There is an interesting battle brewing in Santa Clara County that will decide the future of transit, transportation and, perhaps, a politician or two. It revolves around the recent county effort to place a half-cent sales tax increase on the June ballot. It is intended to bail out the BART project; maybe “bail out” is incorrect—more appropriately we might say “save.” But it is being strangely combined with other county projects as a tax to fund several items other than BART, like hospitals and housing for low-income people. You see, put in this form the measure needs only a bare majority vote to pass, while as a transit measure, it would take an unlikely two-thirds vote.
BART passed in 2000 with 70% of the vote, but that was then and this is reality. Behind the scenes is the work of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, the most powerful and active group in the valley, and a largely altruistic group on several issues. This involvement has bothered many, including Supervisor Blanca Alvarado, who is concerned at the apparent dishonesty of the ballot measure. She has a point. This proposed measure does seem to be a case of bait-and-switch. When government forfeits the confidence of the citizens, then the game is over.
Like the straightforward BART measure that passed in the last election, the 1988 Arena measure was crystal clear and won. These were seminal elections, and the Arena, since completion, has changed the face and image of San Jose. The HP Pavilion is the third busiest in the U.S. in non-sporting ticket sales and has made us a place known much more clearly than ever before. (It is even superior to the phrase “America’s 10th Largest City” that is proudly displayed on our seal!)
The key is honesty. The “trick” is to trust the voters. We are in an area of great optimism and entrepreneurship. Our citizens understand a lot more than elected officials think. People will vote for the future. In placing issues on the ballot—be it transit or baseball—public officials must not intentionally confuse, patronize or deceive the voters. It is the best policy and the only one that has the chance of both honor and success.
I think proposing a general tax measure to circumvent the 2/3rds requirement for specific measures is another attempt at dishonesty. I certainly support Blanca and will not vote in favor of this measure. I will not vote in favor of any BART measure. We have CalTrain to San Francisco with all the local connection points to VTA necessary. We have the Altamont Express to Tracy. We have the Highway 17 Express. Amtrak has daily trains through Oakland to Sacramento and return. What will Bart add to this area?
In my little circle of San Jose friends I will certainly voice my negative opinion to BART.
Tom:
This battle has been brewing for some time. Valley “leaders” have polled the BART issue to death and they cannot get to 2/3 no matter how they structure the push questions.
This is pork barrell politics at its worst.
I’d like to hear Eugene’s take on this, for the record.
The Business Journal printed an editorial on this issue and had a similiar view:
“Voters have shown a willingness to spend money for solutions. Why not take the high road here: Tell the voters the plan and trust them to do the right thing?”
I would have voted for a targeted quarter cent sales tax for BART. Unless the supervisors can tell residents what percentage of the funds raised will be dedicated to BART, I will vote no.
See http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2006/02/27/editorial1.html
This sales tax increase is a bad idea altogether. Silicon Valley has one of the highest costs of living in the country, yet the Supes want to pile it on and jack up the sales tax. We pay enough in taxes as it is. The new tax is regressive and it will make the County a less desirable place to live and work. It’s just another reason that people who don’t have to stay will leave and companies won’t relocate or expand here.
Its time to stop Bart to SJ, because it is a real joke of a project that will not benefit the majority of SJ residents. We will all have to pay for a project that will continue to get even more expensive. I would not be suprised if this measure did pass, we would have to bailout the Bart Project again, in 3 years under some other ballot measure.
It is better to use that money to build out VTA light rail, and make that SJ’s primary mode of transport for all SJ residents.
Bart to SJ is more of a joke then the A’s baseball deal fiasco.
This is government at its worst. Since it is very unlikely another BART tax would pass with 2/3, the usual suspects have joined together to attempt an end-run around that requirement and are trying to fool the people so they eke out a 50% +1 to pass their tax. The concept of BART is OK but the way it has been sold to the public is not. We were promised “traffic relief now”, which of course was nothing more than a slick marketing campaign. We all know much relief we got from that.
BTW Tom—Do you really think we are that well known because of the arena (which doesn’t even have SJ in the name?) Few people around the country would put San Jose and HP Pavilion together. It may sell a lot of tickets but it is hardly a household name around the country.
My old daddy taught me to vote yes on anything that will improve our city! But how will we know if thia new sales tax will improve anything without specifics noted on the ballot? Those idiots, and I say that in all kindness, will use the money for their own interests (increasing their own pay and benifits?) and the tax payers will get nothing!
It is interesting to note that when the old “Book of the Month Club” held sway, not a single bond election failed! Now, the pols have to resort to questionable tactics to get money!
Jerry
Regardless of the merits of a Fairgrounds venue, there was never any legal merit to frivilous lawsuit pursued by the City of San Jose.
Once again, two different taxpayer funded entities waste time, money and energy fighting over dollars from the same source—us.
The City of San Francisco never sues the County of San Francisco—as they are one in the same.
Could we not build BART simply by reducing the 28 transit agencies in the Bay Area to one? Do the taxpayers not already have a right of way to build BART, called Caltrain?
If Caltrain and BART merged, who would suffer other than the administrations and boards of each duplicative agency?
When the Golden Gate Bridge was built, wasn’t it financed privately? Could not HP, Apple, Symantec, IBM, Cisco etc. create a public/private partnership to invest in building BART? They have certainly been generous when investing their money in campaigns to increase the sales tax.
Their determined investment would move the project a lot faster. The companies benefit the most from the transportation and, if the deal were done correctly, they could recoup their investment costs with some profit over time.
If a sales tax increase is essential for public services including BART, I agree with Tom that voters will support it.
But to the degree our leaders can show fiscal responsibility, creative approaches and a shared sacrafice among all stakeholders regarding essential government services, the more enthusiastic the voters will be when asked to contribute to the cause.
I spoke for my group (SCVTARU) at last night’s Supervisors meeting along with several other collegues. I agreed with Supervisor Alvarado on the deceptive means on which this measure was placed on the ballot. A good summary of what opponents (myself included) and supporters said is here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/29245
Disguising a specific sales tax as general is the most deceptive form of government there is. SCVTARU obtained a letter from Carl Guardino himself to supporters which answers many questions on who this all benefits (besides his group). Find that letter (and my own response to it) here:
http://www.vtaridersunion.org/bartsjx/svlgsurveyourresponse_01282006.html
Let Carl spell out to you how the poll was done and its sponsors, and its results. All of your questions on who will truly benefit from this proposal from within the County are at the above URL.
The front page of my group’s web site has all the nasty details behind the ballot measure – which we are officially against.
http://www.vtaridersunion.org/
Please make a bookmark of it for the story behind the story of this debacle.
The problem with this tax proposal is that nobody will guarantee how much of the revenue will go to BART, housing, health and hospitals, road construction, etc. Instead it all goes into the County general fund where the SVLG and other high-powered groups will twist arms for their favorite projects. You can be sure the BART backers will walk away with most of it no matter what the slick campaign mailers will tell us.
If the supporters of this tax proposal had locked in the percentages of revenue to be allocated for each category voters could make an informed choice. Instead they chose to purposely keep it vague. The reason is no mystery. This is a backdoor BART tax. Even if you support BART this smells.
If they want BART put it to a straight up or down vote.
Blade
Do you want to believe the legend and gossip or trust the facts? The San Jose Arena, built not for the Sharks but for the citizens of San Jose, has immensely changed how we, ourseleves, see our city – no more trips constantly to SF or Oakland for our entertainment/sports, and opened our downtown to CEO’s who never would have dreamed of spending an evening here. From such visits, come business decisions. It is not the perfect solution, but it was a major step. Try and find someone who was against it in ‘88 – it’s like the rare person who voted for Nixon! TMcE
I don’t think the SCC 70%‘ers have really thought the BART use case through.
The use case being “Will I even use BART?”.
Transit is simply another flavor of bay area koolaid. “If it’s transit it must be good, no matter how much it costs or how much I might use it”.
If this passes, I’m going to sponsor my own sales tax measure, Measure N, to get a lightrail extension built to Nevada.
Ah, leave it to finfan to drag down the level of discussion. You may not agree with Blanca but is it really necessary to spit out the personal and racial insults to make your point?
#14 – As a former staffer to Supervisor Alvarado, but more importantly as a Latina and a human being, I am revulted by your comments. I proudly display my name too, you anonymous coward.
Just off subject real quick: what happened downtown last night? Anyone around there that can provide more than the Merc? Dan?
I know BART is important but seriously, 4 separate stabbings downtown last night?
Bravo – SJI yanks a post – Here’s a 3 Bronx cheer salute.
Funny that insults and smears against other groups (namely Christians) are allowed to stand on this board.
Anyhoo – I also thought it odd for Blanca to come out so vehemently against BART.
Any chance of having an open discussion?
Was FinFan close to the mark and we’re now to witness page 1 of the Jesse Jackson playbook?
“Accuse your adversary of racism in order to shutdown a discussion you’ll otherwise lose.”
#15 – I assume you are directing your comments to #13 and not to me, #14.
You’re right 4 stabbing is atypical, 10 is the norm.
Look downtown san jose is a Thug Zone after 5pm, its when the “elements” move in….check it out especially during the weekends.
Our Civic leaders wouldn’t talk about these “elements” because it involves race but the reality is that 90% of the trouble makers are Latinos. If you don’t believe me check out the police report from last nights arrest(s)…its no coincidence.
Sorry for all of the confusion…
We did pull the comments of the former #14 blogger and that triggered HRC to move up into that #14 slot. So #15’s comments are addressed to a comment that is no longer on this site. An easy solution would have been to take the offensive sentence out and leave the rest of the posting, but it is our policy not to edit posts, leaving us with only one choice – removing it.
We try and prevent any personal attacks, but this is not a perfect system and some might tend to get through. We sometimes have to rely on help from the blogosphere.
We appreciate HRC drawing attention to it and we will be more diligent in the future.
SJI Editor,
Lemme see if I have all this straight.
– HRC is not an anonymous coward?
– S/he’s known as ‘HRC’ to friends, family, and postmen?
It’s offensive to mention that:
– Mexicans are illegally sneaking across the border into the US.
– Illegals are consuming taxpayer funded goods/services here in San Jose?
– Blanca might have a demographic bias when it comes to how taxpayer funds are disbursed.
What a load.
Finfan and I don’t get along, especially since I consider him cowardly for not posting with his real name.
However, with all due respect, SJI editor, and ackowledging this is your blog and acknowledging that the Constitution only guarantees free speech as against government intrusion, I wonder at your publishing a posting then pulling it.
FInfan has had venomous postings before that were not pulled; and the tree huggers slam me all the time. So, what’s the criterion?
SJI Editor:
If you yank FinFan, you also need to yank Ms. Shelton’s response about how she was “revulted” by FinFan’s post, which many of us never saw. How can you keep in a response to something that isn’t there?
FinFan is the functional equivalent of a Klansman, in my view, a coward spewing venom in anonymity, although he/she oftentimes has some good ideas and is obviously well-educated. But this is an open forum and should remain so.
Jude declined to publish one of my posts last year about Gonzo once, saying my comments about his weight were “too personal” and referred me to your policy. Nothing in your published (well, it was difficult to find it without help from Jude over the phone) policy at that time addressed the issue that Jude used as justification for his editorship.
Hey, if Jewish lawyers from the ACLU can represent Nazis who wanted to march in Skokie, you can publish FinFan’s venom, and let the rest of us pillory him in response.
SJI Editor,
Post #23 is completely out of line and should be yanked immediately.
Calling someone a “klansman” – that’s not a personal attack?
Dear San Jose:
I’m disappointed, but not surprised that the 1/2 cent sales tax increase will be wrapped around public health for poor kids, etc. You might say that the politicians are “throwing the kids in front of the train,” but that’s what they have to do to get the thing passed.
Why not just build BART to North San Jose and connect it with the city’s bold plans for development there? We might be able to execute such a plan without having to raise taxes. As for public health and affordable housing, the county and city governments could afford to fund these social needs if they would stop underwriting the construction of baseball stadiums, concert halls, nightclubs, and shopping centers!
Pete Campbell
Wow, I guess I was paying way too much attention to getting my job done today instead of checking in on SJI, and I missed finfan’s post.
He obviously struck a nerve, which he has a tendency to do, but not having seen the post I have to agree with Novice about what supposedly constitutes offensive content.
JMO’s closing paragraph poses a valid question. Is this place turning into a Craig’s List version of “Survivor” where a small group of offended people get to vote fellow bloggers off the island or what?
Personally, I’d rather have finfan’s comments continue to appear here to stimulate discussion, regardless of who he may insult, instead of now possibly never seeing another post from him. Say what you will, but if finfan chooses self-imposed exile, this blog is damaged goods.
As for BART, it appears this sales tax ploy is being seen for what it is by a lot of the public and you can bet opponents of it will point that out ad nauseum for all the slow-pokes. Leave it to the likes of oxygen-wasters like Beall to try and get this done with 50%+1 instead of 2/3. I don’t see how this has a chance of passing. I also feel that even if the money was there and no tax was needed, as long as the supes were involved in the project it would be a seriously misguided one. Just look at the G.W. Bush bull-headed approach they’ve taken with the concert hall when it’s destined to be a losing proposition out at the fairgrounds.
#23 JMO, I am with you 100%.
Two Ideas:
Why don’t the SJI Editors invite Greg Perry to have a guest blog…
Second…Why don’t the good folks of SJI co-ordinate a no-spin debate between Greg Perry and Carl. No organized mob or media spin this time.
Finfan’s could have expressed his cocnerns without the personal/racial edge, but he chose not to. I don’t know that they had to be removed though. I think most of us know crap when we see it and have no problem jumping on the crapper (or should that be crappee??)
Anyway, why finfan has to resort to his venomous attacks is beyond me. Whatever valid points he makes lose all credibility due to the nature of his delivery.
JMoC—There is a big difference between getting “slammed” by people who disagree with your opinion and this situation.
Novice – It’s pretty hard to make a personal attack on an annoymous “victim.” Nice try, though.
I’m with Mark T and JMO. This ain’t China and SJI ain’t Google. A repost is in order. If it was up in the first place for some to read, it should be allowed for everyone to read.
JohnMichael do “tree huggers” slam you or do people who are involved in environmental disagree with some of your stated philosophy. I guess if we reside in Willow Glen, famous for its trees, then we are automatically tree huggers who slam you. It is possible to agree with you on some points and disagree on others.
I didn’t get a chance to read Finfans slam on Blanca but slamming individuals because of their philosophy, race, sex or religion isn’t constructive but pulling the blog means we aren’t allowed to form our own conclusions and opinions about bloggers. I don’t understand why some people have to hide behind psuedo identities to voice their opinions.
Will someone post a synopsis of what finfan said. Speech about public figures is most certainly protected, irrespective of what is said. If it is wrong and stupid then it simply reflects the writer’s personality.
Supervisor Alvarado was against the last tax for BART, the one that supposedly got 70% of the vote. That vote was for transit and BART was only a part of the measure. BART by itself will always fail. In this situation, and about BART in general, she is absolutely correct. In fact, Supervisor Alvarado is one of the few supervisors who is honest, capable, and forthright. I can only hope that when she retires we can get someone who is at least as half as capable as she is.
As much as I enjoy a spirited discussion about political correctness and censorship, I feel obligated to express my understanding of SJI’s decision to vaporize my earlier post. I accept the editor’s judgment without complaint. This site has been remarkably open and accessible in the past—an obvious reflection of courage and commitment to the free exchange of ideas. Rather than chastised, the editor(s) are to be commended for attempting to do the impossible: be fair to everyone.
My post was pulled because my comments about Blanca Alvarado were judged to be unfair. I’m sure this was not a slam dunk decision, otherwise my comments would have never been posted. Obviously, the decision was made subsequent to further reflection or the input of others. Good enough. In issues of fairness, it is always better to err in defense of the person being targeted.
Sinceramente,
Frustrated Flores Finfan
Tom, this particular blog has drifted way off of target. I truly wish that we could see more commentary on the subject at hand.
Jeff# 28: Pardon my ignorance, but who is Greg Perry?
Novice #24: Klansmen hide behind sheets. FinFan—and you ,actually—hide behind pseudonyms. Close enough analogy for me. At least you’re not venemous in your posts.
If you consider that a personal attack—oh well.
JMO – I take back #24.
Klansman, Facist, Nazi, etc are labels that are so casually and frequently tossed around these days, they’re practically meaningless.
Their only relevance is giving you insight into the person that’s attempting to smear someone with the label.
Back to the issue of the day..
Just 2 words on the BART measure, “General Fund”, should give any voter a super-sized clue that this measure is a slow motion fiscal train wreck and idiot test all rolled into 1.
Should this bill go through I will wholeheartedly agree with Rich that SCC voters truly are a bunch of morons who will deserve the scandals and malfeasance that are sure to follow.
Back to the issue at hand. Why do the county supervisors have to try to sneak a tax issue past the voters? I have to agree with Blanca. If the supervisors need more money to improve health care issues then they should say so. Will BART take that much of a load off Highways 880/280/680? I can envision seeing BART trains running up and down those corridors and being stuck in communte traffic anyway. I would not vote for any bond measure that will go towards BART.
GONZALES NAMED BART EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR – SOUTH BAY
Following a nation-wide search, Ron Gonzales has been appointed Executive Director of the South Bay Division of the Bay Area Transit District (BART), an organization formed in June 2008 to help ensure the completion of the transit system for the San Francisco – San Jose Bay Area. The appointment was also aimed at ensuring the long term financial stability of the newest extension to BART. Mr. Gonzales, a former Mayor of San Jose, California will report directly to the BART President and CEO.
In his new role, Mr. Gonzales will have primary responsibility for directing the activities of the BART – South Bay Division, which will seek, cultivate and receive extraordinary local tax revenues and major grants at the regional and national level. Mr. Gonzales will work collaboratively with the BART Board and member communities in the South Bay.
“We are extremely fortunate to have such an extraordinary professional as Ron joining us to lead the BART South Bay Division,” said Nero Hero, Chairman of the BART Board. “Ron brings to this position an outstanding track record in building community support combined with exceptional energy and passion for the mission of mass transit.”
Tom, I’ve asked this in the past and I’ll ask it again: just who stands to benefit from BART to San Jose and shouldn’t the beneficiaries pay for it?
It’s those folks who live in communities in Alameda County and beyond, and it’s companies here in Santa Clara Valley that stand to benefit from a more accessible labor pool.
I’d hazard that something like 10% of the economic benefit would accrue to those of us who live in the Valley. Let those who benefit pay, it’s the only fair approach.
JMO, I believe Mr. Perry is that famously anti-BART guy who hails from Mountain View.
Ouch! I took a beating today!
But I must refer everyone to finfan’s post #33 and his understanding of the reasons, and some say flawed judgement in pulling his posting. He even injected some good humor at the conclusion…
He seems to have a good attitude about it.
I think the rest of you overexaggerated. We try and let most things through, but occasionally we make a judgement call, right or wrong.
When not serving as Vice Mayor of Mountain View, Greg Perry sits on the VTA’s Board of Directors. His stance against BART to SJ has pissed off the Leadership Group and its followers. Recall last May’s “transportation forum” by the Commonwealth Club where Perry was bounced for political reasons, preventing the public from having a formal debate.
As to why the County Supes are pushing this “general” stealth tax, check out my group’s web site for all the details on how Guardino’s “surveys” influenced all this…
http://www.vtaridersunion.org/
Editorials and op-ed pieces in the Valley’s papers are already noting how deceptive this measure truly is. Letters to the editor in papers like the Palo Alto/Redwood City Daily News note how regressive the sales tax proposal is It is a prime example on how leadership in the “smartest place on earth” bases its actions on private polls led by the business/labor lobbying groups like the SVLG and the South Bay Labor Council.
SJI Editor-
Ah ha! I see that you’re another one who hides behind a pseudonym. For that reason many here consider you unworthy, yet they play in your sandbox. How ironic, eh?
Mal Content-
I just don’t want any emails, I’m getting flogged enough!
VTA Facts
VTA is the 2nd worst transit system in US – 85% of operations paid by tax revenues – fighting New Orleans for # 1 worst transit system
NO BART construction project has very been completed on time and on budget – you can expect hundreds of million or billions in extra unexpected costs
BART is a custom built with different rail width and electrical system that can not physically connect to other rail transit systems unless you get off / on BART and go to another transit vehicle adding 20-30 % additional commute and more than car commuting
BART is heavy rail designed for very high density transit population not our low density area – equivalent to driving 3-4 different greyhound buses to get to your work destination – very expensive to purchase and operate
BART is billions more to construct than a Caltrain or Light Rail transit on same right of way when we do not have money for more Light Rail transit and operating our existing buses
BART passenger trips and revenue projections by local government or those who will benefit are always overstated to justify the BART project and use SF and East Bay numbers which we not have for decades
Silicon Valley Leadership Group companies are transferring tens of thousand of jobs out to low cost areas and only hiring engineers and high paid people to work long hours not typical transit users
BART benefits East Bay residents who work for Silicon Valley Leadership Group companies and required multiple transfers to get to your destination and car commuters get to work faster but SVLG expects local taxpayers to pay for their employees benefit
Santa Clara County politicians expect taxpayers to pay billions more than regular rail transit costs that could physically connect to our existing and future rail system which if properly designed would cut 20-30% of the total transit commute time and equal or be better than car commuting
BART will NOT Santa Clara County’s transit problems – we will need billions more to construct more Light Rail connection lines and ten of millions per year in tax subsidies
Politicians designed transit systems do not work – look at VTA Light rail downtown or south of downtown to North San Jose jobs – takes twice as long as rush hour traffic
Questions
If Federal Transportation experts turned down BART to San Jose as poorly designed custom very high cost transit project requiring billions more to make commuting to work except the few within 2 blocks of BART station THEN how does our VTA politicians who operate 2nd worst US transit system justify to BART except as a very high cost questionable benefit politician ego project that could be named after politician with the largest ego?
DO you TRUST the SCC Supervisors to spend your tax money wisely or using common sense on approving BART spending?
WHY is the VTA Board appointed by cities rather than elected by the voters who could then demand accountability and financial responsibility?
How is BART to San Jose not a public transit Boondoggle – an unnecessary or wasteful government-funded project with no purpose other than political patronage to Silicon Valley Leadership Group who
Proposed Santa Clara County – 1/2 percent general sales regressive tax proposal is
Full Employment Public Sector Jobs TAX – Construction, BART / Transit and Public Health jobs
paid for by taxpayers mostly with no retirement plans or health benefits while public employees get generous pension plans and benefits years or decades before taxpayers can stop working to pay the taxes for these public sector jobs
HOW is this FAIR to ALL Taxpayers and Working People?
VOTE NO
(#44) “Recall last May’s “transportation forum” by the Commonwealth Club where Perry was bounced for political reasons, preventing the public from having a formal debate.”
– – –
Whenever a credible speaker is deprived the chance to be heard, be it by being shouted-down (a favorite campus tactic), ignored (the real power of the press), blacklisted (an ADL specialty), or just summarily “bounced” from a forum (hardball politics, as played by slow-pitch politicians), the public is deprived the opportunity to weigh the evidence necessary to make an informed decision. In short, we all lose.
Greg Perry, an elected official seeking to voice his unique opinion on an important public matter, was prevented from participating in a discussion taking place in a government building. A rigged dog-and-pony show in a taxpayer-owned venue. Now that, SJI fans, is censorship worth screaming about.
Face it folks, the deck is stacked, and if we modern types had the froth and fortitude of our ancestors, we would tar and feather these deceptive scumbags* and ride them out of town on an existing rail line.
Vive l’Internet, le dernier refuge de discours libre!!!
*no names from me today, my hands still sting. Just follow Mr. Bradley’s hyperlink for the names.
SJI Editor #40 “overexaggerated”? Is that like the VERY latest, or 110%? You’d have got JUG @ Bellarmine for that error.
Does anyone know details about actual people or organizations that ” bounced ” or prevented Greg Perry Vice Mayor of Mountain View from paricipating in the panel discussion or the public questions on BART ?
Please Name names and organizations
#49, from:
http://www.vtaridersunion.org/vtameetings/bartsjxpanel-04212005.html
“Mountain View City Councilmember Greg Perry – the most vocal elected official against the San Jose BART extension – was omitted from the panel at the last second by Rod Diridon, Sr. No reason was given by Mr. Diridon, Sr. on Perry’s ouster.”
Also named elsewhere on the site
http://www.vtaridersunion.org/archives/news/04052005-01.html
was Carl Guardino, of whom this was stated:
“Mountain View City Councilmember Greg Perry is a big critic of the San Jose BART extension. He has already been the target of attempts to recall him from his seat on the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority’s Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) by business interests led by SVLG CEO Carl Guardino because of his criticism of the San Jose BART extension.”
Rod Diridon Sr., as was noted in the URL above, is the husband of Commonwealth Club CEO Gloria Duffy. The Commonwealth Club was the sponsor of the “forum” last May in which Perry was ousted at the last second for no reason.
#48 / JMOC – They don’t let Bellarmine guys do the hard work like editing. Don’t you know that?