Do get Dave SNyder to weigh in in that in conversation with him recently, he expressed concerns about Jake's proposal. Sue Hi, The language I sent on the MTA amendments is my proposed draft language; sorry if that was not clear. The SFGP has not endorsed either measure. My draft language is based on my reading of the 2 measures, which I got from the Supervisors' aides, and on feedback from others at the May Transpo WG. If Dave or anybody else has concerns or amendments about the language, please email me and copy the Transpo WG list. Early feedback is better than waiting until the GM and trying to propose changes to the wording from the floor. I wouldn't propose the GM endorse these until they're officially on the ballot in any case. The main reason I posted this to the active list (besides wanting to get more input) is to get feedback on the idea of doing longer statements on the reasons behind our endorsements, in addition to just a yes/no endorsement. This will take some work, but a longer statement should make our position clearer to voters, especially in cases where we don't reach consensus on endorsement (e.g., recent bond measures and the gun control measure). If we do a newspaper, it will be very like the Alameda Greens' version (probably even using their template and printer). That means it will include a slate card for voters to take to the polls, as well as a fundraising pitch. We should discuss the newspaper idea at the CIWG meeting tonight. JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc@sfgreens.org)