DOCSLIB.ORG

Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA) Erupted in Richmond, California, and the City Would Never Be the Same

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA) Erupted in Richmond, California, and the City Would Never Be the Same How did the RPA get started? By Juan Reardon Between the fall of 2003 and the fall of 2004 the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA) erupted in Richmond, California, and the city would never be the same. Here are a few notes about the years 2003-2004 and why, how and who got the Richmond Progressive Alliance started that year. Why was it started? The short answer: to make our lives better, healthier, happier starting right here, in our city and communities. Many organizations existed already in our city before the RPA, and they continue, fortunately, to exist today. Charitable groups, churches, educational centers, and activists struggling for the environment, for equality, for justice, against police brutality, for immigrant rights and many other great causes. The good people involved in so many struggles were already transforming Richmond into a better place one struggle at a time, one stand at a time, one embrace at a time. Why add one more? As in the case of many other cities, the individuals and organizations doing good work to educate the community and improve the lives of residents were absent from the tables where the key decisions were being made. The vast majority of city council members, and the mayor, were individuals who were either placed in office by the corporate forces ruling our city (Chevron, developers, Police & Firefighters Union, and others), or were people who emerged with good intentions to improve our lives, but soon enough were convinced that to keep their seats and career prospects they had to bow to the mighty corporate dollar that ruled local politics. These local elected officials, often isolated from the community, ended acquiescing to corporate money and the strings that it always has attached. Richmond residents, on their part, also had come to believe that our political system had been overtaken by the power of corporate money, and most folks also assumed that it was the only system possible. Nevertheless, there have always been in Richmond, and elsewhere, people who saw with clarity that corporations and their fronts are the enemies of democracy. They realized that unregulated greed brings us poverty, and rooted in poverty are crime, violence, self-destruction and community-destruction by drugs, repressive violence by police, lack of good schools, institutional racism, and a lack of job opportunities to advance. Globally, the results are a permanent state of world war, and the systematic, and possibly irreversible, destruction of the people’s planet. Over the decades, there were many examples of Richmond activists fighting for a better world and against the different expressions of corporate domination. In the years immediately preceding the formation of the Richmond Progressive Alliance, several important struggles and centers of activism were alive and impacting Richmond. Here are a few of them: In 2001, the Richmond Greens were formed as a local chapter of the Green Party of Contra Costa; the “Richmond Alliance for Green Public Power and Environmental Justice” was created between the West County Toxics Coalition, Green Action, the Richmond Greens and others to stop construction of a polluting power plant at the Chevron refinery (It was stopped in June); The “Globalize Justice, Not War” march on the Chevron refinery took place on November10th; the “North Richmond Open Space Shoreline Alliance” was formed under Whitney Dotson’s leadership; The “Sister –Friendship City” relationship was established between Richmond and Regla, Cuba. In 2002-2003: The “Homelessness Is Not A Crime Coalition” fought the criminalization of the homeless by the City of Richmond with its “anti-camping ordinance” passed on December 2001. The Mobilization against the Richmond Police Brutalization of Latinos on Cinco de Mayo took place. In 2003: Anti-war demonstrations took place at Chevron; the community forced the City Council to pass resolution 29-03 defending the U.S. Constitution and opposing the Patriot Act; the Association of Richmond Day Laborers was created and a 10 point agreement of rights and mutual respect was signed by the Association and Richmond Police Acting Chief, Chuck Bennett; Citizens Against Casino Expansion came together to oppose San Pablo Casino and other such centers (Pt. Molate); the No Fines for High Fences Mobilization of hundreds of Latino homeowners against proposed penalization for high fences erected to defend themselves from crime took place. In 2003 and 2004 a diverse group of Richmond residents emerging from these and other previous local and global struggles came together to continue the local fight in the new century, and in electoral politics, an area which until then completely lacked progressive organizing in Richmond. Each person participating in the efforts of the founding and of the first year of the Richmond Progressive Alliance brought forward many different experiences, backgrounds and skills, and that common understanding was expressed as, “We will think globally and we will act locally!” We lost the Feds. All power to the locals! Many had already realized that no possible solution of our collective national and global problems would come from the federal government, the presidency, the congress and other federal institutions. The people of our country have lost those institutions to the corporations, and there is no possible hope of getting anything significant from them. The corporations hold them tight and the corporations will keep them for the long haul. Many of those converging into the Richmond Progressive Alliance believed, to different degrees, that our only hope for survival, and for a national transformation, was to develop local political power through the organizing of our families, our friends and our neighbors, and the winning of local seats on the City Council. Here at the city level we have the possibility to impact our lives to some extent and, perhaps more importantly, to learn by this experience, and show to others, that it is possible for people with common sense to prevail and for democracy to work in the people’s interests. If we can improve our lives locally through the democratic process, then why can’t we do it at the macro level? If we learn to successfully fight the corporations locally, why can’t we apply those lessons to a national and global movement? The RPA starters were, nevertheless, relatively aware that even the most successful local effort would still leave the local community imprisoned in a matrix of regional, state and federal laws limiting our ability to fulfill needs and dreams. Years later it would eventually became clearer. Only through the emergence of a broad progressive movement that recaptures local power in a thousand cities and communities could enough strength be gathered to significantly change the direction of our lives and the country. And so, the embryonic Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA) was conceived as an answer to that absence of true people’s representatives on the local boards of power, be it city council, school boards, board of supervisors or other local elected positions. All the progressives doing great work in the City must have on the council representatives that respond to the progressives and the interests of the regular residents. The Richmond Progressive Alliance brought people together to show the community that it is possible to stand free of the corrupting influence of corporate money in politics and that honest people coming together for the common good can defeat corporate money. Since its inception, the basic dichotomies of the Richmond Progressive Alliance have been: “People not Corporations”, “People Power not Corporate Money”. The Richmond Progressive Alliance coalesced some of the many dedicated activists who were in Richmond at the time into a group that clearly challenged the local political establishment. The emergent group denounced the corrupting influence of corporate money in our democracy by supporting candidates who pledged not to take corporate money for their campaigns, demonstrating their true independence from the corporations. Every voter had heard before from every politician in the land the statement that taking corporate money does not influence his or her votes. It was clear however that the people were tired of noticing how much influence the campaign contributions had in the decisions made by the same elected officials. It was time to say that true progressives simply rejected the acceptance of contributions from large corporations, as a concrete example of our independence. Some candidates rejected all corporate donations, some rejected contributions from large corporations. This initial policy of the RPA evolved years later into a higher bar which required that candidates to office pledge not to accept any corporate donations at all, not even from small corporations. This policy was hopeful music to the tired and frustrated ears of the skeptical voters. It was a grass-roots defense of democracy and it became part of the RPA DNA. Challenging the local political power to get progressive candidates elected with independence from corporate money was the first and central act of the emerging Richmond Progressive Alliance. The RPA also understood that winning elected positions was difficult. Being new to the process, the RPA activists did not have much electoral experience. Most RPA members came from the protest world or the social services world, and our candidates did not have a lot of name recognition. On the other hand, we knew that the electoral work was only part of the work to be done; that the electoral work would help to create the organization and teach the skills needed for the political transformation of the city. The RPA was not only doing the electoral work to win the seats and denounce the corrupt influence of corporate money. The RPA was also raising people’s issues of concern, educating, starting a community thinking process and bringing together all willing progressives already activating in the city.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4 Independent Political Action
    Solidarity Political Basis of Unity: Suggested Bibliography #4 Independent Political Action In the labor and social movements, we call for political independence and a break from the two-party system. The Democratic and Republican parties are dominated by corporations and merely offer different flavors of pro-war and pro-business policies. These capitalist parties maintain a stranglehold on politics in the United States and offer only dead ends for working class and oppressed people. The Democrats in particular have functioned as a trap for organized labor and as the graveyard of social movements. We argue against engagement in the “lesser evil” approach of working with the Democratic Party, which tends over the long term to push the overall political climate to the right. We argue, instead, for the political independence of movements. When possible, we support third parties and independent candidacies that stand on these principles. Our long-term strategic goal is the construction of a mass party that can champion workers’ interests independently of the two-party system. Draft Revision 1, September 2014 Socialists as well as working-class and social movement activists have attempted to build independent parties for more than 100 years. The renewed interest in campaigning for socialist and community candidates stands on that tradition. In the past, those efforts were unable to break through at a national level and several were incorporated into the Democratic Party. Today, election laws, the amount of money necessary to build a campaign and the emphasis on campaigning through the media have raised the stakes against independent political action. Current Initiatives Solidarity is Prioritizing The Green Party campaign for governor/lieutenant governor in New York State is important for the issues it is raising.
    [Show full text]
  • German Hegemony and the Socialist International's Place in Interwar
    02_EHQ 31/1 articles 30/11/00 1:53 pm Page 101 William Lee Blackwood German Hegemony and the Socialist International’s Place in Interwar European Diplomacy When the guns fell silent on the western front in November 1918, socialism was about to become a governing force throughout Europe. Just six months later, a Czech socialist could marvel at the convocation of an international socialist conference on post- war reconstruction in a Swiss spa, where, across the lake, stood buildings occupied by now-exiled members of the deposed Habsburg ruling class. In May 1923, as Europe’s socialist parties met in Hamburg, Germany, finally to put an end to the war-induced fracturing within their ranks by launching a new organization, the Labour and Socialist International (LSI), the German Communist Party’s main daily published a pull-out flier for posting on factory walls. Bearing the sarcastic title the International of Ministers, it presented to workers a list of forty-one socialists and the national offices held by them in Germany, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Belgium, Poland, France, Sweden, and Denmark. Commenting on the activities of the LSI, in Paris a Russian Menshevik émigré turned prominent left-wing pundit scoffed at the new International’s executive body, which he sarcastically dubbed ‘the International Socialist Cabinet’, since ‘all of its members were ministers, ex-ministers, or prospec- tive ministers of State’.1 Whether one accepted or rejected its new status, socialism’s virtually overnight transformation from an outsider to a consummate insider at the end of Europe’s first total war provided the most striking measure of the quantum leap into what can aptly be described as Europe’s ‘social democratic moment’.2 Moreover, unlike the period after Europe’s second total war, when many of socialism’s basic postulates became permanently embedded in the post-1945 social-welfare-state con- European History Quarterly Copyright © 2001 SAGE Publications, London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Welfare Under Chinese Socialism
    SOCIAL WELFARE UNDER CHINESE SOCIALISM - A CASE STUDY OF THE MINISTRY OF CIVIL AFFAIRS by LINDA WONG LAI YEUK LIN Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the London School of Economics and Political Science University of London May, 1992 - 1 - UMI Number: U615173 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615173 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 n + £ s ^ s F l O U o ABSTRACT All complex human societies make social provisions to ensure the wellbeing and security of their citizens and to facilitate social integration. As in other societies, China's formal welfare system is embedded in its social structure and its informal networks of self help and mutual aid. This thesis explores the development of one of China's major welfare bureaucracies - the Ministry of Civil Affairs and the local agencies which it supervises from 1949, with especial reference to the period between 1978 to 1988. The study begins by surveying the theories, both Western and socialist, that purport to explain the determinants of welfare.
    [Show full text]
  • Privatization of Public Social Services a Background Paper Demetra Smith Nightingale, Nancy M
    Privatization of Public Social Services A Background Paper Demetra Smith Nightingale, Nancy M. Pindus This paper was prepared at the Urban Institute for U.S. Department of Labor, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Document date: October 15, 1997 Policy, under DOL Contract No. J-9-M-5-0048, #15. Released online: October 15, 1997 Opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the positions of DOL, the Urban Institute or its sponsors. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Urban Institute, its board, its sponsors, or other authors in the series 1. Introduction The purposes of the paper are to provide a general overview of the extent of privatization of public services in the areas of social services, welfare, and employment; rationales for privatizing service delivery, and evidence of effectiveness or problems. Examples are included to highlight specific types of privatization and actual operational experience. The paper is not intended to be a comprehensive treatment of the overall subject of privatization, but rather a brief review of issues and experiences specifically related to the delivery of employment and training, welfare, and social services. The key points that are drawn from a review of the literature are: There is no single definition of privatization. Privatization covers a broad range of methods and models, including contracting out for services, voucher programs, and even the sale of public assets to the private sector. But for the purposes of this paper, privatization refers to the provision of publicly-funded services and activities by non-governmental entities.
    [Show full text]
  • Marxism and the Solidarity Economy: Toward a New Theory of Revolution
    Class, Race and Corporate Power Volume 9 Issue 1 Article 2 2021 Marxism and the Solidarity Economy: Toward a New Theory of Revolution Chris Wright [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/classracecorporatepower Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Wright, Chris (2021) "Marxism and the Solidarity Economy: Toward a New Theory of Revolution," Class, Race and Corporate Power: Vol. 9 : Iss. 1 , Article 2. DOI: 10.25148/CRCP.9.1.009647 Available at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/classracecorporatepower/vol9/iss1/2 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Arts, Sciences & Education at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Class, Race and Corporate Power by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Marxism and the Solidarity Economy: Toward a New Theory of Revolution Abstract In the twenty-first century, it is time that Marxists updated the conception of socialist revolution they have inherited from Marx, Engels, and Lenin. Slogans about the “dictatorship of the proletariat” “smashing the capitalist state” and carrying out a social revolution from the commanding heights of a reconstituted state are completely obsolete. In this article I propose a reconceptualization that accomplishes several purposes: first, it explains the logical and empirical problems with Marx’s classical theory of revolution; second, it revises the classical theory to make it, for the first time, logically consistent with the premises of historical materialism; third, it provides a (Marxist) theoretical grounding for activism in the solidarity economy, and thus partially reconciles Marxism with anarchism; fourth, it accounts for the long-term failure of all attempts at socialist revolution so far.
    [Show full text]
  • Richmond Progressive Alliance Revives Campaign for Stronger Tenant Protections
    Richmond Progressive Alliance revives campaign for stronger tenant protections Apartment building in Richmond, 23rd Street/Nevin Avenue (Photo by Fabian Graber) By Fabian Graber Posted May 11, 2015 9:00 am Advocates for stronger tenant protections in Richmond received support last week when the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA) decided to join their efforts. The RPA is an influential political player in the city, with members—Jovanka Beckles, Eduardo Martinez, and Gayle McLaughlin— holding three of the seven seats on the city council. The group’s steering committee voted on Wednesday “to reaffirm and update its historical position” in support of just cause protections against eviction and a “fair rent” ordinance, said Marilyn Langlois, a coordinator with the organization. Just cause for eviction policies commonly list a set of conditions under which a tenant can be rightfully evicted, while fair rent policies, sometimes also referred to as rent control or rent stabilization, aim to limit yearly rent increases to a certain percentage. Langlois said the RPA’s steering committee also voted to join “a growing community” of organizations advocating these issues, spearheaded by the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment Page 1 of 3 (ACCE), a non-profit community organization that recently supported Richmond tenants in a partial rent strike. The debate on how to tackle rising rents in Richmond has gained momentum over the past months. In February, the city council, on the initiative of Vice Mayor Jael Myrick, directed the City Manager’s office to draft a just cause ordinance within 90 days, which the council would consider at a future meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • TRANSNATIONAL PARTY ACTIVITY and PORTUGAL's RELATIONS with the EUROPEAN COMMUNITY
    TRANSNATIONAL PARTY ACTIVITY and PORTUGAL'S RELATIONS WITH THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY Juliet Antunes Sablosky Georgetown University Paper Prepared for Delivery at the Fourth Biennial International Conference of The European Community Studies Association May 11-14, 1995 Charleston, South Carolina This paper analyzes the interaction of the domestic and international systems during Portugal's transition to democracy in the 1970's. It focuses on the role which the European Community played in the process of democratization there, using transnational party activity as a prism through which to study the complex set of domestic and international variables at work in that process. The paper responds to the growing interest in the role of the European Community as a political actor, particularly in its efforts to support democratization in aspiring member states. The Portuguese case, one of the first in which the EC played such a role, offers new insights into how EC related party activity can affect policy-making at national and international levels. The case study centers on the Portuguese Socialist Party (PS) and its relationship with the socialist parties1 in EC member states, with the Confederation of the Socialist Parties of the European Community and the Socialist Group in the European Parliament. Its central thesis is that transnational party activity affected not only EC policy making in regard to Portugal, but had demonstrable effects on the domestic political system as well. Using both interdependence and linkages theory as its base, the paper builds on earlier work by Geoffrey Pridham (1990, 1991), Laurence Whitehead (1986, 1991) and others, on the EC's role in democratization in Southern Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • The Transformation of Russian Social Policy in the Transition Toward a Market Economy
    The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare Volume 28 Issue 1 March Article 7 March 2001 The Transformation of Russian Social Policy in the Transition toward a Market Economy Isabel Pla Julian University of Valencia, Spain Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/jssw Part of the International Economics Commons, Social Policy Commons, and the Social Work Commons Recommended Citation Julian, Isabel Pla (2001) "The Transformation of Russian Social Policy in the Transition toward a Market Economy," The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare: Vol. 28 : Iss. 1 , Article 7. Available at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/jssw/vol28/iss1/7 This Article is brought to you by the Western Michigan University School of Social Work. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Transformation of Russian Social Policy in the Transition toward a Market Economy ISABEL PLA JULIAN University of Valencia, Spain Department of Applied Economics The last few years have witnessed truly extraordinaryevents in the for- merly communist societies. These countries were characterized by the great importance attached to social policy as opposed to market economy countries with a similarlevel of economic growth. However, the transition process toward a market economy has set new conditions for the function- ing of governing levels and companies, which has affected social policies altogether. On the one hand, economic liberalization has brought about a reduction of the Russian Government's intervention in the economy, particularly in social policy. On the other hand, the privatization of the state company in a post-communist society would have implied a new way of economic management based on the principal of competition, in direct opposition to the nature of communist companies.
    [Show full text]
  • Families Play a Significant Part in Individuals' Lives and Society. In
    Families play a significant part in individuals’ lives and society. In sociology, one approach is to view families as a small group, focusing on relational processes like support, socialization, conflict, and intimacy that constitute interactions among family members. Another approach views the family as a major social institution that interacts closely with other institutions including those affecting education, law, healthcare, religion, the economy, criminal justice, and welfare. The family—in its varied and diverse forms—is also key to understanding how inequality is experienced and reproduced in society, as substantial responsibility for caring, nurturing, and raising others is delegated to families. The interplay of these multiple levels—the micro or interpersonal, the meso or institutional, and the macro or structural—also interests sociologists, as individuals influence social structures and institutions, and the latter, in turn, affect family interactions and relationships. This certificate provides students a foundation for understanding the complex role of families and family members at multiple levels, as well as the social systems and organizations responsible for supporting families and individuals. The content and methods courses will prepare students for direct service positions working with individuals and families (e.g., human and social services), or research, policy or advocacy positions addressing family issues (e.g., housing, violence and abuse, parenting, social welfare). Students earning the certificate also will
    [Show full text]
  • MARXISM and COMEDY by Max Apple
    MARXISM AND COMEDY by Max Apple The "history of ideas" is one of the great obscenities in the Marxist vocab- tilary. For Marx, history is clearly the relationship of man and his available means of production. Ideas lead only to other ideas. History moves forward; the development of mankind, says the Marxist critic Lukics, "does not and cannot finally lead to nothing and nowhere."' This concept of the "end" of history is the wonder, the intellectualand emotional lure of Marxism. History has a purpose which has been subverted and disguised in the rhetoric of "Jesussaves," a rhetoric that promises the next world while this one is usurped by capital. Marxism promises this world, the only one; it translates "Christ died for you" into "history lives for you." Karl Marx is the Messiah of the industrial age. His doctrine in less than a century has already risen to chal- lenge the Christian West and its Crusades have scarcely begun. Yet, Marx's dream of a proletariat that would be free to read Aeschylus and enjoy the fruit of its labor was, from its political inception, debauched by the power struggle from which Lenin emerged. The messianic hope of Marxism has been somnolent through fifty years of Soviet Communism, but even more disturbing to the nineteenth century Marxist "world picture" are the indications that the industrial process may be moving toward an early obsolescence. In the nineteenth century a socialist could only look toward that rosy era when the workers would own the means of production; in the post- cybernetic age we will be faced with the far morc complex problems of how former workers are best able to use their emancipation from industrialism.
    [Show full text]
  • California's Political Reforms
    California’s Political Reforms: A Brief History April 2015 Eric McGhee with research support from Daniel Krimm Supported with funding from the S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation Summary In recent years, California has enacted a series of important political reforms to improve the policymaking process in Sacramento. Two in particular have received by far the most attention: a radically open “top-two” primary system, and an independent citizen commission that draws congressional and state legislative districts. These reforms are ambitiously experimental, often pushing the boundaries of what has been attempted before and could be adopted by other states. They also provide useful test cases for understanding how policymakers can most effectively shepherd change through the political system: each suffered at least one failed attempt before it was successful. This report identifies factors that contributed to these failures, and successes, listed below. Ultimately, we see that the coalitions policymakers build—and the tools available to them for fighting or promoting reform— are the most important pieces of the puzzle. There is little evidence that California voters radically changed their views of Sacramento politics in a way that contributed directly to reform success. In fact, polls suggest that voters who were more negative about Sacramento were actually less likely to support reform. This is not to suggest that voters were happy with the status quo, but rather that changes in happiness do not offer a promising explanation for reform success. The reforms’ content may have had an effect. Voters generally preferred a redistricting panel of average citizens to one of judges or legislators—the exact structure of the reform the state finally adopted.
    [Show full text]
  • RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, February 23, 2016 the Richmond City
    RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, February 23, 2016 The Richmond City Council Evening Open Session was called to order at 5:31 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmembers Nat Bates, Gayle McLaughlin, Vinay Pimplé, Vice Mayor Eduardo Martinez, and Mayor Tom Butt. Absent: Councilmember Jael Myrick arrived at 5:31 p.m. and Councilmember Jovanka Beckles arrived after the City Council adjourned to Closed Session. PUBLIC COMMENT The city clerk announced that the purpose of the Open Session was for the City Council to hear public comments on the following items to be discussed in Closed Session: CITY COUNCIL A-1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code Section 54957.6): Agency designated representatives: Bill Lindsay and Lisa Stephenson Employee organizations: Service Employees International Union (SEIU, Local 1021); International Federation of Professional and Technical Employees (Local 21); Richmond Police Officers Association (RPOA); Richmond Police Management Association (RPMA); Richmond International Association of Firefighters (IAFF, Local 188); and Richmond Fire Management Association (RFMA). The Open Session adjourned to Closed Session at 5:32 p.m. Closed Session adjourned at 6:32 p.m. The Regular Meeting of the Richmond City Council was called to order at 6:36 p.m. by Mayor Tom Butt who led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmembers Nat Bates, Jovanka Beckles, Gayle McLaughlin, Jael Myrick, Vinay Pimplé, Vice Mayor Eduardo Martinez, and Mayor Tom Butt. Absent: None. STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST None. AGENDA REVIEW Councilmember Pimplé continued items I-3 and I-4 to the March 15, 2016, City Council meeting. cc23Feb2016 Page 1 of 4 PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, AND COMMENDATIONS E-1.
    [Show full text]