Alamo meeting Tuesday night to give facts on incorporation Comments on Stories, posted by Editor, Danville Weekly Online, on Apr 4, 2008 at 4:23 pm
The Alamo Incorporation Movement will hold a public meeting Tuesday to discuss Alamo's potential transition to cityhood. But despite the hot topic, AIM members say the purpose is to answer questions and inform the community - not foster debate.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, April 4, 2008, 9:01 AM
Posted by Oxymo Ron, a resident of another community, on Apr 4, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Many neighbors commented that they visited alamoinc.org and tried to click on "Extensive Information" and didn't find that link. They found opinion, campaign presentation, committee's personal interests, and a wonderful imagination about what is possible but not illustrated in the AIM incorporation proposal.
Please provide the specific link for access to "Extensive Information" and any special password or pin number required to participate in such information.
Special thanks to you for this invitation to in-depth information,
Posted by Lisa Wright, a resident of another community, on Apr 6, 2008 at 9:36 am
Posted and edited with permission of the author
I agree with Hal Bailey's decision not to post commentary on AIMís incorporation proposal or activities because AIM is producing nothing more than campaign jargon and promotion without valid, complete content. Legally, it is drivel.
When David Dolter posted selected portions of General and Municipal Law for his article, Alamo Today lacked the editorial control to demand validation of the material. When Meghan Neal presented her article in Fridayís Danville Weekly, the editor did not demand completeness of story.
Thus, we now need to understand that editors are the source of what is covered and how. Chris Kenber, in many Danville Weekly articles, has yet to say anything meaningful. The facts he references from LAFCo study are simply the financials for the viability of a local government and have no relationship to allowable incorporation proposal of a defined government structure and operations with commissions and committees. Such half-truths are deceptive.
The Danville Weekly coverage of opposition is focused on the Alamo old-timers and supporters as a group no larger than AIMís <90 active participants. Thus, in affect, this is a story about how <200 people feel about incorporation for a limited segment of our region. Neither proponents nor opponents are meaningful to the majority of residents or reflect the considerations that have been posted repeatedly by neighbors for their neighborhoods on the Town Square Forum.
When this handful of <200 and our trusted media do not pursue the greater community, we must consider neighborhood commentary being rejected by blissful ignorance.
Posted by Osymo Ron, a resident of another community, on Apr 7, 2008 at 8:17 am
It continues, now doesn't it?
"Education" is the oxymoron used to describe campaign "sales" activities. "Answers" are oxymorons for compaign interpretations of well-meaning questions. "Financials" are oxymorons for community formation planning. "Communication" is the oxymoron for that lack of communication among factions including governments, organizations, and neighborhoods.
Reporting such oxymorons is confusing and any depth is impossible.
Posted by Clive, the Man of Alamo, a resident of another community, on Apr 7, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Too good not to post with a smile
I encourage you and your pets to visit the AIM meeting Tuesday, April 8, 7PM, as our pal HAL would say in the Alamo time zone, (7:11 PDT). As things get totally out of hand, our pets will bring us back together, "Oh, what a cute Llama you have!"
Our dogs, cats, horses, cows and other pets understand that we are incapable of focus and can look at us with soulful eyes to regain our perspective.
I am bringing my duck named Mildred,
Clive, quite alive, the Man of Alamo, in a tin suit.
Posted just to make us smile as received by firstname.lastname@example.org
Posted by Lisa Wright, a resident of another community, on Apr 8, 2008 at 8:49 am
Edited for posting at the request of the author
Dear Editor, The Danville Weekly
I wish Ms. Neal success in her coverage of the AIM meeting tonight, but I question what the neighborhoods have to do with that event. In my view, two very small factions as AIM and the Old Timers opposition group will gather as less than 300 individuals to discuss their preferences. From my experience with both groups, neither represents the interests of the majority in our neighborhoods.
In further response, I see no value for any neighbor in attending the meeting because AIM has blindly refused to define a government in their incorporation proposal. I am concerned that neighbors will expose their public identity and be subject to the sleaze of local politics. If Ms. Neal and other reporters wear a Press Badge with their names on them, neighbors will introduced themselves using their registered voter names and provide comments on the subjects of the event.
Posted by Oxymo Ron, a resident of another community, on Apr 8, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Oh my dear neighbors,
What seriousness we have all favored! After all, tonight is a "Towne Church" meeting and should we not expect MIRACLES? Quite imagine that AIM could announce tonight that a light had shineth in wisdom and the very good people of AIM would define a government for Alamo in amendment to their incorporation proposal.
Posted by Clarence in Alamo, a resident of another community, on Apr 8, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Too frightening not to post
I would expect all the proponents of incorporation to show up wearing a "for sale" sign now that we know that regional politics has their dirty little fingers in AIM's incorporation efforts.
Sleaze factor? Al Capone was no sleaze but he knew how to buy politics like we have in Alamo!
Stop this bootleg incorporation movement tonight!
Note: This was posted to illustrate many comments about the suspected honesty of incorporation efforts. The majority of neighbors believe that AIM is an earnest, honorable organization of individuals with special interests in the future of a town of Alamo. We all need to consider how deeply incorporation has focused divisions in our region.
Posted at the request of Diablo Vista regional counsel committee members.
Posted by Kathy Bell, a resident of another community, on Apr 9, 2008 at 8:51 am
Posted at the request of the author
We want to thank one neighborhood couple for attending the AIM meeting last night and confirming a continuation of the same position stated in the AIM incorporation proposal. Our total group decided not to attend when only a few attendees joined AIM committee members at the meeting. Our neighborhood representatives and counsel would have been obvious in the audience.
Last night, AIM missed an exceptional opportunity to create community among all factions in our region. The attendance planned by various groupings among neighborhoods vanished with Mr. Dolterís confirmation of the AIM incorporation proposal and its absence of government definition for voter approval. Mr. David Dolterís article last Thursday in Alamo Today is now on www.alamoinc.org website.
Mr. Chris Kenber and other AIM committee members presented to <30 attendees last evening and continued Mr. Dolterís message. Mr. Kenber confirmed AIM's position that their ad hoc committee should not specify the government, but missed that reality that a majority of voters have every right to specify the structure, operations, staffing, commissions, committees and services upon an elected city council. AIM only needs to be the liaison to state such an incorporation proposal. General Law allows such definition and Municipal Law supports it! Such simple liaison would bring the majority of voters together in community and in support of incorporation.