I know that this is a long shot, but I am appealing to members of the San Jose City Council to please not get along so well. It seems that, during the current unparalleled crises of confidence in city government—the resignation under threat of indictment of one of their colleagues, the public censure of the mayor and the on-going grand jury investigations—council members continue to act in an ostrich-like manner, as if we are in the most placid of times. We are not.
Madison Nguyen and Judy Chirco are two people of decency who have only the best of intentions for their city. I am sure of this. Yet they continue to go along with some of the most lunk-headed, thoughtless plans, refusing to separate themselves from the unfortunate status quo. More worrisome, they utilize lobbyists Ash Pirayou and Jerry Strangis as advisors and bagmen. This is not good. We expect more of them; they should expect more of themselves. In allowing these types of insiders and influence peddlers to sell access to them with a disturbingly calm timidity, they tarnish the city and their reputations. This is not what we would hope for in two such good people.
Now we can understand how a Manny Diaz—a lobbyist himself—awash in the special interest back-scratching of Sacramento and their tawdry exchange of votes for contributions, could be in the thrall of such men; but why Chirco and Nguyen? Both are steeped in citizen and neighborhood activism and it is distressful and puzzling to see them silent in these ongoing municipal crises, selling out the people of San Jose to a dozen selfish interests in the Coyote Valley and mute in the face of such moral quandaries of public confidence in our elected representatives. This cannot be why they got involved in politics and certainly not why they carried forward their laudable banners to City Hall with the support of so many citizens behind them.
Tom, I have often wondered about this exact issue. The answer can only be that the culture of city hall is such that the only way to survive is to go along. When we elect people to serve who have the best of intentions, but not the strenth or fortitude to stand up to the status quo, this is what we get.
We have to look at this election cycle and really evaluate who can stand up and be independent? Who has the moral courage and fiber to not change and be sucked in by the culture?
Manny Diaz? Not on your life, just look at his track record. I’ve talked to him and he just talks in circles.
Joel Wyrick? A good intentioned guy, who’s worked hard. I think he’s in it for the right reasons, but has he demonstrated any strength? I don’t know. But I do know he distanced himself from the Mardi Gras fiascos that he started a few years back. Accountability for your actions is important – Can anyone provide examples from him? I heard him talk at a forum, again not a lot of deep substance here. But he has definatley been involved in downtown and the community at large.
Sam Locardo? A fierce, independent guy who has taken on the toughest cases in the DA’s office, with a proven record of doing what’s right. Wow, have you heard him speak? He has a command of most issues – and not afraid to talk in detail about them. Any real community work to speak of?
Jay James? He’s been dependent on the union his entire life. He has bowed to every developer’s whim so he could provide jobs to his Building Trades folks. Talking to him it’s clear he memorized a few talking points, but not much substance if you dig any deeper. Not the sharpest tool in the shed either. Aside from his union work, what has he done? From what I have heard him talk about, nothing of substance in his district.
Pete Constant? Another independent guy who fought hard to make and keep San Jose safe as a SJ cop. From what I hear, he gave up a big part of his health and wellness protecting all of us from bad people. And not just a one trick pony, he has experience in business too. I heard he speak at a community forum and it was clear he had much more knowledge of the issues then the others. Sounds like he’s been involved in the community for years, not jst recently so that he could build a resume.
I think SJI should talk more about these two critical council races. Remember, any mayor elected will still need 5 other votes to get anything done.
Hi Tom.
I had the distinct pleasure of meeting Dave Pandori yesterday in person in his office. I was aware of his stance towards Coyote Valley development and I ask for his take on North First Street development which he gave me to my satisfaction. The MN article on the hidden emails regarding the Race have solidified my vote for Dave. Now please would you explain to us political newcomers why you rail against Ash Pirayou and Jerry Strangis. Many of us don’t know them or of them and therefore your negative comments come across as maybe a little hysterical. I’m sure you have good reason. Would you please explain it.
So Madison Nguyen and Judy Chirco “go native” after getting into City Hall. This is shocking? What would really be shocking is if they were standing up to the special interests as you suggest. We’re more likely to see the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy than an honest politician.
Any new Mayor has to learn to count. As long as six or more councilmembers are united in the same agenda for San Jose, the city will continue to move forward.
For those who don’t like the policies, they must persuade part of that majority to bolt. Hence, the artfully written blog by Tom.
I only differ in the method of persuasion.
Certainly, ‘Madison Nguyen and Judy Chirco are two people of decency who have only the best of intentions for their city.’
But then to berate them for associating with Jerry and Ash, who are also ‘two people of decency who have only the best of intentions for their city.’
The innuendo is that any lobbyist is a bad lobbyist is not justifiable in my opinion.
Certainly there are honest policy differences with economic interests at stake for both sides on issues.
Let’s debate the merits of the policy instead of inferring any Councimember opposed is either stupid or on the take.
Last, Chirco and Nguyen voted to censure both the Mayor and Gregory. They just didn’t pound their chests, ala Chuck and David while doing it.
All San Jose community and neighborhood leaders and involved residents should be concerned about 2 important topics to be discussed at United Neighborhood’s Public Policy Forum – on Saturday, April 29 between 9- 12 noon at San Jose City Hall – Council Chambers to clearly need to understand these important public issues since most do not
1) Why regardless of who is elected, San Jose needs a local Sunshine law and other open government changes to have a open, responsive and accountable San Jose city government.
9-10:30 am – What do we need to have open San Jose city government?
Why a single city calendar, public outreach, adequate ( 5 or 10 day ) notice of pending City Council actions, easy access to public records, clean money political campaigns, how city task forces and study groups appointees are selected since they determine city public policy, land use and spending decisions are issues that should matter to you, your family and neighbors.
How these proposed changes will affect how our City Council spends your tax dollars on things that matter to the residents that will improve your quality of life and basic city services.
2) Are you happy with low level of San Jose city services, delayed street, sidewalk and sewer maintenance, restricted hours at our parks and closing community centers or our city public policies, land use and spending decisions?
10:30 – 12 Noon – How Public Policy and Land Use decisions affect Jobs, Tax Revenue and City Services.
Do you know what San Jose’s major problem is – we have lowest tax revenues and jobs per resident of local and large California cities which drives many city land use and spending decisions since we do not have taxes to pay for basic city services.
Part of the solution is not to wait years for the economy to improve but to add small and neighborhood jobs, cost effectively use economic development dollars to include auditing promised economic benefits and retain our 25% or more of our retail sales taxes lost to other local cities.
Unless we do something to add jobs and increase tax revenues it will only get worst.
Yes, we can spend our taxes better but we need more tax revenue.
Yes, our city staff can be more efficient but we are the #10 largest city with city staffing of #34 city which affect our ability to provide city services especially if our elected officials routinely interfere with city staff and do not provide the orginal city staff reports prior to the many politically requested changes as part of any proposed City Council actions
We have invited knowledgeable panel members from academia, business, community organizations, developers, neighborhoods, labor and Mercury News to discuss the issues and will be taking audience questions
We all want San Jose’s to have a improved future and great quality of life but if you do not know what are our challenges how will you participate in the improvements? Look forward to seeing many of you at Public Policy Forum – Saturday April 29 between 9- 12 noon at San Jose City Hall – Council Chambers
PS. If you have not seen – Ladder of Citizen Participation suggest you read it to understand some of our challenges since San Jose city government is not using our greatest resource – our residents knowledge and ability to solve complex challenges
http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/sherry-arnstein/ladder-of-citizen-participation.html
Neighborhood and Community Leader’s – San Jose Mayor Candidate Debate will be on May 13 – 9-11 am at City Hall – with Meet DA candidates between 8:30-9 am
You can submit questions for All Mayor candidates to [email protected]
YOU WANT TO START FRESH WITH PANDORI THERE’S NO FORKED TONGUE THERE!!
no wonder people boycott that garbage
Tom, you surprise me. When you were mayor, you required total allegiance; everybody to be “A Good German” and go along with your program. If people weren’t 100% behind you, you considered them to be disloyal.
When I ran for council in 1988, one of the things the Murky News mused about me was that they didn’t believe I was collegial enough; they wondered if I could get along if elected.
I believed in about 80%-85% of what you were doing as mayor, and if I had been elected (thank god I was not) I would have gone along 80%-85% of the time. But I would have balked vociferously at the things with which I disagreed.
Politics since long before Jess Unruh and LBJ has been—at all levels of government—if you want to get along, go along. Politicians from school board level to President make deals, give a nod and a wink, compromise, or just plain give in.
There may be quantitatively more problems in San Jose than in prior administrations, but qualitatively, there have always been leaders and followers; there ha always been silent acceptance.
9 – You seem to enjoy comparing folks to Nazi’s and Germans. Interesting.
Anyway, the comparison to today’s pathetic actions at City Hall and what happened during Tom’s time is weak at best. It’s one thing to go along to get along regarding policy within the city but it’s another thing to do that with wrongdoing. I don’t believe Tom was ever involved in any scandals unlike the current GonzalesChavez regime. If you stand silent while misdeeds are done, you are just as guilty as those commiting the acts.
We do agree on one thing though, thank God you weren’t elected.
#2 – I was also wondering why we haven’t heard more about these other races. Anyone?
Manny, Joel, Sam, Jay, Pete – care to weigh in?
Richard, how could Nguyen vote to censure Gregory, when she’s in his seat now and he was already off the council when she arrived?
I think you meant: Chirco voted to censure both the mayor and Terry Gregory, and Nguyen voted to censure the mayor.
correct?
As for voting to censure, when you wait until the last minute to hop on a bandwagon (less you look like a fool for voting otherwise), claiming to be a reformer is weak at best. I hope these ladies are at least getting something good for their districts on other votes. I haven’t seen much to impress me out in District 5. Besides our two new Target Stores.
Dan/Rich – the lobbyists I mentioned are in this business for one reason: power and money, mostly the latter. They are not concerned people trying to aid the process. They care nothing for our city and offer “access” not “good judgment.” Their role as bag men is a disgrace. They prosper most when San Jose is confused and reeling. When all these money changers leave city hall’s environs, we will be much better off. Hopefully the next mayor will do that exact thing. TMcE
For #2 Kevin Johnson
I am in the District 3 race too.
Maybe you missed the Metro article last week.
There were two forums, on the 12th and 19th of April which Jose Posadas and Candy Russell spoke as candidates also.
You are correct in asking for a council person who will not COMPLY with this nonsense. In additioin you have to make sure you don’t get someone who abuses authority.
As I said at the Northside Neighborhood Forum, Tom McEnery brought us the Strong Mayor Initative. My follow up comment was that Ron has abused this power.
So in terms of non compliance, I am your man. As a matter of fact, my father who graduated from Bellarmine in 1959, said the reason he didn’t send me to Bellarmine, was because I don’t comply and would have been thrown out the first year.
Going along or getting along to go along and get along, is the way people get killed, literally. We have to make on the spot corrections to stay alive and keep people healthy.
So, that is also what you get from me, on the spot corrections. I have survived combat, jumping out of airplanes and sleeping in toxic stew and the reason is because people corrected me along the way.
As a US Army Drill Sergeant I witnessed so much abuse of power, that I know what the over assumption of authority is. I know what abuse of power is and you won’t see me do it. And……if one of these clowns tries to do it after I get elected, I will be the one to stop them iin their tracks. Even if they have to call Security.
Peace be upon You
Those ethnic comparisons and insults that JohnM O uses only speak for the character of the man. I’ll bet the next time he goes to his office on W. Santa Clara and there are fresh doughnuts in the street he’ll be calling NAACP and MACA to complain. I can’t imagine why he wasn’t elected to the council.
We would all get along if we tout “Downtown is a great downtown”. We should just focus on downtown and forget about Coyote Valley, alas North San Jose. North San Jose must remain a sleepy industrail area with some medium density housing. The real density and concentration of urban area must be downtown. Throw everything you have in the downtown area to make it the best! That’s how we can achieve our status as real city, and find a whole new industry which would be diversified. We would all get along at this point.
JMO’Conner – How can you be around so long, pay so much attention, and learn so little. While I certainly had an agenda, it was one I spoke of in my campaign & each time I made a speech: rebuilt the tax base, stop sprawl, make the downtown a source of pride, and let the elected guys decide not the special interests. I wanted those around me to have a moral compass & they did. Transparency was there; no one failed to know where I stood. And I tolerated strong opposition/opinions from staff: Manager, Police Chief, RDA honcho,Planning Director. Remember, your mavericks can save you from a “Grand Prix” fiasco. Also, John, I encouraged people to do the right thing, not be “good Germans.” If you don’t know the difference, you are blind indeed. TMcE
I thought they were just talking about possible money, some money, maybe just a little money, or maybe lots millions, but not 4 million, maybe two million, or maybe nothing, thought they were just being cordial, or maybe friendly, but not needing money not that much, maybe one million or maybe nothing or 3 million but not that much. Then surpirse they want Four million not two maybe six why did they surprise me I thought or maybe I didn’t think. Now the Nor Cal Garbage thing with the 11 MILLION, I think I knew about this before hand or maybe I didn’t but thought I heard about it and it was only a few million but when they came to the coucil I didn’t know they wanted to change unions or maybe they did but I ddidn’t hear them or I did but didn’t know it was so much or which union they were changing to. Idid know about it but wasn’t really sure if the Mayor had told me I want’ sure or how much but maybe he did and I didn’t remember. Thank you citizens of san jose for making mr the front runner of maybe not.
Cindy Chavez
Tom:
I think Dan has a valid question. You call to task Ash and Jerry. Perhaps you can share why, if even in general terms.
Like others here, I see the council race happening right now in the downtown as one of the critical races. This district has all the elements of an entire city within it and the council members are in a good position to run for higher office.
So, it would seem that a person of character and integrity is required. All candidates have fundraising limits imposed on them based on the number of residents within the district.
A candidate who held office previously, has left his fundraising account for a previous race open and continues to raise money for that account which presumably is going to go towards the council race – not the one he previously lost.
Can someone help me out, is this legal? Are there any expenditure limits? Can he lend himself money from this account to puff up the council account? Can he spend money out of that account for the council race?
And, aside from legal, is it ethical? We all know that the use of big bucks can alter the complection of a race – is this how we want to get a council member?
Thanks Tom.
Do we know which mayoral candidates Ash Pirayou and Jerry Strangis are supporting? I know you said that Madison and Judy are using them but what about mayoral candidates?
I heard that channel 11 is sponsoring a mayoral debate next week, but I cannot find when it is being broadcast. Any idea what day and time this will be on?
Why have we not heard more about the other council races? Put simply, it is because the Mayoral race is the 800 lb. gorrilla in this year’s election. All other council races, including downtown, has been largely ignored by the media and by the public.
Though I am a candidate in District 3, as Dennis so kindly mentioned, I try to have balance in my life. I still work fulltime, I still put my family and my faith above all else, and I still spend time volunteering in my community and neighborhood.
I have no desire to be a career politician nor career candidate. After this election, regardless of the outcome, it will be my last exercise in campaigning. I shall return to a life of a private citizen and of civic volunteerism.
For those inclined to learn more about me visit the site http://www.communityvoice.org. It is a simple effort to speak on issues that residents have shared with me over the years of my involvement in my downtown community.
You can also find the websites for the other candidates there too.
#20 you are right, something is not legal.
The San Jose Charter , Section 402 (b) states very specifically.
COUNCIL MEMBER. No person who has been elected to the City Council as a Council member in any Council District in the City for two (2) successive four-year terms, after the effective date of this Section, shall be eligible to run for election as a member of the Council in any Council District, nor appointed to serve as a Council member for any additional successive term
Manny Diaz states that he was a member of the San Jose City council from 1994 to 2000, that means he was elected to successive terms.
Does anybody at city hall follow the charter anymore?
The last amendement to this Section 402 was in 1994, the year Manny was District 5’s city council man.
Somebody needs to shake this tree, sounds like #14 might be on to something.
The forum is sponsored by SJSU. Titled the SJSU Mayoral Forum to be hosted by
T. J. Holmes of the NBC 11.
the Master of Ceremony is Ramon Johnson, Public Affairs for KSJS
It will be at 11:30 until 1:30 in the University Theatre, 5th and San Fernando, San Jose State University.
The date of this forum is May 1st.
SAN JOSE POLITICS IN NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
Boston, Massachusetts – April, 26, 2006 – In a ground breaking article in the New England Journal of Medicine, an internationally recognized authority reported on the merging of politics and medicine.
Dr. F. Lee Bailey, a neurologist at Harvard University, published the results of his decades long research on political memory loss and the psychological and medical condition know as amnesia. Amnesia (or amnaesia in Commonwealth English) is a condition in which memory is disturbed.
In order validate the medical and psychological concept of amnesia, Dr Bailey spent many months in San Jose, California studying the behavior of local government officials and their medical conditions.
The study, funded by a consortium of pharmaceutical companies, was designed to explore current medical theory which indicates that the causes of amnesia are organic or functional.
Organic causes of amnesia include damage to the brain, through trauma or disease, or use of certain (generally sedative) drugs. For example, in San Jose city government, elected officials have been harshly criticized for self-serving activities, such as favoring certain business interests, accepting gifts, like cases of high priced California wines, free dinners at posh restaurants, cash loans and similar questionable behavior.
For many weeks and months a San Jose elected official denied wrong doing and repeatedly stated that he could not remember any of the details of the various incidents that many in San Jose considered unethical and possibly illegal. According to Dr. Bailey, this particular person, now a former Council member, was “…apparently on drugs and should have received medical treatment.”
Functional causes of amnesia are psychological factors, such as defense mechanisms. Hysterical post-traumatic amnesia is an example of this. Amnesia may also be spontaneous, in the case of transient global amnesia.
In the San Jose case, a current member of the City Council running for Mayor and fearing criticism for past actions that have kept a number of major business decisions from being disclosed to the public. This elected official now asserts that she could not remember specific information about proposals that ultimately cost tax payers millions of dollars. “This is a classic case of a defense mechanism aimed at protecting a person’s stature with others, in this case the voters of San Jose,” concluded Dr. Bailey.
Finally, the study concludes that this type of amnesia is more common in middle-aged to elderly people, and usually lasts less than 24 hours.
#24 post by legal.
With Manny Diaz now out of the district #3 race.
Where will his fund raising go?
Dear San Jose:
On 4/25, Don Gagliardi posted the following…“Pete Campbell #22, as well as all the other folks calling Cindy Chavez a crook and a liar…”
I invite every visitor to San Jose Inside.com to go back to my post on 4/25 and re-read my comments. (#22). Please also re-read Mr. Gagliardi’s comments.
I did not call Cindy Chavez a crook or a liar. What I did say was, “The improved reporting of the Mercury News helps those of us who are supporting other candidates to make the important case that a Chavez Administration will just be a continuation of the Gonzales Administration.”
Mr. Gagliardi: I believe that it is in your interests to print a correction.
Pete Campbell
Voter # 10: I don’t know whether I didn’t make myself clear enough, or you are either too young or too uneducated to get the reference to “the Good German”. In either event, we’re not communicating.
Tom was an ethical, concerned, honest, effective mayor. He jump started a moribund San Jose. I have never even hinted that Tom was involved in any scandals…because he wasn’t. But that doesn’t make him Ghandi or Jesus Christ. He also railroaded through changes to the city charter that made the mayor much stronger, and thus allowed folks like Gonzo to be able to do what Gonzo did…with Guerra’s help, no doubt.
Questioning/debating is at the core of our system of government.
I use the German and Nazi sloganeering because it hits home. In my view Tom required TOTAL allegiance. That’s the good german phrase.
Re using Nazi, it’s my way of hitting home that people who have a point of view that brooks no oppoisition, and that they know what’s best for all of us, oftentimes describes the preservationists who want to spend someone else’s money on something they and only they believe is worth saving, rather than doing the right thing and spending their own money on what they and only they think is worth saving.
All that preservation stuff on PUBLIC money is fine, as long as there is enough public money to pay for it, AFTER paying for police, fire, roads, sewers, and other infrastructure, and public health. If there ain’t enough money to pay for the necessities, the preservationists need to raise private money to do their good deeds.
People like you just don’t get it—there is no inexhaustable supply of money to pay for everyone’s pet project. Unfortunately, people like you are still in the majority, so we either cut ESSENTIAL public services to pay for the dilettantism, or we raise taxes. Both are bad “solutions”.
Tom # 13—- BOY, did you hit the nail on the head!!!!
Dan #15—there was neither an ethnic comparison nor an insult. The Phrase :“good German” was used by the Nazis @ the Nuremburg trials as a defense. By that they meant that they did what they did for the good of the Fatherland. Thankfully, that defense was rejected. I thought you were an intelligent/educated guy, and would have heard of that defense during your education. Guess you slept through that class.
Tom #17: I agree with all the positive things you said about yourself in # 17. I have never questioned your moral compass or your ethics. But gimme a break—people who disagreed with you got short shrift.
And by the way, to learn the correct spelling of my surname, just look at the big sign on the hosppital along 880, nee 17.
Tom,
Like any good attorney would, you have posed a question that you already know the answer to. The members of the San Jose City Council circle the wagons when times get tough. And newer Councilmembers are expected to support the company line until they earn their stripes.
What I find interesting is the complaining from certain Councilmembers about the secrecy of both the Mayor and Vice Mayor. Why are they complaining? They all, with the exception of Chuck Reed, endorsed the Mayor for re-election in 2002. And most of them have endorsed the Vice Mayor in her bid for mayor. If they want to say what they mean and mean what they say, they should withdraw their endorsement of the Vice Mayor, explaining that openess in government out weighs their political nicey nice. I won’t hold my breath, however.
#33 he doesn’t have that much longer anyway. How about the airport? Oh, yea he’s dead to in the Bush Administration.
Tom,
Ash and Jerry do make their living in San Jose as lobbyists, but that doesn’t mean they don’t care about the city.
Jerry once ran for City Council, has helped local nonprofits and rarely—if ever—leaves the City. He cares deeply about San Jose, he lives in San Jose, has his office in Willow Glen, went to Lincoln High School and all of his clients are required to give nonprofits a donation.
He is a close friend and supporter of Rob Bettencourt—and I believe he was a close friend of yours at one time. I know he has tremendous respect for you.
Ash and his wife, Bianca are also tremendous boosters for San Jose. They love the city. I have personally use Ash as an attorney because he is the most knowledgeable regarding the myriad of local, state and federal election laws.
He gained whatever influence he has by insuring his clients did not violate the extremely complicated political election laws that some on this board want to expand. He is extremely ethical as a lawyer, lobbyist and political advisor.
But much more to the point, he loves the City.
Both of these gentlemen have clients whose projects and issues they believe will enhance the City, make it better and will provide housing and jobs for the 21st Century.
They have won some and lost some—they do not control elected officials, but their advice is sought by clients and elected officials alike.
I don’t agree with all of their positions, we have opposed each other in political races, and we have agreed on many candidates and issues, but we remain friends and I do not challenge their integrity.
I, hopefully, have the same relationship with you.
We can all disagree, we can all have an economic interest and we can all love this City.
It is the merit of the arguments that should carry the day, everything else should be irrelevant to the decision—regardless of who wins or loses economically.
Rich—You were doing pretty good there until your last paragraph—“It is the merit of the arguments that should carry the day, everything else should be irrelevant to the decision—regardless of who wins or loses economically.” Are you really saying that ethics and integrity have nothing to do with it? I hope not, but that’s how it reads.
Falcon,
If the decision is made on the merits of the issue or project, then it is an ethical decision by definition.
#20 and #24…
I think this is the loophole in the charter from section 402b:
“The above shall not disqualify any person from running for election to the Office of Mayor or for any term or terms which are not successive.”
http://www.sanjoseca.gov/clerk/charter.htm
So, Manny is allowed to come back. Just not serve three terms IN A ROW. Corollary: Just think, all your favorite councilmembers can come back after one term off! Even better, if they switch districts, they can be back in as little as two years!
Term Limits=fraud
We’ve always had term limits, its called an election.
#25
I received an email from KNTV saying the debate would be on a live web-cast at 7PM.
Are there 2 debates that day? If so, where is the KNTV debate?
5. Rich- Sorry Nguyen didn’t vote to censure Gregory, she wasn’t in office, since she took his seat.
I stand corrected, Chirco voted to censure Gregory, Nguyen took his seat.
Both voted to censure the Mayor. I hope the point that both are honest was not lost in the details. . .
Of course, you don’t mean to say that just because they voted to censure they are honest. They may be honest, but that vote doesn’t tell us anything.
I WOULD’NT TAKE MY DOG TO THAT HOSPITAL , NOT THE BEST IN TOWN
#39 R.R
Do the facts matter? Jerry went to Willow Glen High. Not important, but you were as correct about that as you are about Cindy.
To answer my own post #44
I just received an email from KNTV 11 regarding the mayoral debate on Monday. This is what it says.
“The debate is being held in City Council Chambers at San Jose’s City Hall. The event is co-sponsored by NBC11, The League of Women Voters and the San Jose Mercury News.”
Since their first email said it being web-cast live at 7 PM I am going to go out on a limb and say it starts at 7.
Is Manny allowed to use the money he is currently raising in his lost Senate race on the Council race?
Does anyone find it inappropriate to be raising wads of money in direct conflict with the spirit of the regulations on fundraising and expenditures?
Does anyone think it likely Manny will again have defamatory hit pieces which come mysteriously and attack the other candidates?
Wouldn’t it have been wonderful if the Charter actually prevented someone from hopping districts (Manny) to run for office repeatedly?
My apologies, Jerry Strangis did go to Willow Glen—not Lincoln—as a former Prospect High alum, I get all the Willow Glen High Schools confused.
Jerry played football there against James T. Beall—who went to Bellarmine.
John Michael O’Connor (did I spell it right) if you in your long life had spent a good portion of your life in Germany as I have. living amongst real Nazis, as I have, maybe just maybe you wouldn’t use these insulting expressions you learned in a classroom. Because of the wonderful reputation of the Nazis, it is against the law, now, in Germany to call someone a Nazi in an amusing or insulting way as you do.
For your information, I am not advovcating using public funds to “hug trees”, save salamanders or honor our heritage and legacy. I certainly believe that the Del Monte property should be developed into something useful as is being done. But……I believe some of the design of the usage could be done to honor the heritage of the place and honoring those those citizens (mostly immigrants) who spent their lives building homes and raising families employed by that industry. I have relatives who were amongst those families.
I surely realize that the days of the agricultural industry in this county are past. I surely realize that Coyote Valley no longer has an industry to sustain itself. I just don’t want to see it paved over. There are intelligent uses and designs. I grieve over the loss of the “Valley of Her Hearts Delight” of my childhood. However, I am not interested in spending one cent of your hard earned tax dollar John, to preserve any parts of those childhood memories. There are many public spirited organizations who honor those memories today. I have been aware of the McInery family legacy and heritage in our central core since I was a child. I was very aware of Tom’s tenure as mayor. He was one of our very best. Let me know when the people decide to honor you with the JOHN MICHAEL O’CONNOR building and I don’t mean the hospital. Based on your entries in these blogs, I am not interested in meeting you. In the meantime you can keep up with the weekend doughnuts in the street in front of your office. Just don’t step on any protected banana slugs at Pasa Tiempo.
Sorry Tom I should know better. I know it’s McEnery I just missed the correction before I hit “Submit.”
John Michael – sorry about the improper spelling of your surname and congratulations on the hospital being named in your honor : well deserved. Tom McHenry
Tom 33,
Buildings shouldn’t be named after people who are still alive.
Oh wait, you don’t agree with that!
R.R. #51 #48 #39
You still are confused,in more ways than one! Willow Glen and Lincoln are both San Jose schools. You know the city in which you claim to know who is most fit to be it’s mayor. Willow Glen is located in the Willow Glen area. Lincoln is located in the Rose Garden area not the Willow Glen area. They are both located in District 6. I know under Cindy’s and Ron’s Mini-Mayor program you and Cindy only learned about or cared for Cindy’s own little district , not the rest of the city..But when David Pandori becomes mayor that will all change. He will encourage council members to work for the good of the city as a whole.
Just the facts,
#52 Some of you folks are soooo easy.
I guess Cindy is right; schools and neighborhoods are identifiable, do go together and the voters do care.
Thanks for proving my, I mean her, point.
#53
And your point was?
when David Pandori becomes mayor that will all change. He will encourage council members to work for the good of the city as a whole.
– encourage council just like when he was on council and it was 10-1 david against the council – yea right – welcome to san jose’s version of arnold
– why would they listen now and did not when he was on council – yea right – because voters elected him Mayor but he only has 1 vote and they have 8-10 – so dream on
#55 dream on,cate
Two things will be better right off the bat when David Pandori becomes mayor. Gonzo and Chavez will be gone!
The problem with Joel Wyrick is that he already has created such a mess with the Maudi Gras event that we cant afford a guy like that. One day he takes credit for it and the next day he’s not responsible for the havoc. You cant have it both ways. I’ve heard him talk and I’ve seen some of his shady affiliates. The last thing we need is
another self serving slum lord that will do anything for a buck. If he’s elected, keep your eye on the redevelopement money.
Take a look at his bogus non-profit business status.
Take a look at how he’s still running illegal boarding houses on 13th st.
He’s a sloppy business person and you wont have to dig very deep to find the scandals.