A Silent Incorporation Around Town, posted by Susan West, a resident of another community, on Dec 20, 2007 at 9:03 am
Alamo neighbors wonder why incorporation proponents ended their communication on November 22 as noted on their website. It seems the betrayal of promises to neighbors signing the petition will not be explained and the more political among these proponents will continue an application for incorporation instead of fulfilling only the promised feasibility study.
Questions posted to their website are not answered and questions to petition volunteers simply result in, "We are no longer involved." In 45 days, these proponents went from constant commentary and ubiquitous presence in our community to inaccessable silence.
Most curious is the lack of media coverage and disclosure of the events of the past 45 days. The betrayal of promises to the community by the incorporation application and regional political actions should have been an exceptional story of politics as usual in Contra Costa County.
There is only silence,
Iron Horse North Neighborhoods
Posted as a courtesy of Alamo neighborhoods e-chains
Posted by Lisa Wright, a resident of another community, on Dec 20, 2007 at 9:46 am
It does seem that we live in another community from the AIM proponents of incorporation. You have captured that issue in your questioning commentary. Overall, the questions you raised are simply answered, "AIM only needed our signatures and the rest is politics as usual in Contra Costa County."
Posted by Hal Bailey, a resident of another community, on Dec 20, 2007 at 10:41 am
Dear Susan and neighbors,
I just talked to a contact within AIM and confirmed AIM's method of response to website inquiries. All incoming comments or questions are checked against the voter roles provided to AIM by the county for petition canvassing. If the name on the message does not match a name on the voter roles, there will be no response. If the name does match a name on the voter roles then a record is kept of whether the commentary is for or against AIM's incorporation proposal.
According to my contact, AIM participants are only communicating with their known supporters at the present time and communication is only related to funding activities. AIM petition volunteers have been told not to comment or have further discussions concerning incorporation now that the petition requirement has been achieved.
Posted by Vince Kreigher, a resident of another community, on Dec 20, 2007 at 1:57 pm
Dear Hal, and neighbors,
Hal, I don't recall any response to any of your questions to AIM via their website even when you used your name as shown on the voter registration logs. Several of the neighborhood forum members asked questions under their registered voter names and received nothing.
Several questions became edited to be used as FAQ answers (campaign PR) on the site and did not directly serve to answer our specific questions. It is likely your final comment is reality, Hal, that AIM communicates with its small base of less than 900 volunteers and supporters and uses its PR releases for all other responses.
The silence is deafening, and humorous. It seems it is going to be worth the $250 for the AIM Dinner and Dance, January 26, to see what these rascals have been up to.
Posted by Leonard Vinci, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Dec 20, 2007 at 3:21 pm
Hi everyone...And by the way...I would like to wish everyone in the Alamo area a very happy holiday season.
Lets all just settle back an let the process happen. The veterans of Alamo know how this will all play out. Let the new comers and some of the older uphappy folks vent. Before all this is resolved, the silent majority of Alamo will rise to the occasion and make thigs right and if they don't, well...lets just say...we, the older and wiser folks of Alamo will make them and offer they can't refuse. ALAMO DOES NOT NEED TO BE INCORPORATED... I don't know if any of you have seen THE TIMES today...section VALLEY TODAY..."Area Roadways in need of repair"...guess what...these will be the headlines in 2012 in Alamo. And the most depressing comment of the article is by Amy Worth Orinda city Councilwoman and MTC commissioner...Wow..a real no brainer comment..."This shows just how urgent the need for additional funding really is needed" a typical BS politian comment. Oh by the way, Orinda needs $150,000,000.00 yes that's right one hundred and fifth million as in million...pretty cool comment...right. To all my neighbors and dear friends in Alamo...the folks that at pushing for incorporation are living in fantasy land. They can't make it in really life or maybe their own home life so they want to impose on your life and the tranquillity of Alamo. Lets not rush to comdemn their movement or motives...yet, it's way too early. When the time is right, let all the Alamo folks with a good sense of reality strike a blow for common sence.
Posted by Leonard Vinci, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Dec 20, 2007 at 10:28 pm
Alamo Ron...who is Alamo Ron? I know Alamo Joe...I even found him one time...I didn't a reward but I found him...I don't know Alamo Ron. Don't be shy, Alamo Ron, if you really believe what you're spreading, around, fess up and identify youself...My name is Mr. Ron _____ from Alamo. And your commment about a well deserved rest for the AIM...get real Ron _____. What did they do, but sign up a bunch of folks that haven't a clue about the Alamo community. Hey Ron _____ there are a lot of ultra ego's out there that want to be wantabes. They should move to Danville, they will be loved over there. Oh! and yes have a Happy Holiday Season...Alamo Leonard vinci
Posted by Hal Bailey, a resident of another community, on Dec 21, 2007 at 8:13 am
An answer for Leonard and neighbors,
Alamo Ron, or Alamoron as a humorous unique form of oxymoron in Alamo, is a local humorist that enjoys portraying the AIM style of commentary that has occurred during the past six months. Like Frank, who writes in "earnest" humor in the style of AIM commentary, Alamo Ron uses the emotion of AIM commentary in creating her humor.
The goal is an oxymoron created by the claims of AIM participants, volunteers and supporters versus the actual actions of AIM's primary committee members.
Alamo Ron's identity is not important when the humor is quite enjoyable. As you might realize, using ones actual identity in Alamo brings ridicule, in condescending arrogance, from a broad range of community group supporters. Thus, I simply want to protect Alamo Ron's identity and enjoy more sardonic oxymoron, as Alamoron, from her creative humor.
Joyous wishes at Christmas everyone and may our new year bring one world in peace with humanity and justice for all.
Posted by Lisa Wright, a resident of another community, on Dec 21, 2007 at 8:50 am
In celebration of the humor of Alamo Ron,
As we all prepare to celebrate our various beliefs at this time of year, Alamo neighbors need to know that AIM is not resting and taking time out for the holidays. As Alamo neighborhoods forum, via our community counsel, monitors AIM steering committee actions, we are aware of very active political interaction with LAFCo, CCCounty, and various economic development councils in our region. The repeated theme in documentation is development of regional political support and funding for AIM incorporation application and activities. AIM steering committee has totally forgotten their volunteers' promise of "only a feasibility study."
AIM is not neighbors working within the community for an incorporation that will invite resident participation in planning the future of Alamo. AIM is very active this holiday season being politics as usual in Contra Costa County and planning an autonomous layer of local government that serves the special interests of regional supporters. Sadly, that is more AIM "Bah Humbug" than any wish of happy new years to come. Beware!
Celebrate the joy of yule tide,
Posted as a courtesy by the Alamo neighborhoods forum
Posted by Frank, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Dec 22, 2007 at 7:52 am
What a bunch of cry babies!
It's a no brainer that we all want local planning and we are not going to get that opportunity until we have our own town and town council to make it happen. You cry babies just can't admit that you will elect the town council and that council will be responsible to the voters to create all the commissions and committees that AIM has promised. If fact, you might come out of hiding and actually run for council or are you too afraid?
Posted by Alamo neighborhoods forum, a resident of another community, on Dec 23, 2007 at 9:56 am
Posted by courtesy of the Alamo neighborhoods forum
A Question from today's e-chains: “How did we lose control? What happened to community-based plans for formation of our municipality? When did the city of Alamo become the sole propriety of Contra Costa aggregated politics?”
Our questioner was reacting to e-chain distribution confirming the regional political control of AIM’s incorporation efforts and the hardened opposition to incorporation illustrated by professional polling. More than 65% of Alamo residents now oppose all forms of incorporation.
How did this happen? How did our community lose control of our incorporation efforts?
Our ANSWER: Alamo’s majority has not lost control and is only reacting to realities of LAFCo incorporation policies. CCC LAFCo, by its own policy and not by the limits of general law, has restricted AIM to a process of petition and application for a prescribed form of government, review and negotiation with the county, and approval for an incorporation election. Certain AIM participants, with knowledge of the Alamo neighborhoods' incorporation definition, pursued incorporation of the Town of Alamo on behalf of regional political interests as defined by CCC LAFCo policies and significant CCCounty influence. Those same influences created the misrepresentation of the AIM petition by volunteers as only for a feasibility study because they knew Alamo neighbors would not support an application under LAFCo’s current processes and policies. Have we lost control? NO! If an incorporation election were held today based on the autonomous town council prescribed by CCC LAFCo and aggregated regional politics, greater than 2/3rd of Alamo voters would vote NO. If any of the AIM participants that are known for their efforts on behalf of regional political sponsors were to be candidates for town council, incorporation would receive a NO vote of greater than 75%. Can we pursue incorporation beyond AIM and CCC LAFCo? YES! Processes for challenging LAFCo policies and additional legislative and legal actions are available. By filing a conflicting incorporation proposal and application on behalf of the 2,197 neighbors that signed the AIM petition, CCC LAFCo’s various studies and CCCounty negotiations must consider all incorporation proposals’ terms and conditions. Any denial of the conflicting incorporation proposal by CCC LAFCo can be challenged by legislative and legal actions including a federal civil rights class action. Can AIM avoid this result of conflicting incorporation proposal? YES! AIM community-based leaders need to illustrate local control and provide an incorporation proposal acceptable to a majority of Alamo neighbors instead of satisfying regional political interests and CCC LAFCo policies.
Posting requested by Lisa Wright, Co-Chair, Alamo neighborhoods forum
Posted by Alamo Ron, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Dec 23, 2007 at 11:53 am
Of all that is said, the only reality is this statement, "CCC LAFCo, by its own policy and not by the limits of general law, has restricted AIM to a process of petition and application for a prescribed form of government, review and negotiation with the county, and approval for an incorporation election."
Once we are a city, or excuse me if I call it a Town, we can agree on a government together as neighbors.
Posted by Alamo Ron, a resident of another community, on Dec 23, 2007 at 6:36 pm
Oh, let me be Alamo Ron.
Being a moron ala Alamo should not be that tough, frankly speaking.
Who gives a damn what LAFCo wants or will consider? We want a town that has a real government we can make answerable every day to our needs and interests. LAFCo, as our pal, Hal, has repeatedly noted, works for us and we do not work for them.
Posted by Alamo Ron, a resident of another community, on Dec 24, 2007 at 10:12 am
Dear Alamo Ron and neighbors,
For all the Alamo Ron's in Alamo everywhere, let me wish you joy and goodwill in this season of peace for Alamo Texas. As a journalist and active part of many community functions in Alamo Texas, I am enjoying the considerations and concerns of Alamo California neighbors. Don't lose your concerns.
Alamo Texas is about the size of Alamo California and has been a city since 1925. We still have our issues and must work hard with our city government to make sure we remain a community serving our citizens.
Your job as citizens is just starting in Alamo California. Being a city requires care and participation as your community serves the plans and desires of your neighbors. No city council or government can succeed without participation and support from the community of neighbors. After all these years, Alamo Texas still has not stopped changing due to the will of our residents and neither will Alamo California.
Joys of Christmas,
Enrique "Ron" Martinez
Posted by Hal for his friend, Alamo (Texas) Ron
Note: All things Alamo and Pop(u)lar is a cultural e-chain among towns named Alamo and Poplar in North American. Many e-chains are the result of The Danville Weekly, Town Square Forum's Alamo California content. To learn more about Alamo TX, read www.themonitor.com.
Posted by Alamo Ron, a resident of another community, on Dec 24, 2007 at 10:24 am
Happy holidays, Alamo California, (posted with permission)
Alamo Lake Arizona was introduced to Alamo California by Lynn Goh, our new resident in Sedona and former Alamo California resident. I enjoy All things Alamo and Pop(u)lar as we review the difficult task of township for Alamo California. In my opinion, the focus on issues and the initial formation of your city will be the critical step to a successful incorporation election and establishment of a government. Such issues indicate that Alamo neighbors have a great deal of consensus to achieve and may not be ready of an incorporation vote for several years.
Posted by Alamo Ron, a resident of another community, on Dec 24, 2007 at 10:32 am
Dear Alamo Ron's including the REAL Alamo Ron, (posted with permission)
Never has such fun been had by so many towns named Alamo and Poplar as the proliferation of Alamo Ron. Nothing is REAL said John Lennon in Strawberry Fields Forever (Thanks Hal) and it appears Alamo California incorporation proponents are finding living IS easy with eyes closed misunderstanding all you see.
The only consensus obvious in Alamo California is everyone wants to be Alamo Ron.
Posted by Alamo Ron, a resident of another community, on Dec 24, 2007 at 10:43 am
Dear Alamo neighbors,
This Yule Tide is our turning point for the hard job ahead of determining our future and the formation of our community in determining that future. We will surely disagree on the issues and be deeply divided among options of the status quo versus urban luxury. It is likely true that we are factionalized and polarized and growing more so.
Our incorporation proponents are not focused within our community as they continue unilateral pursuits of CCC LAFCo, CCCounty, and regional political support and funding. Our community of neighborhoods are becoming more disconnected from incorporation efforts and more polarized in their opposition to incorporation.
Let's enjoy this Yule Tide and turn our attention to consensus in the new year as everyone becomes Alamo Ron.
Posted by Ron Yang, a resident of another community, on Dec 25, 2007 at 8:26 am
On this Christmas morning, Neighbors, we need to recognize a regional political corporation, Alamo Incorporation Inc., has created the Alamo Incorporation Movement (AIM) as a deceptive effort to mask the creation of another autonomous layer of regional government in selected portions of the Alamo Region to achieve the special interests of governments, districts, associations, councils, corporations and institutions. The following describes the deception in the publications of AIM and Contra Costa LAFCo:
Volunteers gather signatures for a petition to LAFCO
Alamo citizens petition LAFCO (the Local Agency Formation Commission), an arm of state government, to perform a feasibility study of Alamo incorporation. The signed petition is NOT a vote for incorporation, but a vote to conduct a study. On November 5, 2007, Alamo petition volunteers turned in 3,117 signatures to LAFCO, representing 32% of Alamo¹s 9,820 registered voters.
PROPOSED INCORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF ALAMO
On November 5, 2007, LAFCO received a petition and application for the proposed incorporation of the Town of Alamo. The petition was signed by over 25% of the registered voters in the area.
By Lea Blevins
CONTRA COSTA TIMES
Article Launched: 12/21/2007 03:01:26 AM PST
The Anaheim-based firm of Winzler & Kelly was selected Wednesday during a special meeting of the Local Agency Formation Commission, or LAFCO, which decides which areas may incorporate.
The analysis is one of the major steps that must be taken to determine whether Alamo could succeed as an incorporated city. It will evaluate the fiscal effects to Contra Costa County and other agencies and whether the proposed city is economically viable.
The report probably will be completed by July or August. That date is important, said Lou Ann Texeira, the executive officer of LAFCO, since incorporation proponents hope to get the measure on the March 2009 ballot.
(end of website illustrations of conflicting statements and actions)
It should be understood that Alamo Incorporation Inc. is not a community-based grassroots organization working within the community to create a city of Alamo representative of our community, neighborhoods and residents. It should be clearly understood the Alamo Incorporation Inc., Contra Costa LAFCo, Contra Costa County and various regional economic development councils are designing an autonomous city government to provide a more dedicated layer of their own authority within our community.
You better watch out, you better not cry, you better not (wait), I’m telling you why! In the silence surrounding Christmas, this deception is actively in progress and planning a future quite separate from our will, needs, interests and advisory.
Let’s work together for a happy new year,
Beth, as Ron Yang, another Alamo Ron in another community named Alamo.
Posted by Vince Kreigher, a resident of another community, on Dec 25, 2007 at 9:18 am
In the many voices of concern about the AIM's silent incorporation efforts, we can summarize the results:
#1 - Neighbors were promised "only a feasibility study" and AIM was provided 2,197 signatures from Alamo's neighborhoods.
#2 - AIM immediately applied for incorporation and did not pursue "only a feasibility study."
#3 - CCC LAFCo confirmed the application and timeline for approval of an incorporation election in Alamo.
But what was not posted to the public e-chain was the various confirming documents from governments, districts, associations, councils, corporations and institutions that illustrate how neighbors' petition signatures are being used in creating regional political support and funding for the pursuit of AIM's incorporation proposal of an autonomous government with NO obligation to our community, neighborhoods or the majority of neighbors signing the AIM petition.
And it was all pursued under the cover of Christmas in silence.
"Bah, Humbug, AIM!"
Posted from distribution to Contra Costa Alliance of Communities this Christmas 2007
Posted by CDSI Research Fellowship, a resident of another community, on Dec 27, 2007 at 9:39 am
Dear Alamo Neighbors,
This morning, CDSI Research Fellowship, firstname.lastname@example.org (info address) received a request to explain the Alamo neighborhoods forum that posts commentary to the Town Square Forum concerning Incorporation issues and demands for specified citizens' participation in any resulting city (town) of Alamo.
Alamo region neighborhoods created e-chains via neighborhood representative distribution starting in June 2000 under the name, Alamo Community Taskforce. E-mail is shared among neighborhood representatives and onward in the e-chains to participating neighbors. Such e-chains have two purposes; 1) to distribute information discovery that impacts our community and neighborhoods, and 2) to share points of view among neighbors. Town Square Forum postings, for the most part, come from neighborhood e-chain entries.
Neighborhood representatives meet once per month in continuation of the Alamo Area Council on the second Thursday of the month. Those meetings review key subjects from the e-chains and determine what research and actions are needed to answer community and neighborhood interests. The subjects can be local, regional or county-wide and often involve Alliance of Communities representatives from other communities and neighborhoods in Contra Costa County.
Forum participants support neighbors in creating various ad hoc committees to pursue specific issues in the Alamo Region. Committees are formed, complete their discovery and actions, and then disband under the support of resident counsel that participate in neighborhoods and their forum.
Access is by invitation only and neighbors should contact their neighborhood groups for such access. Please note that the Alamo Region neighborhoods are Saranap/Rudgear on the north to Diablo Road on the south.
Posted by Susan West, a resident of another community, on Dec 27, 2007 at 4:59 pm
"AIM answers "every legitimate question" to their website." Alamo neighborhoods forum posting:
AIM committee members answered our question by saying AIM only answers questions that AIM considered legitimate. More importantly, most questions are not answered, they were interpreted so they can be used in AIM PR. Since AIM’s approach is a political campaign and their record for earnest and honest response is not credible, Alamo neighbors can’t imagine any advantage to feeding AIM’s regional political campaign with commentary that will be treated as politics-as-usual in Contra Costa County. Clearly, AIM has misrepresented their intentions by having petition volunteers misrepresent AIM's incorporation petition as a petition for only a feasibility study. That misrepresentation should confirm to a majority in Alamo that AIM selectively answers questions submitted to their website. We know AIM was selective in answering questions presented at their public meetings and most selectively answered questions in the pursuit of petition signatures.
Publicly, AIM committee members and volunteers have not invited opposing commentary or answered questions from opposition with other than disregard. AIM committee members should be called on to fulfill their commitments for only a feasibility study and answer all questions considered legitimate by Alamo neighbors.
Posted by CDSI Research Fellowship, a resident of another community, on Dec 28, 2007 at 9:30 pm
In kind admission today, Alamo Incorporation Movement and its parent, Alamo Incorporation Inc., admitted that questions and commments submitted to www.alamoinc.org, "comments and questions" e-mail site are only answered if AIM published commentary supports the interests of the AIM incorporation political campaign.
Thank you, AIM, for refreshing and exceptional honesty
Posted by Steve Mick, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Dec 29, 2007 at 8:31 am
Actually what was "admitted" was the following:
"Just as every letter to the editor is not printed in the paper, not every question is replied to on the website. It doesn't matter if the questioner is an Alamo resident or not, or registered voter or not. Questions that offer an opportunity to clarify incorporation issues for the majority of people have the best chance of being published."
Posted by Susan West, a resident of another community, on Dec 29, 2007 at 10:16 am
It seems Hal (CDSI) and Steve said the same thing, neighbors, and we thank Steve for his continuing willingness to communicate and clarify (access www.alamore.org).
Questions to the AIM website are not answered if they can't be published as AIM interpretation and promotion of AIM's incorporation proposal. Both conclude that AIM has not responded to a majority of comments, requests and questions that required personal e-mail responses from the AIM committee members or petition volunteer chairpersons.
Why such response is not offered remains an open question. It is not unexpected because such lack of response has been part of Alamo community groups including county agency committees, Alamo Improvement Association, and Alamo Community Council (District 3 liaison activities) over the decades. AIM committee members come from that community group culture that has excluded Alamo's majority from interactive communication.
The result is alienation for AIM with a growing majority of residents in the Alamo Region as legitimate questions go unanswered or are interpreted for AIM PR purposes. The one major question of Incorporation Application when only a feasibility study was promised remains unanswered by AIM and the media that covers AIM regional campaign activities.
AIM remains a Silent Incorporation,
Susan West, Iron Horse North greater neighborhoods
Posted as a courtesy of the Alamo neighborhoods forum
Posted by Vince Kreigher, a resident of another community, on Dec 30, 2007 at 9:42 am
Dear Susan, AIM doesn't answer a question even when they publish their answer on www.alamoinc.org:
I asked: As part of the formation of Alamo neighborhood groups and their alliances, I would like to know how you intend to engage the majority of Alamo residents in neighborhood groups and their efforts in defining incorporation advantages and disadvantages? When will you bring the experts from LAFCO, municipal counsel firms, and county departments to answer detailed questions concerning Alamo incorporation?
AIM's Answer: The Alamo Incorporation Committee is highly interested in communicating with all residents and neighborhood groups. A number of community meetings are planned which will allow everyone to be heard on this important issue. In addition, a speaker's bureau is being organized which will bring information to local neighborhoods. The speaker's bureau will be willing to speak to both large and small groups. The community meetings will include presenters from many different areas including the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) as well as people highly knowledgeable about the operation of municipal and county government.
We all know the lack of reality in that answer as unfulfilled promises. We have seen AIM committee members disrespect and suppress opposition at AIM meeting and no expert participation was provided. We now know that AIM, now that they have our signatures on their petition, has no interest in communication with our community of neighborhoods.
Posted by David Brower, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Dec 30, 2007 at 10:38 am
Can someone explain better what these "Alamo Neighborhood Forums" are? I've never heard of them. I'm trying to follow this incorporation stuff in a Blog at alamounincorporated.blogspot.com (Web Link) and much of the above leaves me confused.
Posted by Vince Kreigher, a resident of another community, on Dec 30, 2007 at 11:09 am
You are part of the Greater Miranda Neighborhood in Alamo which is one of 29 Alamo region greater neighborhoods. The Alamo neighborhoods forum is primarily an e-forum for neighbors to receive information that impacts their neighborhoods and join in commentary about subjects that impact the Alamo Region. Once per month various neighborhood representatives get together to discuss the important subjects covered in the e-chains and to determine ad hoc response.
Incorporation is a very important to our community and our rights as residents to participate in the future of Alamo. We post important commentary from the e-chains so all Alamo neighbors can publicly consider the issues of the incorporation process and the activities of the incorporation proponents and opposition.
Hal Bailey provides the courtesy of the CDSI information address for further questions, email@example.com.
Posted by CDSI Research Fellowship, a resident of another community, on Dec 30, 2007 at 11:29 am
Thank you for your inquiry and I would be happy to provide you detail of forum activities via firstname.lastname@example.org. I serve as liaison and I am not a neighborhood or forum representative.
Most importantly, Alamo neighborhoods support incorporation of Alamo but demand specified citizen participation as part of the incorporation proposal to be considered in an incorporation election. To date, the incorporation proposal summary included in the AIM petition prescribes an autonomous city (town) council without obligation for citizen participation in the structure, operations, and planning of the city of Alamo. If we vote for that autonomous council, then we will have no voice in their decisions for four years.
Alamo neighborhoods forum are not opponents of incorporation or do Alamo neighbors concede their rights of incorporation to sole representation by the AIM committee.
Posted by Lisa Wright, a resident of another community, on Dec 30, 2007 at 5:21 pm
A posting from the Alamo neighborhoods forum
We appreciate David's questions about the confusion of current incorporation activities. It is confusing to sort out the reality of AIM committee actions from the omissions and misstatements of their volunteers. A majority of neighbors signing the AIM petition were misled into believing that only a feasibility study would be pursued. We know now that the petition is being used as part of application for incorporation under an unacceptable incorporation proposal. We also know that the petition is being use to validate AIM committee leadership as sole representatives of incorporation for Alamo. We know that the petition is being used regionally to gain regional political support and funding. What we signed in good faith has become AIM's political collateral.
Neighbors are confused by the lack of good faith communication and consideration by AIM committee members and see the reality of an autonomous city council in the current actions of AIM committee members. If AIM cannot willingly reach out in efforts to represent Alamo neighborhoods, we should not expect their autonomous city council to do much better.
This silent incorporation is a reality of regional politics and special interests in Alamo. In that one reality, no one in Alamo is confused. Each neighbor, neighborhood and neighborhoods alliance must challenge AIM to be an earnest part of our community.
#1 - WRITE to www.alamoinc.org, via AIM's comments and questions page.
#2 - DEMAND that media cover the actions of the AIM Steering committee and their relationships with LAFCo, County and regional political groups.
#3 - POST your concerns to this on-line Town Square Forum so the many readers in the Alamo Region can review your concerns.
#4 - USE a pseudonym so you do not suffer regional political arrogance that has been directed at earnest commentary by Phil Erickson and several others.
AIM is a Silent Incorporation. Remove their silence.
Posted by Kate, Alamo Ridge, a resident of another community, on Dec 31, 2007 at 9:55 am
Posted with permission of the author
Like David, I am confused. I have just had a conversation with a neighbor that was a AIM petition volunteer. As we discussed the feasibility study and the purpose of the petition, we became confused together.
We read the petition copy my neighbor saved and it is a petition and proposal for incorporation and not just a feasibility study. I would like to have The Danville Weekly explain what is going to happen and how are neighbors going to get the chance to review and comment prior to the incorporation election.
If others are confused like me, won't they just vote NO?
Posted by Alamo neighborhoods forum, a resident of another community, on Dec 31, 2007 at 2:07 pm
RESEARCH RESOURCES for understanding the incorporation process:
For David, Kate and Alamo neighbors:
Access www.calafco.org, click on RESOURCES, and then click on the following files:
#1 - Guide to the LAFCo Process for Incorporation (pdf)
#2 - Guide to the LAFCo Process for Incorporation Appendices (pdf)
Then if you want to know more about how general law cities are required to be structured and staffed, and the options available, review California Municipal Law Handbook which is available at the reference desk of the library or through www.cacities.org.
If you are still willing to pursue more research and understanding, google Santa Clara County LAFCo, Riverside County LAFCo, and San Mateo County LAFCo. You will find examples of citizen-led governments and how they are structured under General Law.
Neighbors, a city for Alamo is your choice and you do have the right to define your participation.
Posted by Susan West, a resident of another community, on Jan 1, 2008 at 10:25 am
Dear Hal, thanks for CDSI REFERENCES for neighbors' review.
The answer to Alamo Ron's request for examples were listed at www.cacities.org. Without being charter cities, many California cities are citizen-led with defined commissions and committees created by voter nominations and other majority selection methods.
I hope a majority of neighbors review these important references and understand how neighbors can define their government during the completion of the incorporation application by LAFCo.
Iron Horse North greater neighborhoods
Posted from neighborhoods e-chains by permission of the author
Posted by Karen Sexton, a resident of another community, on Jan 2, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Posted with the permission of the author
THANK YOU, Alamo neighborhoods forum,
I have reviewed www.calafco.org and www.cacities.org and found easy-to-understand options in the incorporation process and examples of cities employing those options. I would recommend that Alamo voters should review the references you provided by e-chain and on the Town Square Forum so all neighbors understand how they can direct AIM, LAFCo and the county in fulfilling voters' requirements for a incorporation YES vote.
I remain concerned that AIM and LAFCo did not provide these references or discuss optional incorporation proposals on their websites. Do they really want us to vote NO?
Posted by Kate, Alamo Ridge, a resident of another community, on Jan 2, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Neighbors and AIM supporters,
Take a look at these references from Hal/CDSI. I agree with Susan that Alamo Ron got us to look at our resources and the alternative incorporation we desire is provided in many examples at www.cacities.org. Good work, Ron!
My neighbor, an AIM petition volunteer, and I applaud such easy-to-understand references. She is now going back to AIM's committee to get all AIM participants looking at the opportunities and possibilities. We can have the community involvement our majority of citizen's desire and we start the new year with our community seeking involvement together.
Posted by Carl Osborne, a resident of another community, on Jan 3, 2008 at 8:40 am
Posted with permission of the author:
AS our neighborhood gathered to review the research resources posted on TDW TSF and to community e-chains, we all noted that AIM and their website remain silent on the wealth of knowledge we are discovering. Occasional newspaper articles provide little more than quotes from AIM. Alamo Today, once per month, publishes AIM releases that contain little of the resource information we are discovering.
It brings a real question. Do we have the right people pursuing incorporation on our behalf?
Posted by Beth Rauch, a resident of another community, on Jan 3, 2008 at 11:55 am
Posted from Alamo neighborhoods forum
The answers Alamo Ron and David Brower are looking for are listed in the www.cacities.org and www.calafco.org references provided. The term, "contract-services municipality" is descriptive term similar to "town" and is used in various LAFCos, from other counties, in description of commission and committee forms of government that use county or indepedent services under contract
Posted by Susan West, a resident of another community, on Jan 3, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Published with the permission of the author
An open letter to AIM committee and volunteers
Today, The Danville Weekly published an article that purported that AIM answers every legitimate question submitted to "questions and comments" on your web site. In the article, AIM was allowed to discredit more than 60 unanswered questions by illustrating a few comments or questions AIM considered not to be legitimate. Further, AIM was allowed to avoid the often repeated questions concerning the misrepresentation of the AIM petition as "only for a feasibility study" and to avoid defining their actions on behalf of our community over the past 60 days.
Beyond the failure in journalism, this illustrates the silent incorporation effort being actively conducted by AIM. If AIM is representative of Alamo, then the majority of our residents do live in another community.
Posted by David Brower, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Jan 3, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Beth, please provide a specific link to a "town" thing such as you describe in the referenced sites. I don't see one at www.cacities.org or www.calafco.org when I look. All I see is a page that identifies a "charter city" and a "general law city" as the legal entities that are possible.
You can put links in here directly if you include the 'http' ':' '//'
(which I can't do directly here. When you can point me to the specific pages you have in mind, then I may understand what is being suggested, but I have not yet seen it.
I also see forms of government defined as four possibilities, council/manager, council/mayor, commission, or town meeting. I don't see "contracted services" in that list.
Similarly, the name of a few example municipalities in California would be useful concrete data to investigate.
Posted by Hal Bailey, a resident of another community, on Jan 3, 2008 at 5:52 pm
For David Brower, Alamo Ron, and what the HAL, for Alamo Joe,
Today, The Danville Weekly published an article on "legitimate questions" by AIM PR. As a result, Alamo neighborhoods forum has determined that they will only communicate by e-chain among their 4,114 residences in the AIM boundaries and >2600 residences in the Alamo region.
So, David and neighbors, let CDSI guide you in your further research. It is a common practice for cities to contract services and that is the proposal of AIM for incorporation. Danville contracts for police services as an example. Further, it is common practice for new cities to create citizen commissions and committees as part of their incorporation proposal to insure community support in an election.
Our neighborhoods studies were done under a promise of confidentiality to various LAFCos throughout the State and we will not violate that promise or name the cities proposed or incorporated that became "contract-services municipalities".
Thank you, David, for incouraging neighbors' communication.
Posted by Sharon, a resident of another community, on Jan 3, 2008 at 6:52 pm
There is no rational basis for communication with a selfish AIM minority that wishes to rule Alamo autonomously. Let's simply erase their efforts and take control of the LAFCo relationship. Until LAFCo knows that they cannot specify our community leadership, structure and operations, we will not have control of our future.
Remember, LAFCo works for us and we do not work for them. If that means we have to take legal or legislative actions, let's do it now!
In the other community named Alamo
Posted from Alamo community e-chains with author's permission
Posted by David Brower, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Jan 3, 2008 at 8:36 pm
How does LAFCO have anything to do with AIM now? As I understand it, AIM has no official role at this point. The petition is in, they paid the money for the contracted study, and now it is in LAFCO's hand.
"Until LAFCo knows that they cannot specify our community leadership, structure and operations, we will not have control of our future."
LAFCO can't specify out leadership, structure or operations. That is stuff that is done with an election of representation after a decision to incorporate is made. Where do these charges come from?
Posted by Alise, Miranda Neighborhood, a resident of another community, on Jan 5, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Posted with the concern of an Alamo neighbor
Do you realize that you lost the interest, commentary and support of the majority in the Alamo Region neighborhoods with your poor reporting of AIM's response? Does it occur to you that AIM is less likely to read your paper and support your advertisers? You allowed Mr. Kenber to continue his discrediting of the majority in Alamo and escape responsibility for the lack of information to the majority that AIM clearly does not represent.
I understand why Alamo's majority has labeled you just another member of the aggregated politics that wishes to victimize Alamo neighborhoods. I am more than sadly dissappointed and will no longer read your editions.