Compliance with Strict Greenhouse Emissions Law Cited
California moved to the front of local government efforts to fight global warming Wednesday when Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed legislation calling for a radical reduction of greenhouse gasses by dissolving the Santa Clara County government.
Citing numerous studies that show “unusually high” levels of carbon dioxide emission emanating from the county supervisors’ chambers, the state has ordered a temporary closure pending a comprehensive study and plan.
“We simply must do everything in our power to slow down global warming before it is too late,” Schwarzenegger said at a lavish press conference at SJI.com headquarters. “And putting a cork in these blowhards was a significant first step.”
The governor said he would introduce a bill in early October that will severely limit the number of letters, words and sentences the supervisors will be able to utilize during their sessions. Inside sources are indicating that the consonants “D,” “G,” “J,” “M,” and “Y,” will be outlawed along with vowels “A” and “U.” Other provisions will limit sentences to a total of five words, and only three sentences can be strung together in a single breath. However, the supervisors’ general lack of grammatical “aptitude” and frequent syntax errors will not be addressed in this bill.
Although most hail the effort, critics of the plan suggest that it will only drive these hot-air bags to positions in local government where there are no regulations and will probably lead to more damage in the long run.
“Simply curtailing one’s ability to speak will not decrease the amount of gas escaping from the useless drivel uttered,” said an unusually chatty San Jose Councilmember Judy Chirco. “so I challenge them to take a vow of silence during meetings as I have.”
Other news on the Schwarzenegger front – local history buffs and those preservation rascals at PAC*SJ will be happy to know that the Governor has infused some sex appeal to this field often associated with late night reading by insomniacs (didn’t YOU fall asleep in your history classes too?).
Last week, on the advice of his San Jose advisor on historic issues, Mayor/historian Tom McEnery, he appointed Maria Shriver’s personal interior decorator, David Phoenix, to the State Historical Resources Commission:
http://gov.ca.gov/index.php?/press-release/4023/ (scroll down to appointment 14)
a prestigious board that the Governor mistakenly targeted for marginalization in the early days of his administration. The Commission rules over the tedium of National Register applications among other “policy” duties involving cultural resources statewide.
Democrat David Phoenix is well suited for this new role, having worked for Ralph Lauren Home Furnishings. David, bringing in his experience with CEQA issues involving historic resources, was charged by Maria Shriver with the responsibility of ripping out Nancy Reagan’s interior layout of Ronald’s suburban governor’s mansion in Sacramento before it reached the 50-year old threshold for California Register eligibility.
McEnery was quoted this week, that “Mr. Phoenix will provide a fresh new look for this Commission with the same magic as his 2004 project ‘Maria Shriver: making over First Lady’.”
http://www.davidphoenix.com/press.htm
It is rumored, but not yet confirmed, that San Jose Inside will be inviting Mr. Phoenix to stand-in for Leonard McKay on occasion and bring up the ratings of SJI’s Monday morning history lessons.
I know you write in jest. However, if anyone paid just the smallest attention to the work and responsibilities of the County and the BOS, you would rethink.
While the cities get to deal with city stuff, the County is serving the most vulnerable and needy. The undesirables, the abused, the poor.
It is no wonder you all hardly pay attention since people actually doing work is not sexy or interesting to the Merc and others.
Hopefully the reduction in foul emissions will cause the exterior of the county building to deoxidize and lose that rusted, abandoned factory patina. That, combined with a significant reduction in the amount of drool puddling in the interior, would go along way towards finally making the building attractive to sentient beings.
Sacramento has been put on Air Quality Alert awaiting the outcome of the 24th Assembly District race
Sacramento Air Quality Management District issued a statement – ” We live with unusually high levels of carbon dioxide emission emanating from the State legislature but after an alert and emission data furnished by Bay Area Air Quality Management District ( BAAQMD) We have after a comprehensive study determined if Jim Beall is elected Sacramento will suffer the highest levels of hot air, carbon dioxide emissions and global warming of any location in North America”
They indicated the EPA will require them to issue Beall a Cease and Desist order to Beall prohibiting his speaking. BAAQMD indicate that carbon dioxide emissions from the County building although still high will be significantly reduced and equal to San Jose City Hall. These 2 buildings with the Chamber, SB Labor and Silicon Valley Leadership buildings are the 5 highest producers of hot air in the county
Jim Beall responded “I am only exercising my free speech rights like most other politicians and lobbyists do in Santa Clara County and people love to hear me speak”
Just an observation. When David Pandori clearly won the big 5 debate in the primary, everyone had something to say.
Now that Cindy has won the big 5 debate in the general, nary a word.
Double standard?
http://www.rant.sv411.com
Again, just an observation.
Welcome back John—-ouch!
I know exactly what you mean Rich. I looked forward to commentary about the debate last night and instead found that good news for Chavez cannot be reported. I read part of your post earlier today at
http://www.mayorwatch.blogspot.com
thank you for covering the real issues Rich, if anyone wants to read about the debate check Mayor Watch or
http://www.rant.sv411.com
That’s because David is still the winner.
Besides, how could Chavez win the Big 5 when there were only 2 (and they are both very small.)
Given the damaged state of both candidates, there are no winners in this mess. The biggest losers in this fiasco are the citizens of San Jose.
For the second time this week a Chavez supporter has tried to spin the established format of this site into evidence of some kind of conspiracy. First it was Single Gal’s Tuesday column, where she had the audacity to post her obviously pre-prepared blog without first checking the Cindy Chavez ticker tape for breaking campaign news. Now here comes Mr. Robinson and friend, eager to shake their fingers and chastise everyone here for the high crime of simply enjoying another excellent edition of SJI’s Friday satire.
Your efforts stink of desperation. Had you a real leader to support, you might not have to stoop to such childish tactics. Next election, pick a better candidate.
Wow! Things are really changing on this site. I actually agree with FinFan. Maybe there is hope for SJ after all.
#5. Rich – The only thing Chavez won this week was the mud slinging contest, with a lot of help from Reed. Neither candidate “won” the debate.
That’s why people aren’t talking about it. The debate was a non-starter for both candidates.
Chavez failed to effectively capitalize on a week’s worth of momentum and Reed failed to use the debate to beat down a week’s worth of bad publicity or launch an effective counter-attack.
Nobody came out of the Rep with a changed mind. No candidate won, no candidate lost.
Thanks for the advice Finfan! Next election I’ll be sure to choose the candidate that steals taxpayer money so that he can deceive the public into thinking he’s a good guy. And who knows, maybe that candidate will break the law by writing off these “charitable” donations in his tax returns. You sure know how to pick your candidates!
Finfan and others,
No conspiracy theory, I just think the silence is deafening.
As for the big 5 debate—and it refers to the sponsors, not the participants—there certainly was a clear “winner”.
As for minds changed, most people I’ve talked with believe the entire race has flipped.
What was interesting about the debate was the new juxataposition of the candidates.
Reed, arrogant, unrepentive—allowing for “mistakes” without acutally admitting wrongdoing. Chavez, articulate, funny, warm and inclusive.
If this election is a referendum on the current Mayor, what we saw is what many of us have been saying for months.
Reed’s style, philosophy and decision making are far closer to the current Mayor. Cindy’s style, philosophy and decision making are more in line with a Susan Hammer.
That makes the choice rather simple.
What a shock that Rich thnks Cindy won the debate and that the race has flipped. The only surprise for me at the debate was that Cindy didn’t have the “deer in headlights” look she had at the first debate. The fact is, Cindy could have soiled herself on stage and Rich and RC/Justin would have proclaimed her victorious. I look forward to November when Cindy’s propagandists will finally have to accept defeat.
#12. Interesting. You say that most people you’ve talked with say the entire race has flipped. Because that you are a partisan for Chavez that perception does not surprise me.
I’ve also spoken with a lot of people this week and had a somewhat different experience.
The sense I get is twofold: 1) Reed made a major blunder that has harmed his position as The Reformer 2) On balance most people think his check reimbursement problems do not begin to erase the baggage Chavez carries with Gonzales, Norcal, Tropicana, Grand Prix, etc. (Talk about “unrepentant!”)
Maybe we travel in different circles (I’m not involved in campaigns) but I have not heard of any Reed supporters switching allegiance to Chavez. I have, however, heard some take the position that he is now “the lesser of two evils.”
If I were Chavez I would be focusing on undecided or unlikely voters. Those are the people she might win. The anti-Chavez voters aren’t going to flip. The best Cindy can hope for is they stay home on Election Day.
If I were Reed I would be preparing a series of ads and mailers that hammer Chavez about the aforementioned weaknesses. People are likely to forgive misspent thou$ands when compared to misspent million$.
If I were Pandori I’d put a big sign in front of my house that reads “I Told You So!”
Ben,
Both you and Rich have written about Reed committing crimes by deducting his reimbursed expenses on his income tax.
Do either of you have the evidence to show the rest of us?
Just had an interesting discussion with my neighbor. He said that everyone he has discussed the mayor’s race with is….supporting Cindy.
From what I can tell out and about I am finding the same thing….no wonder Reed hasn’t posted anymore polls.
#15
Reedimbursement announced he would make his tax returns public. He had documents available EXCEPT his charitable contributions that he deducted. Why is that? If he does not release his charitable deductions he should resign.
What does he have to hide, maybe a felony tax charge? Release the deductions and clear the air!
#13
If she would have soiled herself then I would have only proclaimed her winning the debate with the radio audience—
Chuck made many blunders in the debate, number one, he did not apologize. Sounds like the Gonzo strategy and it will fail. Number two he lied again about his votes—In earlier debates he has stated that he supported SNI—fact is, he voted against it.
When confronted with the question as to why he did not support state Prop 40 (Parks Bond) he says Cindy misrepresented his position—in fact he voted against it in a resolution the council took to support the measure—why would he lie?
When confronted with the question as to why he did not support a federal house of reps. transportation bill that included 10 million for the Coleman/880 interchange, 5.5 million for Guadalupe Park, and 5.5 million for Coyote Creek Trail, he says Cindy misrepresented his position—in fact he voted against a resolution of support the council took to suppor the measure—why would he lie?
We don’t need another go it alone Mayor who has trouble with ethics and telling the truth—when will Mr. Reedimbursement disclose his charitable contributions so we can see if he deducted his reedimbursements on his income taxes?
RC-
There is a difference between supporting a proposition, and believing the city should take a position.
Many people, including me, believe that the city has more important things to do than take stands on ballot measures.
The reason is simple. The city council need to spend more time reading the garbage contract, and less time passing resolutions on things they cannot change, like prop 40.
In my own city, the city council does not take positions on most ballot measures. That doesn’t mean we oppose all of them. It just means that telling voters how to vote is not a high priority.
RC – You say “We don’t need another go it alone Mayor who has trouble with ethics and telling the truth.” I agree. So who do we vote for since neither candidate can live up to that?
Keep spinning RR and Reality Check…it won’t work on this website. Nobody will be flipping from Reed to Chavez. All this reimbursement stuff is just a temporary diversion from the fact that Cindy’s ethics are questionable too.
Mr. Perry (#19) wrote:
“Many people, including me, believe that the city has more important things to do than take stands on ballot measures.”
Do you really believe that a politician’s meaningless, unaccountable posturing is unimportant? If so, could you please share with Mr. Robinson and the Reality Spinners where you were vaccinated against the dreaded Bullshit Virus. I fear they’re in pain and suffering horribly.
Once again, Mal Content has left his hot dog stand, which is near the B/A Building, and read enough of the newspapers on the bus benches, because he is too cheap to buy one, and hauled it over to MLK to write another ode to Chuck.
Chuck Reed is dirty, was dirty, and is in the process of lawyering up. Reed was never Mr. Integrity, as he is blocking through the City Attorney and through other means, including his incompetent Chief of Staff, Armando Gomez, several public record act requests.
But it does not matter to Mal Content, who has the same fondness for Reed, that De Niro had for Jerry Lewis in the King of Comedy.
He hopes, with desire, to one day be thanked by Chuck, Mal dreams of it every night that one day, Chuck will pay attention to him.
Sorry, Mal, Chuck has had a warm heart for even his wife, HE ASKED THE CITY TO PAY FOR HIS ANNIVERSARY CAKE!!!!!!!!!
Among all the other credit card charges and reimbursements Chuck seems to be claiming, there is likely one to be the topper of topper’s. Mal Content, who sobs to himself at night that Chuck never thanks him, will, like most of the Reedites that Chuck, himself, loves to disdain, defend him even after this, may want to know that Chuck even asked the city to pay for a big cake that he and his wife feasted on at the end of his campaign two years ago. Even to cheap to buy her a cake, Chuck? Well, Victor never told you to be considered nice.
R.C. #17,
So at this time you, Rich and Ben have no evidence showing Reed committed felonies.
It is sad that the three of you are so intent on ruining Reed’s reputation that you speculate Reed committed felonies even though you have no evidence.
If you weren’t so blinded by your hate for Reed, I am sure you could easily think of other just as likely reasons he would not want to release his tax returns (if he did or did not I do not know).
to all the reed critics,
check out the article in today Merc’s re spending habits of other council members and chavez, including some who joined chavez in condemning the pratices of chuck reed.
seems like more campaign tactics from the chavez camp rather than true moral outrage over reed’s spending habits. Campos and Madison Nguyen are just leashed dogs of the Chavez camp.
how do these hypocrites answer charges of spending public money to promote themself or their office. Are they going to reimburse the taxpayers too?
#22 & 23 – Why are you picking on Malcontent – he has more brain cells in his pinky than you two have in your whole head.
I don’t think that he is a “Reedite” or a big Chuck defender. Just sees the hypocracy of the other side attacking him for misspent thousands while she helped misspend millions and doesn’t buy into the spin that the tide of the election has turned.
So, if that is the definition of a Reedite, then I guess I am one too.
Hey, Bedtime, just because Reed hands you a pint bottle to write this stuff does not take away from the fact that Reed used city money for his campaign, and to pay you as well.
23/23 – I know it’s tough, but try to raise the level of discourse here. If you’ve got nothing to say it would be better to keep in to yourself. Your cute little comments about cake and Mal, etc. do nothing to further the discussion.
We all know about Reed. Most of us know about Chavez. What are we going to about them? Both are tainted and are leave us little choice when we go to the voting booth. Any chance you have something positive to provide that would help us move forward as a city? I didn’t think so, but thought I would ask.
I am waiting for all the good government Reed bashers to express their outrage over Chavez and her supporters misuse of public funds. As usual, your silence is deafening.
#28 It was not city money for his campaign, and if you want to condemn him, condemn Cindy and the rest of the council as well. They all did it, doesn’t make it right, but it does mean that you can’t single one person out for it.
#30, #31
Chuck Reedimbursement spent taxpayer money to support a political campaign of someone who has endorsed his race for Mayor. Since there are so few who have endorsed his candidacy it was real easy to find. Taxpayer money spent to help a candidate or ballot measure is illegal.
Chuck Reedimbursement spend taxpayer dollars on lifetime memberships.
Chuck Reedimbursement spent taxpayer dollars on other memberships in organizations he says he would not have joined if he was not a council member.
Chuck Reedimbursement received gifts for his memberships. KTEH sends a nice gift with my membership and a magazine.
Chuck Reedimbursement handed out money in little red envelopes to look good with a particular group. Is that a gift of public funds? You bet it is. What consideration did the city get for this money? Made Chucky look good.
If a council member does what Chuck has done in the decietful, unhonorable manner that he has done it in and won’t release their charitable deductions then I will be first in line to condemn them as well. Know anybody that has done this besides Chuck E. Cheapskate? Maybe Tom DeLay or Duke Cunningham but no one around here.
#35
Please see post #32—They have done the same thing is laughable.
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/15654120.htm
The San Jose Business Journal in its editorial Friday says what Reed did amounted to petty theft. Don’t take my word for it, read the Business Journal or the Mercury News. Where did Cindy buy lifetime memberships with taxpayer dollars and where did she spend taxpayer dollars contributing to a political campaign?
#34 Checkmate or rather Checkbook
Here is what I read in the Mercury News on Sunday—note the last article.
Also read in the San Jose Business Journal the editorial they wrote blasting Reed, comparing him to Shoeless Joe who through the world series and writing that what Reedimbursement did amounts to petty theft of taxpayer money——ouch.
Do they, the pape of record for the business community have it wrong?
Listen, Checkbook, Reed proves the adage, don’t throw rocks if you live in a glass house. But hey, if your Reed, you just write a personal check to replace the broken glass and then submit it to the taxpayer…no problem, right?
#35
You seem to be paying a significant amount of attention to my very fact filled and even handed posts now. Paying enough attention to respond, weak as it is, to the facts in my post.
Do you have in your possesion the Chuck Reed for Mayor playbook that says; Do one thing and say another?
Because you write that you don’t pay very much attention to my writing yet you respond.
When will Reedimbursement release his charitable donations he claimed on his income tax, is he chicken?
38 – I read enough to notice you ignore the wrongdoing of Chavez. The difference between you and me is that I believe wrongdoing by anyone should be challenged. Why should Reed be attacked if you are not going to do the same to Chavez? We both know why.
Looks like the city treasury should be getting another reimbursement check, unless Cindy lost that darned checkbook again.
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/15654110.htm
#1: Also appointed: “Heather Lambert, 29, of Sacramento, has been appointed legislative and education liaison for the California State Lottery. Since 2003, she has served the Office of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger as deputy appointments secretary and external affairs coordinator. Prior to that, Lambert was staff assistant for the Office of Congressman Ken Calvert and an assistant account executive for Randle Communications. This position does not require Senate confirmation and the compensation is $87,500. Lambert is a Republican.”
“Legislative and education liaison for the California State Lottery @ $87,500/year?! No wonder we’re going broke!
I attended. The fellow next to me ( a self-important local lawyer)was asleep within 15 minutes. I began to nod off after half an hour.
It is scertainly improper to call it a “debate”. It was Q&A at best.
Perhaps Jim Beall and Chuck can get a 2-for-1 deal on charisma implants.
A somnolent and tepid performance, with lame attempts @ humor by Vintage Foster. A complete waste of time. Little heat, no light.
32 – Your anti-Reed tirades continue to ring hollow given your silence on the misuse of funds by Chavez. And I’m not even talking about the millions and millions of dollars of public funds that she has given away.
She has done the same thing as Reed, as have other council members. Where is your outrage?? Reed is wrong and so is Chavez and every other council member who has misused public funds.
When you are equally outraged by ALL wrongdoing, even by Chavez, then I will pay a bit more attention to your ramblings.
#37. All I am asking is should Cindy reimburse San Jose for her political ads?
Let’s see if you can address the question this time.
Clay feet, you got it dead on, man. I voted for Pandoir, but I have read, watched, and listened to Mr. Integrity and his staff, rumored to be the most incompetent at City Hall. Chuck can no longer claim to be Mr. Integrity. He just cannot. When you think how much ducking and weaving, his chief of staff, Armando Gomex, the joke of Milpitas, has done on simple public record act requests, it makes you laugh. Chuck prcolaimed himself the ethics maven of San Jose, HE RAN ON IT. Now, he can longer be Mr. Integrity, and that was his only vision. Just like the tie, it was all for show.
I’m shocked that despite our City’s deficit budget spending and cuts to essential City services that Rich/Reality Check and all the other Cindinistas have not been talking about Chavez’s pandering to the South Bay Labor Council and SEIU with her plan to have the tax payers in San Jose pay for the health care of all the illegal immigrants who were marching in the streets a few months ago.
Additionally, I don’t see them acknowledging the information that the Merc dug up about Cindy’s own political ads in Newspapers that were also paid for by the tax payers. I guess her memory was a little short when it came to her own political spending—that and the convenient line about a missing checkbook register. Additionally, now I know why the majority of the Council was in favor of publicly funded elections when the majority of the City residents oppose it.
As far as neighborhood spin. I can verify that the anti-Chavez sentiment has not dissappeared. In fact my neighbors and co-workers are really PO’d that Mrs. Potter wants to use their tax dollars to pay for the health care of illegal aliens when funding for public safety, schools, parks, libraries, affordable housing and community centers have been cut. People are just waiting for the election to clean house.
After the election, the rumor I’ve heard is that the christian church groups with the help of small business owners and funding from some individual deep pocket COMPAC members will mount a recall campaign to dump Williams, Campos, and Ngyuen—and possibly Pyle if she doesn’t start voting for the interest of her Almaden district residents. This is an Angry Voter Year!
I am tired of those braindead reed bashers who add nothing to the discussion but biased bluster.
In the end, I just want goverment leaders who will try to spend less of our money and when they do spend it, to do it judiciously. Based on their past history, I trust Chuck a lot more than Cindy to do that.
I;m still holding my nose and voting for Chuck. I don’t want a candidate that is so beholden to labor that they can’t make a step w/o them.
When will Reed release his charitable deductions from his tax returns?
RC # 46—He did it weeks ago, and the Murky News showed all charitable deductions were legit.
Time to put a sock in it, RC. And give the other sock to DB, unless he’s just your evil twin Skippy.