I'll wait to see where the Mercury stands on this issue, and then I'll go the other way.

Dirk you are not infrequently guilty of hyphen abuse.

The Mercury should really consider investing in a blog that supports text

Also, how dare they threaten Randy Leonard's legacy of kickbacks, favors and rate increases.

tarrying? nicely done sir

Which way do you want to go, Todd? That way we can go for it, too, and headfake you.

Well, since you're forcing my hand, Denis...I'm pissed off at the council for raising rates to pay for pet projects, and for rolling over on covering the reservoirs, and since most of my political decisions are based on anger, I'd say take the power away from the city council. But I do worry that corporate interests could take control of the water district more easily (and quietly) than they can take control of the council. So at this point I'm thinking a reluctant NO to PPWD.

If you guys agree with me, I'll rethink.

Todd has it generally right. This was a pretty poor attempt at veiling their motives. It's fairly textbook:

1. Destroy credibility of status quo through lawsuit, media and paid outreach.

2. Create plausible-sounding alternative that you can pitch as more democratic and more consumer-friendly. Make any other alternatives sound unworkable or less attractive.

3. Consistently guide the formation of the alternative through drafting of ballot language and management of campaign.

4. Spend a whole lot of money on candidates sympathetic to your demands when the new board holds its first elections.

5. GET WHAT YOU WANT

This is nothing more than a proposed corporate takeover of the city's public utilities, disguised as a 'citizens action'.

If Ms. Grabenhorst is concerned about the use of sewer and water funds for non-sewer and water projects, then she and her group should be supporting a charter amendment to disallow the practice.