsible party for their removal. We are calling these provisions to your attention to avoid possible embarrassment to you and your supporters. Please pass this information along to those assisting in your campaign. Should you have any questions, comments or need additional information, please call (916) 654-6473. written by fortheunderdog , September 06, 2008
Now, given that Hite and Abercrombie read these blogs and have read this morning's Press, they'll do the right thing and order their signs taken removed then put back up on Sept 20th.
written by fortheunderdog , September 06, 2008
Sorry, should read "taken down" not "taken removed".
written by fortheunderdog , September 06, 2008
"written by fortheunderdog , September 06, 2008
Now, given that Hite and Abercrombie read these blogs and have read this morning's Press, they'll do the right thing and order their signs taken removed then put back up on Sept 20th. CORRECTION: My apologies to Abercrombie who has not posted any political signs. written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008
Who Cares:
DaleCose: You are wrong the signs at Perko's were authorized years ago, in concreate. The signs in front of the other properties were allowed by consent. If you notice, I never put signs on your slum buildings around town. Thanks to you and your buddies for pulling my signs down you criminal. There are laws on the books about doing things like that just ask around. A few of my signs went down a few days late, because I was in the hospital. As it was when it was time to put them up, was very ill, but I managed with the help of others. Who are you the sign police, go out there and pull your buddy Hites signs down? P.S. My signs were not considered littering. The next time you talk about my failed campaigns, people will remember your comments and may consider you part of my campaign failures. I hope your proud of yourself. t. b written by Dale Cose , September 06, 2008 Mr Hite asked for clarification from the City, to do less is not his nature. That the usual writers find the response he received unacceptable bring it up at the next council meeting, ask the City Attorney to review the text, file a complaint with whatever election commission, go forward with it. written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008
Cose,
I don't see the conflict between what you posted and what I said... right of way would be a public property (signs not allowed) the time limits are City ordinance which is what the article said and I repeated. Are you in favor of Hite and Maciel breaking City ordinance, but not Benigno? Please splain it to us Lucy. written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008
The issue here is Hite and Maciel not following the 45 days.
written by Dale Cose , September 06, 2008 written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008 The owner of the shopping center disputes you, was angry and removed your signs. See him for the pulverized concreate The signs in front of the other properties were allowed by consent. The City doesn't care for campaign signs in the R.O.W. Who at the City gave you permission? Which owner at the Safeway shopping center gave you permission? If you notice, I never put signs on your slum buildings around town. Please identify the slum buildings around town. Thanks to you and your buddies for pulling my signs down you criminal. There are laws on the books about doing things... Don Benigno calls me a criminal... without bothering to offer his proof (yawn) Did-not-touch-your-signs-nor-at-anytime-would-I-do-or-say-anything-to encourage-others Furthermore mr. small bananas- If I saw someone trashing, stealing etc. even your signs I'd confront them or call law enforcement. A few of my signs went down a few days late, because I was in the hospital... I said nothing about illegal placements taken down late and I'm sorry to hear life dealt you another blow. P.S. My signs were not considered littering. The next time you talk about my failed campaigns, people will remember your comments and may consider you part of my campaign failures. I hope your proud of yourself. If you would have received permission I would have agreed with you. Littering stands. Considering the alternative of having Don Benigno in office... I'd say relief would be the proper word. You want someone else to take responsibility for your failure. You ran your campaign, you spoke for yourself, you own it. written by Dale Cose , September 06, 2008 written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008 Section 5405.3 of the State Outdoor Advertising Act exempts the placing of Temporary Political Signs Rexdom, quote your state law. written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008
"Temporary Political Signs shall not be placed within the right-of-way of any highway, or be visible
within 660 feet from the edge of the right-of-way of a classified “Landscaped freeway”. " FROM your own post COSE written by fortheunderdog , September 06, 2008 So what is it? Since Hite was told by a city clerk it was ok to post now on private property is he going to leave his signs? Or, since Tracy's regulations says candidates can post signs 45 days before election will he take his signs down? If every other candidate knows that there's the 45 day rule. written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008
FTUD,
The signs in the picture are still up as of 12:00 noon today - I saw them on Tennis Lane. written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008
Who Cares :
I is obvious that Dale Cose supports Larry Hite. It seems as though they think a like, because they were in the Rotary they can do what I want. We don't want to elect people who think with they are better then everyone else, and are corrupt. Dale are you looking foward to having Larry Hite, giving you a freebee on home inspections. So you can cheat your way in the building business. Slum lord buildings, is your trademark. t. b written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008
Who Cares:
To the Tracy press pull the Larry Hites sign article off the blog. If you put out one you should do it for the rest of the candidates. I think you can do the article without showing the sign. Come on Firpo get with the program. t. b  written by Danny Hobbs , September 06, 2008
Just got back from the bean festival and overheard a conversation about this sign thing, The city ordinance only applys in the city limits and "private county property" is legal for political signs
to be erected now. written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008
Hite's signs are on Tennis Lane.... it's in the City Limits!
Maciel's signs are on developer property in the County (Kagehiro and Souza) Is Maciel going to split hairs on a technicality. Is this why we need a cop on the council? Knows how to work the system. written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008
Hite - ask your pal Mike to move your signs out to Kagehiro/Souza land.
written by Dale Cose , September 06, 2008 written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008 Section 5405.3 of the State Outdoor Advertising Act exempts the placing of Temporary Political Signs D. Has had a Statement of Responsibility filed with the Department certifying a person who will be responsible for removing the sign (Attached) Rexdom, you Don Benigno, and what? have about the lowest reading comprehension level of any bloggers I've come across. See the bold. any ideas? Hint: the statement of responsibility means there are State controlled ares you can place the signs. Waiting for your citation of election law to refute it. written by Dale Cose , September 06, 2008 written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008 The other Tom Benigno for Supervisor put them there? Tell Al Navarra that he dosn't own every building in Tracy. Your old enough, you can tell him. As for Perko's Julius owed me that, privilege. Apparently one more person disagrees about what you're owed. As for your slum lord buildings, everything you own is a slum. Gosh I don't know if I can bear the pain of your accusations. Dale... crying softly... now you're just downright mean Don Benigno. Some people surprisingly, disagree with you. Go ahead name the buildings. I am taking responsibility for my own, I should have had you thrown in jail, for removing my signs Statute of Limitations hasn't expired... have me thrown in jail Don Benigno. It's very obvious you have a hatred for me that goes much too deep. People are beginning to think that you are dangerous person. I must say I agree. I don't hate you. How many times have I called you my brother, shown you the error of your ways, told you I love you? You haven't said any of that once, though you did say you loved my mother. dangerous? Boy Tom... serious... nutball...serious...nutball... written by Tom Benigno , September 04, 2008 written by Tom Benigno , September 05, 2008 written by Tom Benigno , September 05, 2008 written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008 mr. bananas, mr. clean written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008
Who Cares:
Like the old saying goes, with friends like you I don't need enemys. I don't know if you have a brother, but you don't show love by stepping on his head. No thanks. I sure your Dad taught you how to be respectful, but you have a bad seed in you. Ask your mother if you have ever,fallen on your head? I assume you are admitting you took my signs down. t. b written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008
Who Cares :
Lets get back to the subject, of Hite taking his signs down. That's the story. t. b written by Dale Cose , September 07, 2008 written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008 I love you Tom... I have never stepped on your head, either one. Drove you around the block countless times... I sure your Dad taught you how to be respectful, but you have a bad seed in you. My father taught me to respect people that earn it, be nice to people that you meet, and the part I learned... some people will say or do anything. Ask your mother if you have ever,fallen on your head? I've fallen on my head... face... rear... more than a few times but good news, I faired better than one perennial candidate. I assume you are admitting you took my signs down. You assume too much. You wrote, I should have had you thrown in jail, for removing my signs. Tom, reread my post... throw me in jail. written by Tom Benigno , September 06, 2008 after your done with your previous post?  written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 07, 2008
(f) Political signs.
(1) Maximum height: Six (6') feet. (2) Maximum area: Thirty-two (32) square feet. (3) Calculation of area: One-half square foot of sign area for each lineal foot of parcel frontage. (4) Permitted zones: All zones. (5) Sign permit needed: No. (6) Installation: Signs may not be erected sooner than forty-five (45) days preceding an election or political event. (7) Removal: Signs shall be removed within five (5) days following an election or political event. City Ordinance supersedes State Law when State Law is less restrictive.  written by LawDog , September 07, 2008
This is great, The man knows what hes doing. The law is he cant put signs up in the city untile 45 days before election but, he can have all his friends and family put signs in their yards.
I personally know Larry and he's a good man, and we all as Tracy residents would be very lucky to have him voted as city council. written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 07, 2008
I still think the ordinance is clear. That should include family and friends. It doesn't mean he's a bad guy, just misinformed.
written by Malcolm , September 07, 2008
LawDog,
So, are you thinking if it's his own yard he can't put up his signs, but other peoples yards are ok? No that is wrong - the law is no signs until 45 days before the election. He may be a good man in your eyes, and you may personally know him, but what the voters see now is he released his signs to people contrary to the law. Here's the other worry, is Williams School a polling place? Because the signs are very close to the school and there is also a law about that, something like you can't have the political signs within 100 yards of a polling place. written by Dale Cose , September 07, 2008 written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008 Why not take your issue to the city. That is where Mr. Hite received his clarification... ... something like you can't have the political signs within 100 yards of a polling place 100 feet. Within 100 feet or Something like that. Malcolm, can you be counted on to check some things out before posting? You have internet access and even with not knowing, the polling place campaigning information isn't hard to find. written by Malcolm , September 07, 2008
Well then Cose everyone else should release their signs according to you.
written by Tom Benigno , September 07, 2008
Who Cares:
The comments that should be made are, if they put them up too early that's a violation. Anyone can get the rules off the FPPC,web site. Or if you are interested go to city of Tracy web site. t. b written by Dale Cose , September 07, 2008 Rexdom, what meanum 'release their signs?' written by Tom Benigno , September 07, 2008 Tom, I'd ask you what your 1st sentence means but based upon history no clearer explanation will be forthcoming. Or if you are interested go to city of Tracy web site. ... or if one really is really interested... go down to the City of Tracy at 333 Civic Plaza and ask them. That information would be the most current. ... or call. written by what? , September 07, 2008
Sad thing about the violation is the fat asses in the code department will not be removing the signs that are in violation of the city code!
Will the code department be put to task? Would the manager of the code department demand removal of all signs in violation? Lets see some action at city hall on Monday! Or will this be another I scratch your back you scratch mine.. written by Malcolm , September 07, 2008
Ok Cose,
Suppose you were running for City Council. One of the things you might do is order some yard signs for your campaign since they have your name on them you have to custom order them (one size doesn't fit all) The signs are shipped to your address, it would be prohibitive to do a separate SHIP TO for each and every property owner that says they will put your sign on their lawn. Then when you are allowed to put the signs out (in the case 45 days) you RELEASE the signs to whoever wants to put a DALE COSE for City Council sign on their lawn (if there is anyone) written by Dale Cose , September 07, 2008 written by what? , September 07, 2008 The city attorney's opinion doesn't work for you? Best inform the DA or the State AG. I tell Brent what? said, He said who? Exactly. Some faceless, nameless blogger filled with a sense of his importance said... what Tom says, who cares; written by Malcolm , September 07, 2008 Rexdom, A little wit wouldn't hurt you. What prevents a politician from handing out the sign anytime they want? R U N ID8 or just playing the part? Why do you and what make the most inane statements (okay Benigno too) and think people believe you? written by what? , September 07, 2008
Dale,
Will the signs stay on the lawns? Or will the code enforcement officers do ABSOLUTELY nothing? Monday will tell the tale.. Who is watching out for Hite.. written by Dale Cose , September 07, 2008 Check with the city for the latest 411 on campaign sign status. written by Dale Cose , September 07, 2008 FYI After the recent Tracy Press article because of people's requests... Larry Hite is out of yard signs. He ordered more... so you should be able to see even more.  written by UCoty , September 08, 2008
Good Grief!!
Same 'ol people and same 'ol stuff! Can't you find anything postive to comment about? So a couple of people put up signs already, whats the big deal? All this energy should be channeled into helping improve Tracy and brace it for the future, not slamming others because they jumped the gun or got a head start. Its truly appearing to be a grip fest in here these days. Why not just meet together and discuss it over coffee or something? Right worng or different, none of these really factors into the bigger picture which is the fate of our town. Ubbo written by what? , September 08, 2008
Just shows the quality of the people running and the lack of understanding of the election laws = Some people follow the law and others break the law. What kind of ethics does Larry Hite fall under?
written by what? , September 08, 2008
If Larry Hites campaign signs are still up tommorow. Open the rules for all candidates - Level the playing field. If the city does not follow its own laws let the rest of the political players take advantage!
What good are laws and rules if no one follows or polices them? written by Dale Cose , September 08, 2008 written by what? , September 07, 2008 Clearly more than your ethics. You are overriding the City's interpretation of the law? Whoa. The DA or State AG said what? He cleared it with the City 1st, any reason you are unable to also? Instead of getting a pouty attitude... check with the City... 1st thing Monday. some wish to remain overtly discreet. written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008
written by Observer , September 06, 2008
The point is all elected officials and those seeking election should have known the city codes if they want to run for any office. If they don't know their own city code, how will they lead effectively??? Up to you voters. -amy It would be impossible to remember all the codes but they should know by now who to ask before they erect their signs. written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008
written by Dale Cose , September 06, 2008
cont. STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF TRAFFIC OPERATIONS OUTDOOR ADVERTISING PROGRAM Dear Candidate or Committee Member: As a candidate or campaign worker for either office or a ballot measure, this reminder about State law governing campaign signs should be helpful to you. Section 5405.3 of the State Outdoor Advertising Act exempts the placing of Temporary Political Signs from normal outdoor advertising display requirements. A Temporary Political Sign meets the following criteria: A. Encourages a particular vote in a schedule election. B. Is placed not sooner than 90 days prior to the schedule election and is removed within 10 days after that election. C. Is no larger than 32 square feet. D. Has had a Statement of Responsibility filed with the Department certifying a person who will be responsible for removing the sign (Attached). A completed Statement of Responsibility must be submitted to: Division of Traffic Operations Outdoor Advertising Program P.O. Box 942874, MS-36 Sacramento, CA 94274-0001 Temporary Political Signs shall not be placed within the right-of-way of any highway, or be visible within 660 feet from the edge of the right-of-way of a classified “Landscaped freeway”. State law directs the Department of Transportation to remove unauthorized Temporary Political Signs and bill the responsible party for their removal. We are calling these provisions to your attention to avoid possible embarrassment to you and your supporters. Please pass this information along to those assisting in your campaign. Should you have any questions, comments or need additional information, please call (916) 654-6473. Of course Dale this only pertains to state owned property as the city ordinance for "political signs" supersedes the State codes, except for state properties. written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008
Hmmm, my quote didn't work, Anyway I was quoting Dale in the above comment.
written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008 written by Gary , September 06, 2008 It might be your property but the ordinance says you can not put sign with political messages 45 days before an election. written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008 written by Dale Cose , September 06, 2008 Mr Hite asked the wrong person. written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008 written by fortheunderdog , September 06, 2008 Morally and legally Hite should take his signs down. written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008
Might as well throw your state laws out the window Cose. Tracy ordinance supersedes it for political signs
written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008 written by Dale Cose , September 07, 2008 Why bother the city when the ordinance is clear. written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008 written by Tom Benigno , September 07, 2008 Tom B is right. written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008 written by what? , September 07, 2008 Why should code enforcement go around picking up signs when by now these people running know better. There are more pressing problems then CE worrying about the signs when Hite most likely knew it was wrong to place them. Look at all the free publicity he is getting from doing it. One more checked off my list, very easy written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008
written by Dale Cose , September 07, 2008
written by Malcolm , September 06, 2008 ... So, are you thinking if it's his own yard he can't put up his signs, but other peoples yards are ok? Unfortunately Hite went to the wrong person AND it is easily available om the internet. written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008
written by what? , September 07, 2008
If Larry Hites campaign signs are still up tommorow. Open the rules for all candidates - Level the playing field. If the city does not follow its own laws let the rest of the political players take advantage! What good are laws and rules if no one follows or polices them? Hite didn't follow them, Ignorance is no excuse for the law. If Hite has to, he can pick them up himself. written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008 written by UCoty , September 07, 2008 UCoty, you should know by now one sign leads to ten and 10 leads to 40 and forty leads to 100; get my drift. It gets a little ridiculous at times with all these sign spread out over town. written by Malcolm , September 08, 2008
Ubbo
If it had been Celeste I'm sure you wouldn't be so forgiving now would you? I also remember your over the top posts about Sundberg and the bean festival, something happened four years ago or so and you going on and on about it. Didn't seem like you were following your own advice. Somebody, if you have time please drive by the corner of Hickory and Tennis Lane tomorrow morning and see if the signs are still there and then post it up here for all of us to read. I agree with MNDC, Code Enforcement shouldn't have to waste their time on this with all the other problem areas they are inadequately staffed to keep tabs on, the candidate Hite should go take them down as a character building exercise. As well as Maciel who is splitting hairs by putting his outside the city limits. Sure we need a cop on the Council so he can slither past the intent of the law. I recall he did not support Measure A, then supported IVES and company illegal ordinance 1095 that violated Measure A, then publically declared that Judge that ruled it was a violation was wrong. Is that a law abiding attitude? written by what? , September 08, 2008
It all comes down to who follows the law and who breaks the law.
What laws will Larry Hite and Mike Maciel follow? Good ol Boy Network! written by Dale Cose , September 08, 2008 written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 07, 2008 all the verbosity, fact checking, checking, rechecking... one of the days when yer all growed up... you can tell me all about how you checked your facts. ... by the when did you or any of your buddies... what?, FTURD, Rexdom, or Don Benigno actually call or go down to the City to reconcile the web vs Larry? why is it the same bottom-feeders revel in avoiding knowledge... Go to the City, call the City for the latest 411 You can get a face to face. Published materials have been known to lag current information. written by Dale Cose , September 08, 2008 written by Malcolm , September 07, 2008 TRACQ, tried to get the City to retroactively violate the existing developer building rights after the implementation of Measure A and then... publically declared that Judge that ruled it was a violation was wrong. Is that a law abiding attitude? You tell us Rexdom. written by what? , September 08, 2008
Another fine example of the extreme BIAS at city hall. If this were the other camp - You can bet Ives would send both of the fat asses CE out this morning, with the citation and cease and desist orders!
In the case of Larry Hite - Not a big deal, oh well.. written by what? , September 08, 2008
I dont buy into the excuse from city hall that CE is to busy to do their jobs! Enforce your own code! No exception to the rule of law!
written by Dale Cose , September 08, 2008 written by what? , September 08, 2008 Nah, that's what?(x2) would do. written by what? , September 08, 2008
Dale,
Today will tell the tale - Will the BIASED city hall, do the job they were paid to do.... Or has Larry Hite gone out and saved the CE department from public embarrassment? written by Dale Cose , September 08, 2008 written by what? , September 08, 2008 The negative derogatory shadow you cast on the Press website... is that something that bends around your household? or does it permeate your life? written by what? , September 08, 2008
All I can say is if this were any other candidate, you can bet that your negative comments and your cronies would far surpass my common sense observation. Once again, my comments are off of the above story - Signs posted before the legal date - City Hall refusing to enforce the election sign law - Signs still posted around town. Follow the story Dale. It is a blatant disregard to the rules and regulations. But I forgot you are one of few who think this is Standard Operating Procedure!
written by what? , September 08, 2008
Dale,
Nothing about this story is ok.. Just because you are Morally Corrupt, does not justify the fact that this an example of ethics, rules and law. Some follow the law and others bend them.. I am not one of the bending kind. Not like you! written by Malcolm , September 08, 2008
What can we expect from someone who doesn't even take care of the code violations of his own rentals? With this guy in their corner... well that says it all.
written by Dale Cose , September 08, 2008 written by what? , September 08, 2008 I apologize, until you pointed it out... I didn't recognize what I term 'thoughtless lunacy' you value as common sense observation. I called Ms. Garamendi a panderer/critic. Please list my other negative comments about any or all other candidates. Is it possible that Mr. Hite did check with the City (on more than one occasion before the sign article) regarding campaign sign placement? and is it possible that the latest information may be garnered from staff ? and is it possible that you might take the time to call the city for more information? and is it possible that your ethics, by the use of blatant propaganda terms like BIASED are a figment of an overwrought imagination? and is it ever possible you could do more research before launching? written by what? , September 08, 2008 After all the candy I've taken from you, no wonder your nonplussed. How many times now have you made a statement as what?, my2cents... some other nameless... then found you were in error... again? written by Dale Cose , September 08, 2008 written by Malcolm , September 08, 2008 Rexdom, please illuminate the violations. written by Malcolm , September 08, 2008
http://www.tracypress.com/content/view/15101/2242/
Did you ever make things right with the family on the unfair rent amount? written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008
I did go to city hall DALE. I got the info DALE. I got it right OK?
This is what I was told: City Ordinance supersedes State Law when State Law is less restrictive. State law says 90 days before, City Ordinance says 45 days before. It is very simple math. 90-45=45 written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008
written by what? , September 08, 2008
I dont buy into the excuse from city hall that CE is to busy to do their jobs! Enforce your own code! No exception to the rule of law! Well to bad what cuz they do. Go on a ride along like I did. I could barely keep up. Oh, you probably can't get off you a** to do it I suppose. written by maybenotdumBcommenT , September 08, 2008
what, it's always been obvious you've had a beef with CE. You must of got caught doing something you weren't suppose to do because you want to blame this all on CE. Open your eyes. Do you realize there are more pressing matters than CE writing citations for signs that are placed illegally. I'm going to assume you have lots of time on your hands. Go around and write down the name on the sign and where it's at and give it to Code Enforcement. That would help then since they are severely understaffed. And there is so much more as citizens we could do to help keep Tracy cleaned up.
written by what? , September 08, 2008
mtdum,
Enforcement means just that - Enforce the code that is on the books.. 45 days no exception. CE just needs to add this to the to do list for the day. Or it would just confirm that this is just another BIAS at city hall. Why is this our problem that the city hall CE is a poorly run department? written by Malcolm , September 08, 2008
MNDC
Thanks to you for going and getting the information from the City, and I agree with you Code Enforcement should not have to take care of this matter. Did you happen to check on Tennis and Hickory to see if the signs are still there? Well no matter, I will check tonight when I return from my commute. to: What? Under normal circumstances Code Enforcement should handle it, however they are probably as strapped as the animal shelter and the fire department. But I agree, if it was Celeste, Ives would have come down on that very hard and a citation would have been issued, and maybe even put the cuffs on? |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments