The newspaper asked each candidate to disclose. That's why Matt Ramsey did it.

What he didn't disclose is even more important: (1) when was the money given [was he planning on running against Dan] (2) how much did each of these parties give (3) what are their trades or occupations (are developers, lawyers or bankers) (4) what was the total amount given from contributors who gave less than $101? If he puts that on this website I will be impressed. Until then, "we won't get fooled again".

I will vote for Matt Ramsey if he will promise three things:
(1) to support a metro-wide moratorium on new construction until the drought is solved; (2) vote to never support, fund or vote for TDK in any way; (3) to never support changing any of our districts. Just say no-- and this includes ALL districts. Brown's referendum idea would be ok. Until then, we are fine the way we are up and down the line.

Turtle Man,

Did you read my entire post or just the Subject line?

Anyone, with any knowledge and history of our area can look at the names disclosed and put two and two together. Also, like I said, the 'straight poop' will come out after the election. After it's too late.

I've said it many times and it bears repeating; just look at the company Lawyer Ramsey keeps and it's ever so obvious as to how much of 'Judas Seabaugh' this guy will turn out to be.

On the issues at hand, I don't trust this guy as far as I can throw him. And that ain't very far.

Poor Git...But Spear Guy agrees with you apparently on the district voting thing. On that issue, I say don't change any districts, don't increase staffs and payroll. None of that.

On the disclosures...Look, if Ramsey raised say $10,000 from 7 people a few weeks before Dan died that means that they opposed Dan (I supported him) and they had an agenda worth investing money in. Instead, let's assume they were making their cash calls during the funeral. I still don't most of these people and I don't know, for example, if the Group VI lady gave $2,000 or $200. Big difference.