Another Put Up Or Shut Up Post

First, I am very progressive as far as State, National, and foreign issues go, so it is only honest to inform you of that at the outset.

Ms. Sharon Yarber, Mr. Jim Jones, Mr. Ken DeLong, Mr. Barry Hildebrand, and a host of others opposing Measure C are very intelligent residents of our city and they have demonstrated their care for our city for decades.

These folks are also leaders in the No on C movement.

I am holding my nose and voting Yes on C, but I won't endorse a vote either way.

But I think these highly intelligent, caring, and informed residents need to offer what they believe to all the voters who bother to cast a vote on Measure C.

All of the people I have mentioned have declared in some fashion that they do not necessarily oppose our city becoming a charter city. They all happen to oppose this particular charter up for a vote.

O.K. I can dig that, quite deep. I happen to think somewhat along their lines with respect to the inclusions and exclusions with this charter.

But what I have done in an earlier post is something I haven't seen from these intelligent people.

In an earlier post, I wrote about four specific issues that should have been included in this charter, but were not. I provided my reasoning and still consider the proposed charter to be lacking, but still something I will vote Yes for.

Where is there an example of a charter those supportive of having a charter, just not this one, at?

Why haven't the No on C group gathered their heads together to offer a charter to voters they could get behind, since they have stated they don't oppose us becoming a charter city.

I don't know who wrote the charter up for a vote, but I think most 'in the know' folks have a better than pretty good idea of who wrote the charter.

I am absolutely sure that Ms. Yarber, an attorney, along with the brain trust at No on C, have just as much knowledge as the authors of this charter and they COULD HAVE offered up a charter they could support to use against the charter up for a vote.

Now, here is what the Yes on C folks will instantly reply with: The No on C folks won't offer something like that because they really don't want our Council to be a Council of a charter city, no matter what.

We are asked to vote for or against what many residents, including me, consider a flawed charter. But No on C hasn't offered anything but discussion time as an example of what they would like to see.

So, I think for the sake of our intelligent and caring electorate (those that bother to learn and vote in the first place) the think tank at No on C needs to offer up a counter charter, if they are really to be trusted with their words that they don't necessarily object to R.P.V. becoming a charter city.

I have written about the supporters of the charter in a put up or shut up vein regarding prevailing wage guidelines. Nobody could honestly accuse me of not using my put up or shut up, favoring one side or the other.

So, if THIS charter is bad, give us something to compare it to. That is of course, the No on C folks mean what they say about not objecting to a charter in the first place.