Jared - are you saying that McCasey gets paid an additional salary from the City of Sacramento on top of the $163,975 he gets paid (not earns) from SRSEF?

McCasey was hired in 1994 which is way before KJ's city hall era. If you visit the SRSEF website http://www.sacsports.com/overview.htm you will see Sacramento used to have all sorts of really great events: NCAA Championship tournament basketball, gymnastics, volleyball, rowing, they are gone. Olympic Track trials left after 2004. Oscar De La Hoya fought at Arco Arena in 1996. It is doubtful the World Masters event will come back after their experience. Will the Amgen come back? Why have all of these events gone by the wayside? Is it because they were they all managed as poorly as the WMA?

SRSEF Executive Director John McCasey is making $165,000+, here is how his salary compares to other positions in the city. Does his level of responsibility match those below? Not even close. How did he strike such a sweet deal? Mayor $116,646 Councilmembers, $60,800 (part-time) City Manager $258,000 Interim City Attorney $186,643 City Treasurer $165,006 Director of Finance, $150,302

How much is this money was spent on McCasey's trips to Europe to "study" how this event was put on successfully (which was clearly a waste)? I attended this event and the lack of advertising/signage/organization was an embarrassment to the city. McCasey makes $200k and is the man in charge. He needs to stop making excuses and take responsibility for his failed assignment.

Will they put it in a to-go coffee cup so I can bring it to work?

Would you agree your initial statement {They are currently co-locating with Sac Charter to help defray the cost of the facility for the charter school which clearly cannot afford the site." } was misleading? Charter schools pay rent on the square footage they utilize. Whether or not a school is co-located has no effect on their cost.

Perfect example of how Shields throws out statements that are not based on fact. " The MET is growing and has a small campus by Southside Park. They are currently co-locating with Sac Charter to help defray the cost of the facility for the charter school which clearly cannot afford the site." The MET is currently co-locating with Sac Charter becuase the district is in the middle of a $6.9 million renovation and is unsuitable for use. http://www.sacbee.com/2011/07/16/3773423/the-met-sacramento-high-school.html

If SCUSD has to close schools due to decreased funding, how would they be able to pay for a new comprehensive high school? Especially when enrollment if down throughout the district. This does not make fiscal sense.

Sactownhammer - Sac High has a higher enrollment than West Campus. If they swap, how would that be better utilization of the campus? St. HOPE Public Schools is paid in full to the district - check your facts!

Several of the residents from the disputed area were at the meeting Tuesday and voiced their concerns about the process and about the fact that they preferred to remain in District 5.

What exactly is the point of creating a citizen advisory committee if council members will only ignore their recommendation to secure their next election (McCarty)? Do they really think we are stupid enough to buy this? shame on them. You better fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy night at city hall tomorrow.

So much for the constituent voice. Remember this next time you head for the polls. Until then, city council should adopt this slogan: Sacramento: of the people, by the council, for the council

Sacramento is lucky to have such a talented person to volunteer for this project. Thank you Ms. Moulton! Looking forward to hearing more about the Powerhouse Science Center.

Ms. Haley - did they give a reason why they prefer this time? It certainly appears that hearing what the public has to say is very low on their priority list.

This means that Fong, Pannell, Sheedy and Waters also voted to move it to the end of the meeting. Did they give a reason? Seems like it would be difficult many members of the public to attend that late at night - is that their goal? If so, not exactly serving their constituents that way.

wow...this comment section has reached a new low.

I was there and saw the labor reps reaction which was one of shame. Were you at city hall for the meeting?

Sheedy is an embarassment to our city. Even her labor support disappoved of her antics last night.

Two thoughts: 1)The heading reads: "Sacramento, Calif. – Two Sacramento City Unified School District elementary schools – Matsuyama and David Lubin – were named 2010 California Distinguished Schools by the California Department of Education on Monday." This statement is not accurate. Perhaps the heading should be amended to read "Two non-charter Sacramento City Unified School District elementary schools were named....". 2) you state that "lack of parental involvement is a tremendous burden for traditional public schools", does that mean you believe the Oak Park charter schools that were also named distinguished do not have difficulty with parent involvement?

Actually 4 schools from SCUSD were named distinguished schools. For some reason the writer did not include the charter schools. http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/sr/cs/disting2010.asp Aspire Capitol Heights Academy Elementary David Lubin Elementary Matsuyama Elementary St. HOPE Public School 7 Elementary Congratulations to all these schools. Keep up the great work!