And the truth shall set you FREE!

I do understand what a "Controller" is (although there may be those who do not,) but what I (now) don't understand is what those contracts in AZ would be for. Is SF not able to fulfill its own functions as needed?

Or is this supposed to be in exchange for LA getting their water from AZ, in a roundabout way?

1. Low bidder?

2. Unionized labor in AZ?

Curious though, why they couldn't use a CA based company.
 
Curious though, why they couldn't use a CA based company.

Probably the AZ-based company employed a relative or friend, or made campaign contributions to the administration. Pay for Play.

Remember - legislation generally creates financial opportunity for someone, or likely it would never make it out of committee.
 
Meg Whitman (gubernatorial candidate for CA) came to a Rodeo Kick off Party that I was at, it was held at the powerhouse pub here in Folsom by the chamber of commerce. I had to go and do some networking for my company. She went up on stage and did some campaigning. I went up to her after she got off stage and proceeded to ask her how she felt about cutting AZ off.
She immediately avoided from directly answering my question by saying we need to take care of CA’s problems first. I further heckled her and asked if she felt if it was economically sound for CA to cut off AZ. She could tell that I was for the law that AZ has just passed and tried real hard not to answer how I knew she wanted to answer as I know she is against what their doing in AZ. None the less I don’t trust her as she couldn’t be truthful to my face.
Good for AZ for taking matters into their own hands.

That is what is wrong with these scumbag politicians, they will either flat out lie or blow smoke to keep you from finding out their real position on anything for fear they will loose a vote or people will really find out their stance.
In all honesty I could give two craps about how she feels about the Az law, but if 51% of her constituents believe in that law she dam well better too.
 
Back
Top