State of Jefferson ballot campaigns diminish to two from five

Editor’s note: I received this email from the “Keep It California” contingent:

“Following on the heels of our work with the Lake County Board of Supervisors to rescind their offer to put the State of Jefferson on the ballot, we worked with other counties to do the same. January saw Plumas and Amador remove the question from the June ballot and Sierra County’s supervisors adopted a resolution declining to join the State of Jefferson.

“Each of these county boards made it clear that the proponents of such a radical idea should prove they have local support by availing themselves of the initiative process before county dollars are spent on a ballot measure.

“The hugely publicized delivery of ‘thousands’ of names on 15 petitions from the State of Jefferson group to the state capitol on January 6th, turns out to be nothing but a photo op. Twenty, yes twenty, names were turned in from Nevada County and that was the highest number for any county.

“Most of the other counties had two to five signatures. County board members all over Northern California are incensed that the SOJ had misrepresented the counties’ support in the petitions submitted to the state. What a mockery of the democratic process!

“Nevada County Executive Rick Haffey wrote a very pointed clarification that the Nevada County Board of Supervisors do not support the State of Jefferson and do not plan to do so in the future.

“The initiative supporters in Nevada County turned in over 5,000 signatures (they need about 3,840) to get an advisory measure on the ballot. Margie Joehnck, our coordinator in Nevada Co., delivered a ‘Call to Action’ to the supervisors to begin at once to assess the possible fiscal and other effects the State of Jefferson proposal would have on the county, so we will have the information for our campaign should they have enough qualified signatures.

“Lassen County adopted ballot language for the advisory election in June. However, we are lighting a fire up there with an organizational meeting planned for early this month. Please contact us if you live in or near Lassen and can help with this campaign.

“So, going from the possibility of having to run campaigns in five counties down to a possible two counties is pretty significant work for two months.”

Author: jeffpelline

Jeff Pelline is a veteran editor and award-winning journalist - in print and online. He is publisher of Sierra FoodWineArt magazine and its website SierraCulture.com. Jeff covered business and technology for The San Francisco Chronicle for years, was a founding editor and Editor of CNET News, and was Editor of The Union, a 145-year-old newspaper in Grass Valley. Jeff has a bachelor's degree from UC Berkeley and a master's from Northwestern University. His hobbies include sailing and trout fishing.

9 thoughts on “State of Jefferson ballot campaigns diminish to two from five”

  1. What’s pitiful is that our county is one of the two left at the same time we want to be attracting millennials, companies and grant dollars here. What a mixed message we send to the outside world!

  2. SOJ update: Just 377 out of the 500 random signatures selected were valid for the proposed ballot measure, The Union is reporting. And “three of the 500 signatures were duplicates,” it added. Now Greg Diaz’s office must count thousands of signatures. I wonder what the SOJ “best practices” are. BTW, kudos to The Union’s Alan Riquelmy for diligently following up on this. http://www.theunion.com/news/20555966-113/state-of-jefferson-question-likely-wont-make-cut

  3. A message from your future State of Jefferson State Senator:

    “It’s sort of strange,” said Eddie Garcia, a Jefferson supporter who delivered the petition to the elections office. “It just doesn’t make sense to me, but it’s what the election code says.”

    One would think that if you were going to start a secession movement you would know that if you don’t get enough valid signatures your question will not appear on the ballot. These are the people that want to make complex policy decisions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s