I am taking this very seriously and am drilling down into some of what was said last night – which is why it’s going to take a while to post. For instance, I’m about to talk to Cary Davidson to get an explanation about why EQCA might have to pay hundreds of thousands in fines after an audit for late filing. The Yes on 8 may have to do the same, too – but we need the how much and why.

So yes, please check back here later. I’d hoped to post this morning – but I’m going deeper than a simple post about what happened.

There are several issues on which you ought to report. 

First, I understand that some polling numbers were discussed at the last Town Hall.  Could you please report on these polling results?  

Second, how serious is this “survey” that EQCA is hyping and which you linked to?  It doesn’t seem very likely that EQCA will make such a momentous decision based on the results of an internet survey.  In fact, the entire discussion seems fake, as it is unlikely that EQCA would go ahead for 2012 when it doesn’t even have ballot language ready.  Wasn’t the need for a lot of lead time a key argument for not going to the ballot in 2010?   Well, it does not appear that EQCA actually did very much during the 2009-2010 timeframe.  In fact, I believe they shut a couple of regional offices after donations went down during the recession. 

For the record, I am against going to the ballot in 2012.  But I don’t like seeing a phony public “conversation” and a fake “survey” on an issue that probably has already been decided.  Rather than pass on EQCA’s hype, why don’t you pose some hard questions to them?

now we have two reports from community members who attended the SF town hall. we need to hear from EQCA about how they feel the meeting went.