Sneak Peak: To be published in the July 4 edition.

Earlier this week, I volunteered my time at a local fireworks booth to raise money for a nonprofit organization. It’s something I do every year; I like the people, I feel good about the charity and, like any other red-blooded man, I enjoy being around the fireworks.

Yet, this year was different. The stand is usually a bustling center of activity, with folks from throughout the neighborhood and beyond stopping by to purchase our fireworks. Instead, customers were infrequent and the booth sat a bit lonely. My only consistent companion this year was the thick veil of smoke in the air.

The thick cloud of cough-causing lung congestion that covered the city – the result of the state’s raging wildfire season – was the impetus behind Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s declaration that California citizens refrain from purchasing fireworks this year. The governor’s statement, a demand for a fireworks-free Fourth of July, was a reasonable plea considering the current conditions, as California’s 2008 wildfire season will likely go down in the record books. Combine that matter with the drought declaration and it would appear that Fourth of July fireworks might be considered a deadly (if not wholly destructive) weapon, the spark that could fire the further demolition of California.

Still, with such a stern and serious warning set within such dire circumstances, the governor did not issue an outright ban on fireworks sales. As such, hundreds (if not thousands) of nonprofits that sell fireworks annually to raise money, opened up shop last week to a near zero demand for their wares. Customers and passers-by routinely discussed the governor’s warning, some bothered by it (and inspired to buy fireworks), but most agreeing.

Now, with volunteer efforts somewhat squandered and money lost by California charities (dollars owed now to the pricey fireworks suppliers), it begs the question: Why didn’t the governor simply ban fireworks outright, fully securing the safety of the state while simultaneously supporting nonprofits and charities, giving them time to plan and execute other fundraisers?

Is it a question of having one’s cake and eating it, too? Did the former movie star-turned-governor not want to appear as the villain—the party pooper? Or was it Schwarzenegger’s hope that those who did purchase fireworks would use them responsibly and free of accident? But isn’t that the risk he was trying to avoid?

Such middle of the road positions often result in being struck with unintended consequences; taking the hit this time are the state’s lauded charities and nonprofit organizations.

When it comes to the safety of the state, its citizens and its resources, the governor’s mission is clear; however, the logic behind his action (or inaction) in this instance is much more reminiscent of the milky cloud that clogged the skies above Sacramento.

Ehat do you think? Email me at Ryan@SacUnion.com.

SNEAK PEEK: Here is our latest Beehive (to be published June 27).

It has been nearly four months since The Union began tracking how long the Sacramento Bee has operated a Web site that invades the personal privacy of citizens employed by the State of California.

In spite of our protest (or because of it), the Bee continues to manage and promote the site, trading away the individual security and personal information of state workers for increased Web hits and temporary online advertisers. It was a quick cash grab, with reporters acting as perps and the paper playing the part of getaway car; in total, it’s a move that smacks of desperation. But with a paper that is suffering from recent layoffs and a drop in subscriptions, anything goes.

Taking a Stand

As an historic and well-revered monument to justice, The Union was sympathetic to those assaulted and insulted state workers stung by the Bee. It is the philosophy of this paper that the most important part of our republic is the individual liberty of the person—we believe in less government and more oversight, but we do not blame the salary of the secretary at the Department of Technology Services for such bloated budgets and fiscal waste. No, The Union correctly targets and identifies offending legislators and appointed staffers for squandering taxpayer monies—the same individuals the Bee has protected for years.

The Bee has yet to realize that the publishing of state workers’ personal employment isn’t investigative journalism, it’s invasion and it’s offensive. If it was a matter of providing oversight, the paper could have easily listed state positions and employment titles with their respective pay grades; instead, they were looking for outrage and intrigue. The cost of their sensationalism, beyond that of the Bee’s professionalism, was the privacy and safety of our neighbors.

Continuing Our Protest

For months, we have devoted a space of our editorial page to protest the Bee’s Web site; yet, we have recognized that such a small space does not adequately provide a large enough platform from which to launch a serious objection. Thus, we will move our dissent from print to the Internet at SacUnion.com/MetroBlog, an interactive forum better suited for such controversial issues and a more appropriate place to dispute offending material originating online.

Therefore, we will continue providing not only a check on government and its abuses, but also a watchful eye on the Sacramento Bee and its penchant for overreaching. It may be the paper of record in Sacramento, but it is no longer the only paper in town.

To begin this blog, let me address the reason for resurrecting The Sacramento Union and why it is increasingly popular among local readers.

We want to expand and enhance the public discourse. As it is, so many of you out there have been bullied and broken by the doom and gloom peddled by other newspapers. In contrast, we at The Union want to publish the good news happening in our neighborhoods; we want to celebrate our commonalities, not exploit divisions; we want to offer the full spectrum of political news, not just a sliver; and we want to tell your story.

For more than a decade, the Sacramento Valley has had but one major daily newspaper upon which to rely—truly a sin for a population as diverse as ours. And for too long, locals here have had to suffer through inadequate, inefficient and sometime unfair and unbalanced news reporting. No longer. It is our hope that we can offer our neighbors something they haven’t had for years: a choice.

Welcome to the SacUnion.com Metro Connection blog. I am Ryan Rose, managing editor of The Union. Feel free to email me your thoughts, opinions and news tips at Ryan@SacUnion.com.