[UPDATE: Well, no, it seems. See Byron's comment. A mystery solved. But I got to tell you that a unique ID number would solve this problem. That way, we could all invoke Thomas Paine without confusion...]
Get up to speed on the whole NotJanetReilly.com issue right here.
Now, who’s paying Google to send searchers to Not Janet Reilly, a tiny website that would get no attention but for a Google “Sponsored Link?”
Oh, it’s “Common Sense Voters, SF 2010?” But who are they?
Are they “CommonSenseSF” and/or the “Coalition for Reliable and Affordable Electricity and/or PG&E?”
Don’t know. But the big beef against Janet at NotJanetReilly appears to be the whole Public Power / Community Choice Aggregation issue, one that PG&E would seem to have an interest in. See?
Now, I’m not surprised to hear that District 2 rejected Public Power in the past, but I wonder:
Who would win a popularity contest in D2 right now – Janet Reilly or PG&E?
That’d be something for some area Pigs Giraffes & Elephants(who haven’t been having a good year, to say the least) to consider, mmmm?
Tags: 2010, bay area, board, california, cca, coalition, common sense, Community Choice Aggregation, d2, district, district 2, election, google, Janet Reilly, marina, pacific gas and electric, pg&e, power, public, San Francisco, sea cliff, sponsored link, Supervisor, two, untility, voters
I took a look at the two committee’s and they are entirely different groups that are not connected. Looking at the finance reports, PG&E is not a contributor to the “Common Sense Voters” group. You can see all the contributions at the Ethics Commission site here: http://nf4.netfile.com/pub2/?aid=sfo
Thanks Byron. I guess I always think of the state FPPC when I think of who regulates this kind of thing.
http://nf4.netfile.com/pub2/QuickNameSearch.aspx
“Common sense” is the search term