update 10/12/02:  Today we got the latest advertisement in support of Measure A.  The proponents finally disclose their other big backer -- Multinational home builder Brookfield California Land.  By law, when an organization provides more than 80% of the financial backing of a Measure, they must be included in the name of the organization, which is now officially disclosed as "Yes on Measure A, Riverside County Taxpapers for Traffic Relief (Construction) Major Funding by Johnson Machiner Co. and Brookfield Calfornia Land.  But what do we know about Brookfield California Land? Well, it is part of a group of corporations headquartered in Canada.  In December, they will start selling three new housing tracts at Winchester Road in the Temecula (or "Trafficula," as Dan Bernstein calls it) area of Riverside County.  Need I connect the dots? Amazingly, we are told prominently told "Riveside County says "Yes" to Measure A", even though it is illegal for a governmental entity to actually endorse a ballot measure.  And, equally amazingly, the advertisement is in the precise same format as the "infomercials" previously sent us at taxpayer expense by the Riverside County Transportation Commission.  Obviously, these people scoff at the voters and the intent of the law -- and will do anything to get you to pass this 30 year transfer of public wealth to special interests.

Who are the Measure "A" supporters? (rev. 8/02)

Well, amazingly, no actual ordinary commuters make the donation list.  Wouldn't you think that if commuters wanted this tax so badly, they would be backing it?

The proponent's flyers call them "Riverside County Taxpapers for Traffic Relief," but of course their actual name is "Riverside County Taxpayers for Traffic Relief (Construction)."  "Construction" denotes significant backing from the Construction industry, something they apparently wish to leave out of their flyers.  Here's part of their Campaign Disclosure Statement (click to enlarge):




So if these are "Riverside County Taxpayers, why is their mailing address the REED & DAVIDSON law firm in Los Angeles?  And why is their treasurer Dana Reed of that firm?  As we can see, all their bank accounts are also in Los Angeles (click to enlarge):



As of their August 2, 2002 filing, their biggest contributor was Johnson Machinery Co., providing $50,000 of the $62,750 war chest.  Is it any wonder that this company, which specializes in Caterpillar heavy construction equipment, is interested in a spending law that will build freeways?  And, located at 800 East La Cadena Dr. in Riverside (on the east side of I-215) is their any chance the company will benefit from the proposed expansion of I-215 from the 60 interchange to the San Bernardino border?



Then we have Riverside County Taxpayer  "Guy Evans, Inc." a specialist in supplies for the HOMEBUILDER.  Don't think Measure A is designed to bring more housing development to Riverside County?  It appears Guy Evans does.

Of course, Eric Haley, Executive Director of Riverside County Transportation Commission, is involved.  He is, after all, the head of the Commission that drafted Measure A.

Next is Riverside County Taxpayer "Homme Construction Co., Inc.", another taxpayer involved in -- of all things -- Construction!

Not to be left out is the 40 person Civil Engineering and Land Surveyingfirm of Mainiero, Smith & Associates, Inc. Because after all, there will be a lot of Engineering and Land Surveying to do as soon as the Measure A bonds are sold!

Also, there is "Sierra Landscape Co." -- a company that is involved in highway landscaping projects.  No surprise here.

How about the Irvine taxpayer, RBF Consulting, a Construction Industry consultant?

Or that other not Riverside taxpayer from San Diego, public relations firm Southwest Strategies, LLC.




Well, having discovered that the only "Riverside County" Taxpayers putting significant money behind Measure A are in construction or public relations,  what do we know about the LA law firm of REED & DAVIDSON?  The firm indicates it specializes in "political, initiative and referendum law."  Here is a list of some of their key clients.   Some notable activities are:

Representing a City Counsel candidate who improperly sent out "annonymous" campaign literature.

Represented a judicial candidate who improperly passed herself off as a judge in campaign materials.

Represented defendants that admitted to laundering campaign contributions

Erroneously Argued that the City of Irvine acted improperly in encouraging people to vote with "Vote2000" -- on the novel argument that this was done because Irvine knew the voters were against El Toro development and encouraging them to vote would improperly affect the outcome!

Brought suit to invalidate voter-approved Measure "F" in Orange County that voted down development of El Toro



Naturally, we can conclude that all of these donors are acting solely in the best interests of commuters, and without any self-interest, correct?  Well -- you be the judge...