I do remember a Russell Johnson for city council web site that went up back in 2006. Russell said he hadn't endorsed the site, which had been put up by some people who were trying to get him to run.  Ultimately he decided not to try for the job.

Perseverance!

I've missed any contact information to help collect signatures, could you repost it here.

Thanks, in advance,

montfred

you have to live in ward 3 to collect signatures. The contact information is willard_winn@hotmail.com

Are there really 38,000 people in Kern county who give a rat's tail about this stupidity? That prospect is scary.

Catpaw: Wrong recall, sorry. This is about the Ken Weir recall, not the Ann Barnett recall.

LOL. Excuse my fuzzy braincells. Some of us seniors have a difficult time keeping our recalls straight. That and the child molest cases. And the Virgin Mary apparitions. And the different street gangs.....

Catpaw:

If, by "this stupidity", you're talking about the Barnett recall, I think there really ARE 38,000 people.  Don;t think this is exclusively about the gay marriage thing, that's merely one example of the auditor controller's outsized behavior.  If need be, we can get a number of people collecting the signiatures.  Who's got the papers?

Howie:

I'm sure there are 38,000 people -- registered voters even -- who would sign a petition. Actually collecting the signatures is another story, as the Weir recallers are finding out. (I wonder how many have blisters so far.)

Pup:

They haven't said so explicitly, but I get the impression from the city council that they're ready to board whatever bandwagon the county supervisors are on, on this issue. They're going to let the county go first, but if the BoS adopted MSN, it would be a hard sell to get the council *not* too.

 Pup...I think you need to do something about this problem yourself, other than complaining on a paper's website.  You know, like Johnson, Mrs. Weir's position is merely voluntary.  Also, the point of enforcing licensing is to raise funds for the county and to ultimately control the population of animals in our city by using those funds toward low cost spay and neuter programs.  The rabies vaccine just happens to be a part of licensing.  Perhaps you should use your animosity, time, and money to try and prevent the overpopulation of animals in our city.

Pup: The cost will be about $13,000. How much is a license? $80? That means maybe a couple hundred new licenses to break even.

It will not take two officers off the street. They will be new hires — positions that are currently in the budget but unfunded.

The licensing fee for an unaltered dog is now $60.00 per year and going to $75.00 per year if the BOS passes the enforcement of mandatory licensing plan.  Only $15.00 per year for altered dogs.  But as we all know - the majority of dogs in Bakersfield and Kern County are unaltered and unlicensed  - 90% unlicensed estimated for the County -  92% unlicensed in the City.     With the County committing 10% of the collected licensing fees to low cost spay neuter if the program is approved.  But I must reiterate most dogs in Bakersfield and Kern County are intact/unaltered.  That means that many people will be faced with paying $75.00 per animal per year or getting their animal spayed /neutered to qualify for the lower licensing fee.

People would have the opportunity to license their unaltered dog for $75.00 per year or get their animal altered for about the same money through HOPE/SPCA or other programs.   Then the licensing fees drop to only $15.00 per year per altered dog and even less if they buy a three year license

What a way to derail a thread, Pup.  You demonstrate a severe case of revenge run amok.

Is your name really Chad Louie?

Lincolnman, why would you think Pup is Chad Louie?  And why would Louie want to change the subject from a Ken Weir recall?