45° CLEAR, Board votes 4-1 against Prop. 8
Last Modified: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 at 4:03 p.m.
On a split 4-1 vote, Sonoma County supervisors voted Tuesday to urge voters to reject Proposition 8, the November ballot issue that would eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry.
North county supervisor Paul Kelley, the panel's conservative voice, cast the lone negative vote, saying he favors the proposed constitutional amendment and didn't support the board taking a position on the controversial issue.
"It is straight forward," Kelley said. "I don't think it takes away any rights from anyone."
Supervisors Mike Kerns, Valerie Brown, Mike Reilly and Tim Smith said the board should take a public stance because they view it as a civil rights issue affecting gays as well as an economic issue that could result in lost tax revenues if it passes.
More than a dozen opponents of the proposition, some gay and some heterosexual, called for the board to unanimously oppose the proposition. No one spoke in support of the measure.
Next Article in
Events Calendar More Events Submit Event
- Why Woodward and Bernstein came to town
- Rohnert Park woman dies in violent crash on Hwy. 116
- SJRC student reports sex assault
- Armed robbers hit Santa Rosa adult store
- Martz evolves into Hill's biggest fan
- Cell phone traffic stop leads to $90,000 drug find, arrest
- Man guilty in Bennett Valley rape, abduction
- Raiders' Johnson more than just a replacement
- Teens arrested in car shooting spree
- Crash kills bus passenger
- Cell phone traffic stop leads to $90,000 drug find, arrest
- Armed robbers hit Santa Rosa adult store
- SJRC student reports sex assault
- Man guilty in Bennett Valley rape, abduction
- Rohnert Park woman dies in violent crash on Hwy. 116
- 'Twilight' brings vampire love to Santa Rosa
- $75M OK'd for Doyle Drive makeover
- Gunmen rob adult shop in Santa Rosa
- Why Woodward and Bernstein came to town
- Gas prices fall below $2
- Pumas' NCS volleyball goal: Go back-to-back 1 hr ago
- Live updates from Petaluma 3 hrs ago
- Sex offender suspected of violent attack on ex-girlfriend 3 hrs ago
- 49ers' Singletary looking for a better result 3 hrs ago
- Panther Junior PeeWees play for a trip to the national championships 3 hrs ago
- From Rincon Valley to the back of a flatbed in Philly 3 hrs ago
- Metrolink accident injures 4 near L.A. 4 hrs ago
- Lake County tops state list of pot seizures 4 hrs ago
- Stocks soar on Treasury appointment news 4 hrs ago
- $75M OK'd for Doyle Drive makeover 4 hrs ago
Comments
Only moderator-approved comments are shown on this page. To see all comments, please visit the forum.Post a comment | View all comments on this topic.
October 14, 2008 12:35:38 pm
Like their opinion carries one ounc of weight. The voters will pass this measure and immediately some liberal judge will judge it unconstitutional.
October 14, 2008 12:45:54 pm
Since when is it the responsibility of the the board to "urge" the voters to vote one way or the other ?
Their time should be spent doing OTHER things.
Like their jobs for instance.
October 14, 2008 12:48:54 pm
Don't the supervisors have anything else to do? And praise Paul Kelley for at least having the courage of his convictions. The rest of them bow and tremble in fear to any potentially controversial subject.
October 14, 2008 1:04:12 pm
I don't agree with Paul Kelley, but I do have to say he has courage to be the sole person to vote for it.
October 14, 2008 1:05:56 pm
Hello, the judges that ruled were appointed by Republicans. They know the constitution protects all citizens, not just the majority. I'm happy that Sonoma County supes are against this initiative. It's time for the state to focus on items that are important to all of us and stop picking on people we don't like. Live and let live.
October 14, 2008 1:06:04 pm
Just another example of elected officials wasting time and money on matters they were not elected to address. The county is in deep financial distress, tax revenues are down, roads and bridges are crumbling, retirement and health benefits for current and retired employees are in jeopardy. It steams my clams every time elected official waste the public's money sticking their big noses into something they have no control or jurisdiction over. How about concentrating on the hard issues that need addressing?
October 14, 2008 2:42:36 pm
It violates the rights of people to safeguard their children from homosexual indoctrination.
October 14, 2008 2:45:19 pm
So because they didn't vote the way you homophobes would vote, the other four supes have no convictions? It sounds like they voted their convictions and are saying they fully support equal rights and don't support religious bias. Which is what has no place in politics, although Kelley lets his religion affect his politics.
October 14, 2008 3:03:27 pm
I think the Board of Supervisors is out of line to throw their opinions out there. At least it helps clear up who I won't vote for in the next election.
I read a very interesting article about this issue, written by a Democrat in a liberal paper, surprisingly enough. It pointed out that marriage really isn't about the couple getting married. It is the provision for a stable, safe environment that nurtures children. Children gain from the differences a man and a woman bring into the children's lives. Voting to keep marriage traditional is really a vote to protect our children.
Post a comment | View all comments