Rhonda thank you and all for your wonderful questions. It will be nice finally to have a virtual discussion with the Mayor about the issues facing our City. I do love to debate Steve, but I don't think he is actually a candidate for anything? As to some of the comments, this beautiful Sacramento morning, my plan has been described as "vague" bullets - in comparison to the Mayor's piece. I am not sure that is fair. However, in fairness to the voters and the reading public, in development of my plan, you will see the items that are proposed that would cost money, actually have a cost associated with them - I have spreadsheets if anyone is interested. Second, my cost proposals and budget savings proposals were developed on a Sunday evening, while reviewing the Fiscal Year 2013 Budget. This was the same evening that Mayor Johnson was in D.C. at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. Difference in style, I guess. Finally, as to political party and voting record, and a record of success, I have a signed resolution, signed by Mayor Johnson discussing all the "successes" I had in City Government going back to 1996, and thanking me for my dedicated service to our community. As to voting, take a look at the City Clerk's website - you find that many of the policy recommendations I developed Mayor Johnson voted for. There's the difference - substance, facts and figures, and transparency. That's the Mayor you will get when I am elected. Don't think that was all that vague.

Hi Ronda, I don't have the money that the Mayor does. So I deliver my fliers personally to each door as I walk them. If you would like to see it, it is posted on the internet at my site http://jonathan.rewersformayor2012.com

So Steve is up as well. I never said that the public should "craft," the budget - I don't think they are interested in reviewing the Form 2 or filling out prep tables, like I used to. The interesting thing, is the idea that Steve seems to think is absurd is exactly what City Manager John Shirey is proposing. In a link right next to Mayor Johnson's picture on the City's website is a link asking people "What should the role of City Government be?" Let me quote the site: ”To the extent that we are able to correlate resource allocation with priorities, there may be an opportunity to consider the reallocation or reduction of allocated resources in future budgets." I am pretty sure this concept and tool was presented to the City Council, don't know if the Mayor asked that this approach should not be used? I am not saying any different - shouldn't the voters get a say in our budget priorities? I hear the priorities are police, fire and parks.....I'm just saying shouldn't we respect what the voters say? and their ideas of what is important? The City Council seemed interested. That's how things get done in Sacramento, with good ideas, presented to the public and implemented with their support. Guess its just a difference in approach yet again.

Evak - good comment. I recommended to the City Council today, that if they consider a modest sales tax, that they have an advisory measure go with it - so the voters could agree with how the funds might be used. There was further discussion about the Council taking action on an expenditure plan. You are right, if a General Sales tax is approved, the voters should get to know and agree how those dollars would be used.

This is a great discussion and debate. Thank you everyone for your comments, including Steve. I seem to debate him more often than the actual candidate? I have been talking about parks, pools, recreation, public safety, strengthening our neighborhoods and being respectful to Sacramento's voters. I am a Republican - okay, I am honest about it, and agree with statements about regressive taxes. However, again, as Mayor it is your job to represent your community, your voters, and I have heard them. I also think, as a Republican it should mean something to have lifelong Democrats endorse me, and people who actually know me, what i have done and what I stand for. I think Steve is a great guy and political consultant. He is using every trick in the book. I am a political scientist, I know (another expertise). The Mayor four years ago, when issues that were not germane were brought up would respond: "that is not relevant we need to focus on the issues." I agree with the Mayor, people want to talk about how the leaves are going to get picked up, why they need to pay 30% more in Utility Fees, why only half of our swimming pools are open, and why we are cutting police and firefighters. I think that's what the voters care about. This is a non-partisan office, and I have a public record, I have been recorded making statements, taking positions, and people are free to look at the record. I am happy to debate them any time the Mayor wishes. That is my commitment to the voters of Sacramento. I am just someone who has actually had policy ideas that needed to get a majority of votes on the City Council....that's my background. So let's stick to the issues. With regard to this one, it should be up to the voters if they want to pay more or not. When the Mayor proposed public financing for an Arena, something that had been opposed by the voters previously, the greater context was not considered. We needed a new water treatment facility - nearly $150 million. Instead of using revenue generated from monetizing parking for that purpose, we chose to propose using it on an Arena, again something the voters had spoken to. To pay for the new Utility infrastructure we decided to increase everyone's utility fees - so everyone is paying more for a needed service, in that case they were not really given a choice, the City Council made that decision. I am saying if they want safer streets, open pools and community centers - they should have the chance to decide to pay for it. That's capitalism.....if you want a product you have to pay. I think the City Manager has demonstrated well that there is just no money left.