Posted by Betty Seckler, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Oct 31, 2012 at 10:06 am

Kim, we’ve already aired our differences of opinion on how our tax dollars are being spent by the Sequoia Health Care District whose purpose is no longer what voters who created the district intended. Now let’s bring up the accusation of Mr. Hickey unnecessarily causing the district the expense of this election. Without this election you and Katie would retain your seats on the board. With an election you would not. Of course you would prefer not to have an election. Without an election, voters would not have this opportunity to support or oppose the district’s policies and expenses by voting for you and Katie, or Mr. Hickey’s platform calling for dissolution of the District.

And about those handsome four page, full color, 11 by 17 flyers prepared by your $4700 a month PR guy and sent out under the guise of a Report to the Community just in time for the election. This was authorized by your $182,000 per year CEO with your approval. Board review and approval was deemed unnecessary. Isn’t that a clever and convenient piece of campaign literature paid for by those tax dollars some of us feel should not be in the district’s hands?

And now – on with the election old sport!

Support dissolution of the Sequoia Healthcare District by voting only for Jack Hickey. Voting for a second candidate would defeat the purpose of this election.

Posted by Jack Hickey, a resident of the Woodside: Emerald Hills neighborhood, on Oct 31, 2012 at 10:17 am

Kim's Guest Opinion was originally posted as an on-line letter to the editor. See: Web Link