Posted by Pedro on May 26, 2008, 5:35 am, in reply to "Re: Vote YES" on Measure "V"!"
68.6.79.193
so you're saying this new building is not receiving a dime of funding from Measure V? is that what you're saying? that certainly wasn't the impression i got from City College's Measure V website.
http://www.sbcc.edu/measurev/
under "Map of proposed changes", the "MA" building is color-coded as a "New Building", and under "Measure V - Full Text Ballot Proposition" it lists "Build and/or Expand Classroom Buildings and Facilities" in the projects funded by Measure V. this is at least the second time now that you have berated me for using information obtained directly from City College. where else am i supposed to obtain my information? City College is apparent a very poor source, in your view.
as for "ad hominum" [sic] attacks, i believe i've done very well thus far to abstain from making any against you, though every posting i've read of yours is rife with jabs against me. Joe White may not agree with my stance on this issue, but i think he would be proud of my ability to remain civil and discuss issues rather than the people presenting them.
now the figure becomes $40 and not the $8.50 being touted. and i am the one making misleading statements? if you're going to publish a figure that applies only to a minority of the population, why not publish "$0"? after all, we do have quite a large homeless population here in SB who would not be affected by the property tax increase.
i find this imaginary figure of $8.50/year at the very least extremely misleading, and i tend to be skeptical of any campaign, whether political or otherwise, that stoops to such measures in order to promote their cause.
i would love to debate this with you further. would it be too much to ask that you retract the claws so we can discuss this like civilized people? like any political debate, there is no objectively "correct" stance on this issue. some stand to benefit while others stand to pay. such is the nature of politics.
and for the record, i have not made any derisive comments about the quality of education at CC. this is an unfair characterization of my stance. i oppose raising taxes and i oppose expansion. these are very separate issues from whether City College is going a good job or not. Starbucks is going a great job making coffee. that doesn't mean we should impose a property tax to build a giant coffee fountain in the center of town. can you imagine the hygiene concerns? what a terrible idea that was. you should be ashamed of yourself!
114
Message Thread:
« Back to thread