Otermat recall drive on the slow path to Failure
Cris Alarcon, Placerville Newswire, May 31, 2012With half of the time allotted to get signatures past and only 20% of needed signatures gathered it is unlikely that they will succeed in getting a recall on the ballot. Estimates provided by recall proponents show error in math and lack of process understanding. The recall effort will need 1,780 valid voter signatures to get the recall on the ballot.
Bob Villalobos, who is a member of the group that is gathering signatures, said that so far approximately 300 to 500 people have signed the petition. That is only 17% - 28% of the number need to get the recall on the ballot, but it is not an accurate estimate of petition drive success. Those experienced in gathering voter signatures know that you must gather an extra 20% to offset those signatures disqualified in the verification process. To expect success the petition proponents will need to gather 2,136 good signatures to end up with the required 1,780 "valid" signatures.
With the realistic number of 2,136 signatures needed and only 300-500 gathered, the drive in only 14%-23% done with over 50% of the time gone. To reach their goal petition proponents will have to gather signatures 5 times faster in the second have of the drive then they have accomplished in the first half.
The petitioners say "Ms. Otermat should be removed from office in order to permit the Georgetown Divide Public Utility District to continue providing adequate, clean affordable water to its customers." Some have asked, "Does GDPUD no longer provide clean water to its customers?" Others have commented, "Otermat campaigned on 'I will Cut the Waste in spending' and she is being RECALLED for doing that????"
Supporters of Otermat claim that the recall is a management driven effort, not the ratepayers. "Odd, the clique driving the Otermat recall. Mostly management. Not a lot of ordinary GDPUD 'outraged' customers signed up. Perhaps in future voters should run candidates by management for approval?" said one resident. Another said, "Mr. White's $250,000 total compensation computes to a whopping 10% of GDPUD's annual $2.5 million of rate revenues. It's hard to figure what's more egregious...General Manager White's lavish 10% of rate revenue pay package...or the Mountain Democrat's ongoing misleading headlines and biased reporting that dupe the public."
Several have complained about the Mt Democrat's misleading headline "Otermat recall drive at 35 percent" when the story itself showed only 17%-28% of the total number had been reached. The story also failed to note that raw signatures never equals valid signatures driving the needed number up, and the completed percent down. One person said, "When it comes to water districts GDPUD and EID, the Mountain Democrat continues its penchant for sensationalized headlines and sloppy, blatantly biased reporting that blindly support Management largesse while grossly misleading the ratepaying public."
"No one's ever done a recall up here before," said recall supporter Villalobos. "But it seems to me the momentum is picking up." To succeed it will have to pick up 500% throughout the next 6 weeks. Otermat supporter R.W. Cole does not seemed worried and wrote he is, "looking forward to party time in November."