Town Square

Post a New Topic

AIM answers 'legitimate questions'

Original post made on Jan 3, 2008

Murmurs that the Alamo Incorporation Movement has stopped answering Web site inquiries about cityhood were echoing around town - but operators of the site and representatives for the organization say AIM has responded to "every legitimate question."

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, January 3, 2008, 1:28 PM

Comments (5)

Like this comment
Posted by Susan West
a resident of another community
on Jan 3, 2008 at 4:30 pm

Dear Neighbors,

If you wish to prove yourself invisible and unimportant, Access, and follow these instructions. "On the front page of the AIM Web site there is section that reads, "Comments or questions? Let us hear from you!" Users can click in the section and be linked directly to an AIM e-mail account. People are encouraged to ask questions about becoming a city to help determine whether or not they support incorporation."

Like many of your neighbors, you will likely receive no response or have your questions or comments interpreted to serve the incorporation campaign purposes. Try it! Prove to yourself the intentions of AIM's Silent Incorporation as only needed your signature on a petition and nothing more.

Susan West
Iron Horse North Greater Neighborhood

Post as response from Alamo neighborhoods forum

Like this comment
Posted by Kathy
a resident of another community
on Jan 3, 2008 at 6:59 pm

Published with the author's permission

The article was a sick failure by AIM to excuse their autonomous behavior. I am saddened that a trusted news source would be victim to such drivel.

I remain concerned about Chris Kenber's comments about OUR incorporation and his further role in SRVUSD strategic planning. Chris needs to know we care deeply about his opposition to community voice and opinion.

I am sadly dissappointed and wish to remove my signature from the petition.

Outer Stone Valley greater neighborhoods

Posted as a courtesy of Alamo community e-chains

Like this comment
Posted by David Brower
a resident of Alamo
on Jan 3, 2008 at 8:21 pm

Where exactly has Kenber expressed opposition to community voice and opinion?

What would people like Kenber/AIM to say and do, really? Reading these forum threads, I get the sense that anything they do is going to be painted as wrong one way or another.

First they are accused of silence, then they talk and are called a "sick failure".

When you say someone is a "sick failure", it doesn't sound like an encouragement to dialog...


Like this comment
Posted by Mark Bauer
a resident of another community
on Jan 3, 2008 at 10:20 pm

Posted with permission of the author

Dear neighbors,

Let us clarify. Our e-chain distributed 63 submissions to AIM's web site that did not receive a response. Those messages asked for expert resources for study of incorporation and its options, or direct presentation by experts at neighborhood sponsored meetings (paid for by neighborhood groups).

The reality is 60 days with lack of public disclosure of AIM Steering Committee activity. An incorporation application when only a feasibility study was promised. And a defense that discredits a volume of questions to the AIM website as not being legitimate.

Sorry, David, that cannot be defended with playback of selections from well-considered messages. The only expert resources have been offered by neighbors for public consideration and neighbors' research. In the end, we remain at odds among those that wish the neighborhoods to ignorantly accept their authority and a majority in Alamo that refuses to concede their future to ignorance.

It is all said and done, and the answer is NO!

Mark, Livorna West

Published from Alamo community e-chains

Like this comment
Posted by David Brower
a resident of Alamo
on Jan 4, 2008 at 1:35 pm

Can someone send me these 63 submissions? I'd like to see them, and I'll post them on my blog at Web Link; send email to

Without seeing these, it's hard to know what was asked.

I don't see where opportunity for expert study has been precluded; I thought that's what LAFCO just contracted out. Nor do I see where "neighborhood" groups are precluded from getting presentations from experts of their choice if they are willing to pay for them.

I'll certainly grant AIM's PR isn't very sophisticated, and that Kenber can seem like a diffident know-it-all, but I'm not sure how that affects the merits.

What exactly is wrong with the process that is in progress? I feel like there are submerged issues that are assumed to be understood, but which have not actually been explained.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Salami, Salami … Baloney
By Tom Cushing | 29 comments | 849 views

Dublin recall unlikely to make June ballot
By Tim Hunt | 0 comments | 528 views