Last week’s Willow Glen forum for the District 2 County Supervisor seat featured stumping from candidates Patricia Martinez-Roach, Richard Hobbs and George Shirakawa. What stumped Fly is why no one asked Shirakawa about the lien the city placed on his house last month because he didn’t pay his garbage bill on time. The supes’ salary would buy a guy a lot of cans: the base pay is $143,031, along with a monthly $600 vehicle allowance and $2,000 a year for expenses. This isn’t the first time for Shirakawa—a couple of years ago, the feds placed two liens on Shirakawa’s home because he owed mucho dinero on his personal 2003 and 2004 federal income tax returns. It makes us think of Shirakawa’s favorite preface to his answers at the forum: “This is obviously a very complex problem.”
San Jose Inside
San Jose Inside (https://www.sanjoseinside.com)
DUDE.. lay off homeboy. Don’t you know times are tough.
Throw his butt in prison and if he doesn’t comply use a taser on him.
That’s a little scary – liens are not filed without notice to the property owner. Agencies that levy taxes and fees are most willing to resolve issues without resorting to the lien process.
How can we be comfortable that George will use reasonable and prudent judgment in matters relating to the office of County Supervisor?
#5
The County does not control the fate of Reid Hillview. I believe it is the State or Federal Government, which decides whether to close it or leave it open.
Reid-Hillview is one of 2 Santa Clara county owned and operated airports. The other is the South County airport. The Palo Alto airport is owned by Palo Alto, and leased to the county for operational control. At this time, Santa Clara County wants out of the lease, and return the operation of the airport back to Palo Alto.
So, to correct your statement, the county most certainly does control the fate of Reid-Hillview.
http://cramp.org/
http://www.reidhillview.com/
http://www.sccgov.org/portal/site/rda/agencychp?path=/v7/Roads & Airports Department (DEP)/Airport Information
http://www.countyairports.org/
Personally, I think George will make a terrible County Supervisor because he is giving the impression of being either incompetent, corrupt, or both. He has told the aviation community that he supports keeping Reid-Hillview open.
In other words, he is putting the welfare of 3300 pilots in Santa Clara county, of which maybe 1700 use RHV, ahead of the welfare of 1,800,000 county residents.
What is the quid pro quo for this travesty?
Of course, this also applies to Dave Cortese.
Reid Hillview is making the valley safer by keeping general aviation out of the flight path of commercial airliners thus avoiding mid air collisions. Reid Hillview was build long before the houses that chose to encroach on the airports borders. All the people that bought those houses did so knowing the airport was there. Wake up
#4- The County does not control the fate of Reid Hillview. I believe it is the State or Federal Government, which decides whether to close it or leave it open.
Now Hobbs as BOS is rather frightening thought. Using County and tax payer resources to campaign, emailing campaign contribution requests to County employees who work under him, and participating/organizing immigrant marches on County time is unethical, and deserves a mention in the Fly too.
#6 – Bluefox, You are correct that the County owns Ried-Hillview, but if they had the power to shut it down, Blanca would have done it YEARS ago. And to say she tried is really an understatement. As I understand it, there has to be some finding by the Federal Government before it can be shut down.
9 – Be careful. You’re about to bring down the wrath of Kathleen and Christian. Prepare to read their tired, old diatribe against Hobbs and extolling the mythical virtues of Shirakawa.
In case you missed Herhold’s column in yesterday’s Merc, here’s what he had to say about the race:
Best bet: Hobbs. Though his inexperience in campaigning has shown, he’s a decent man who tried to broker compromise on the Little Saigon fight.
Most baggage: Shirakawa. His history of getting big campaign contributions from contractors and vendors in the East Side district is bothersome. After leaving the San Jose City Council, he turned to lobbying to make a living. And on April 25, the city of San Jose filed a lien on his property because he didn’t pay his garbage bill.
#7
…if they had the power to shut it down, Blanca would have done it YEARS ago.
Blanca is one county supervisor. It requires 3 of 5 county supervisors to vote in favor of closure. In 1996, the vote was 2 in favor of closure, and 3 against closure.
Interestingly, in 1996 Ron Gonzales was a county supervisor, and he was in favor of closure, but something happened, he changed his mind, and voted to keep it open.
As we all know, Gonzales is a backroom wheeler dealer. I think this quote from a California aviation web-site clearly explains what happened to Ron’s vote.
“Before the public hearing, many private informational meetings were held with key supervisors to persuade them of the merits of keeping the airport open. The public meeting was essentially a formality….”
http://www.calpilots.org/www.calpilots.org/cpanew/prior/dec96/victory.htm
Ah Paper Boy, I’m sure the facts are not important to an ardent supporter of Hobbs like you!
#11
Most people are aware that Shirakawa is part of the San Jose establishment,he represents more of the same, he comes across as one of the “good old boys”.He rests on his endorcements to put him into office, he believes the casual voter will elect him.The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors has endorced him.Just what does Liz know about the problems in our district, her endorcement is like an outsider endorcement.
Again he was out of touch at the Willow Glen Forum.
12 – Thanks—you are always good for a laugh. Of course, you are wrong. I don’t support either—I don’t even live in the district. I just don’t care for George’s type of politics. Qualifications and competence are much more important to me apparently than they are to you. But that is OK. Have a good weekend.
Kathleen,
I believe Hobbs as Supervisor would be a refreshing thing !!
Since when has the “Fly” become a favorite of yours. You need to look back on your previous comments about the “Metro,The Fly and Dan Pulcrano”. Seems you have had a change of heart about these people.
I don`t remember seeing you at the Willow Glen Neighborhood Association Forum. All candidates were given a chance to speek, all were given a chance to do their homework, all had a chance to convince the residents that they were knowledgable about their district concerns.
I was at the Forum, I herd other residents-voters comments at the end of the debate.Hobbs did very well from what I herd.
#9-Richard, I would caution you to be very careful and fully research whom you vote for in this election. I think the next time you go to a debate with these three candidates, you and your community members better ask Hobbs about his stand on immigration, his strong ties with Labor, developers, and why he felt he was above the law in using tax payer resources to campaign with. What makes you think if he’d try to intimidate his “own,” employees into supporting him in this election, use his position and resources at the County to campaign with, and put vital issues like health care for all, housing, homelessness, and other very important issues on the back burner, during his tenure at the Office of Human Relations, that he’d do anything to support your community’s needs, unless he wanted something from you, or was looking towards a higher office?
#14- Not so fast Paper Boy,
“Qualifications and competence are much more important to me apparently than they are to you.” I’d like to see you prove that statement. They are important to me and so are the facts about all candidates, but especially with Hobbs. You have yet to refute my facts on Hobbs; instead you chose to engage in immature swipes at me. So let’s take this back to the topic shall we?
I do not support anyone in this race either. I live in D9. I have worked with both of these men on vital issues in the community and am speaking from a personal, first hand place of knowledge. I do not know the other candidate and that is why I haven’t made any comments about her.
” Best bet: Hobbs. Though his inexperience in campaigning has shown, he’s a decent man who tried to broker compromise on the Little Saigon fight.”
Not true. If you go to the City of San Jose’s website and watch the video of many of the Council meetings on Little Saigon, you will see Richard Hobbs sitting with a group of Hispanic businesses opposing “Little Saigon.” He told us he did not support the name Little Saigon. Now how can a man who early on who took a stand against the Little Saigon Community try to broker a “fair,” compromise to any one involved? He is NOT an experienced or qualified mediator, so what makes you think he had any right to involve himself in this?
Secondly, if you look at supporters of Madison Nguyen during her election for Council you will see that Richard Hobbs was a staunch supporter of hers. He is very heavily tied to Labor, and Labor supported Madison 100%, and still does through this whole Little Saigon issue. How can someone who is so far from neutral try to deceive others into thinking he is a “decent man who tried to broker a compromise?” The only part of the quote you gave that is correct is that he is ‘inexperienced,” in the art of honesty, and integrity.
As to his badly failed attempt at a supposed broker of a deal to resolve the Little Saigon issue, don’t make me laugh. He used it as he uses everything to gain votes for office. He wants the immigrant vote, and he’ll do anything he can to get it, even if it includes trying to deceive Little Saigon supporters who knew nothing of his ties to Labor, or Nguyen, or his affiliation with Saigon Business supporters.
I attended the Willow Glen Forum.Richard Hobbs seemed to be the nost informed with the issues in our district, and seemed most connected to the residents in attendance. Patricia Marinnez Roach was also a concerned candidate with some good answers. George Shirakawa seemed out of touch with the community.He didn`t do his homework.
Why no coverage in Fly of the debate between Santa Clara Valley Water District Board candidates?
Judge has been on the Board for 22 years. Has he ever faced a challenger since he’s been an incument? Foss is the first in my recollection. This race is news too…
18 – Thanks for the info, Richard. I tend to dismiss most of what Kathleen says on topics other than animal rights. She tends to spin, twist, and distort her points when it comes to politics.
Shirakawa is a luggage store when it comes to baggage.
He is not a terrible person but he certainly is not the kind of candidate I want in charge of my money.He is available to the highest bidder and I had hoped we were moving away from electing those kinds of folks.
I’ll take someone with experience at the Office of Human Relations over a paid lobbyist anyday!
Richard,
#17- Richard,
“You have every right to express your opinion on candidates. You do not have the right to mislead people on facts. People might respect you more if you simply expressed your opinion and kept away from unnecessary mud slinging.”
Clearly my right to express my opinion does not apply with you Richard unless I agree with yours. You can proudly support whomever you want in any election, but if you are going to accuse me of misleading people, and misrepresenting the facts, I’d like to see you refute anything I’ve said.
#18- Richard,
“Kathleen wrote” Richard Hobbs was a staunch supporter of Madison Nguyen”. No one person on the City Council was a bigger supporter of Madison than Mayor Reed, he stood by her all the way.”
All but three members of the Council supported Madison and still do, so what. That isn’t the issue here. I think you’ve missed the point Richard. Who on the Council supports Madison or doesn’t has nothing to do with my questioning why Hobbs tried to present himself as a neutral and tried to broker a compromise in the Little Saigon issue when he is a Nguyen supporter, a Saigon Business District name supporter, nor does it have anything to do with my questioning his motives for getting involved with this issue in the first place.
#19- Paper Boy,
“I tend to dismiss most of what Kathleen says on topics other than animal rights. She tends to spin, twist, and distort her points when it comes to politics.”
Thank you for finally admitting your personal bias against me, and your close mindedness when it comes to someone you don’t like. I can respect that kind of honesty. Thank you!
I was wondering why you didn’t refute my facts on Hobbs, or any other issue we’ve disagreed on, or why you don’t present any facts of your own to disprove my statements. Next time, I’ll know not to owe you the respect of responding to your comments to me on any issue in future.
#17 – Richard Zappelli –
First, all Kathleen did was to present facts that she has to you, for your own review. If you don’t like those facts, you are free to ignore them. But to say she is “mis-leading” people is out of line. Please, PROVE where she has mislead people with her facts. Tell me EXACTLY where she has mislead people, and give her a chance to either agree with you, or to prove her fact to you.
Regarding the VTA and the property at San Carlos and Sunol Streets, I’m afraid that battle was lost to you long before you got there, long before Barry Swensen decided he wanted that property. I admit now, I have not followed the issue you speak about, but I do have some background knowledge on this subject. So, if I get some details wrong on the project you are speaking about, please feel free to let me know.
San Jose has a longstanding policy of putting higher density housing along Light Rail Corridors. This policy dates back to when Susan Hammer was Mayor, and is most likely still in effect today. The policy exists to (1) increase the amount of housing in San Jose – especially affordable housing – for residents that need it, and (2) put housing along transit corridors where people will use it. I would venture a guess that other Cities in Santa Clara County have similar policies. Given that this property is on or near a Light Rail Station, developers are, smartly, following City policies and guidelines, and consequently, are getting the support of City Leaders. I would guess that when, as you said, Mayor Reed made the motion for the property to be sold (ok, I am not sure why the SOLD the property), the vote was unanimous – meaning the other City and County officials on the VTA board voted for the motion too. They are just following policies that were formed to help improve our housing stock (Businesses like Cisco, the Manufacturing Group and other major manufacturers and businesses lobbied for more housing) and improve ridership on Light Rail.
You could find out which Council District the project is in, and work with your Council Member and the developer on helping the project fit in with your neighborhood. What needs does your neighborhood have that the project could help with?
I would like to know why we never hear much about Patricia Martinez-Roach. I’d like to know where she stands on the issues, what her background and experience is. How come the only candidates we hear about are the ones either endorsed by the paper, or who have raised the most money, or is presently in office?
I have decided to vote for Hobbs, at least for the primary.
Santa Clara County (SCC) is facing an approximate $200 million dollar deficit this year, and I think it was stated for at least the next few years. This deficit is resulting in cuts to the bone, and maybe elimination, of vital county health services, and other programs, that benefit all of us.
SCC needs to honestly evaluate all of its programs and resources in order to address this issue. For any county supervisor, or supervisor candidate, to support keeping Reid-Hillview (RHV) open in the face of this crisis is irresponsible at best. Before any rational decision can be made regarding the future of RHV, we need accurate, honest data. Not the wishful thinking and fantasy that we hear from airport supporters.
At the very least, we need to know:
Who benefits from RHV?
How do they benefit?
Who does not benefit from RHV?
How does RHV not benefit them?
What is the tax contribution from RHV?
What is the economic contribution from RHV?
What is the quality of life, and standard of living, impact to local residents from RHV?
If RHV was sold, what would be the county’s profit?
If RHV was developed as a business park, what would be the tax revenue?
If RHV was developed as a combination business park, recreational park, and limited housing, what would be the tax revenue?
What would be the economic impact of developing RHV?
What would be the quality of life, and standard of living, impact to local residents by developing RHV?
Until we have answers to these, and probably other, questions, no politician can responsibly state that RHV should stay open.
#23- Blue Fox,
“Santa Clara County (SCC) is facing an approximate $200 million dollar deficit this year, and I think it was stated for at least the next few years. This deficit is resulting in cuts to the bone, and maybe elimination, of vital county health services, and other programs, that benefit all of us.”
You are 100% correct and it is only going to get worse! Many vital programs are being cut out completely, and not just to the bone. I am very concerned about the disabled, the poor, the elderly, and programs taking cuts that help victims of crime, or Legal Aid programs that assist people applying for services like low income housing, Social Security Disability benefits, Welfare, and health care. Our city, county, and State are in deep trouble.
I’m not sure what the answer is but I’m deeply worried about how people are going to fare through this. I haven’t heard anything about lay offs at the County yet, but it wouldn’t surprise me if that were done to try to lighten the burden of the budget.
It is so bad that the County’s Animal Shelter head sent out an SOS to animal rescue groups asking for help in getting cat litter for the shelter because they were cut to the bone, and weren’t allowed to buy more until July! Others and myself got on the ball made some donations, and sent out requests for help. Evon sent requests to the local papers in Morgan Hill, Gilroy, and San Martin. The response was incredible! The media was great! They posted a story on the need for help. Pet stores in the area offered discounts to people buying litter for the shelter, and to my great pleasure and gratitude, the community bought so much litter for the shelter that they sold out! Wow! I just received word that the shelter is now safe for litter until July. It is just remarkable how loving members of the community are when people are in trouble.
My hope is that as times get even worse that we will all pull together to help one another. It doesn’t take much to add a few food items to our grocery basket, and drop it into a bin for Second Harvest on the way out the door, or to go through our closets so people can have something to wear, or to donate a blanket or two for the less fortunate. I think we need to view this as a community issue rather than a political one because no matter who is elected to office now, they can’t do much to change the budget deficit, unless they can find creative ways to find revenue, and stimulate the economy.
#17- Richard,
“Kathleen,
I like you when you speak your concerns about animal care.”
Thank you for your kind words but my life, education, and profession is not confined to just animal issues. Women do actually care about more than just housework, animals, and children, make up, and clothes Richard. Our opinions on politics and community situations should be given the same respectful consideration that you give your fellow male counterparts. I think you just might attract more females here on SJI if you do.
#16
Kathleen,
I like you when you speek your concerns about animal care.
You have every right to express your opinion on candidates.You do not have the right to mis-lead people on facts.People might respect you more if you simply expressed your opinion and kept away from unnecessary mud slinging.
Again I attended the debate at Willow Glen and simply said Hobbs and Patricia Roach did their homework and were well informed on the issues within the district.
Regarding Shirakawa, we have recieved a promotional flyer of his in the mail and he advertizes the support of Union`s and I don`t have a problem with that,there are good people in the Union too.
At the last open VTA meeting on May 1st. 38 District six residents asked the VTA board not to approve the Barry Swenson project at San Carlos and Sunol Streets. Two lobbiest, one from the Silicon Valley Leadership Group and the other the head of the local labor groups spoke in favor of and asked the VTA Board to aprove the sale of the VTA property to Barry Swenson, and send the project and Barry and Van Avery onto the city of San Jose planning department for development .
Pierluigi was in the audience and stepped up to the mike for the record and asked the VTA Board and his five fellow City Council members that sit on the VTA Board to seriously consider the requests of his 38 voters that came to the meeting to express their concerns.
The 38 residents lost, the two lobbiest won! Mayor Reed stood up, put up the motion and recomended the property be sold and have the project sent onto the San Jose Planning Department. Sam Liccardo 2nd the motion and all five San Jose City Council people sitting on the VTA Board voted in favor of the Union leader and the SVLG`s request.
Shall we get rid of the Mayor and those five San Jose City Council members that ignored their voters request and went along with the Union`s request? Pyle,Liccardo,Reed,Campos and Williams, they all voted with the Union.
Kathleen,
You did the mud slinging, not me. I think you should back up your facts. I respect your opinion as yours and maybe others too. I just don`t think you have to resort to mud slinging when you don`t like someone.
I liked all three candidates on a personal basis. I just feel two of them did their homework and two of them answered the questions. That tells me something about a candidate.Two, Richard and Patrica took the time to prepare for the debate.
#16
Paper Boy,
Kathleen wote” Richard Hobbs was a staunch supporter of Madison Nguyen”. No one person on the City Council was a bigger supporter of Madison than Mayor Reed, he stood by her all the way. I have no problem with that. The Little Saigon issue took too much of the City Council`s time (my opinion).
I came away from the W.G. Forum feeling good about Hobbs and Roach because they answered the questions asked of them and seemed to be well informed about issues in our district. Hobbs in his presentation also spoke in favor of open Government, transparent Government (Sunshine). He was the last to speek,Shirakawa was the first to speek and no mention of “transparent Government”. The County needs Sunshine laws,Reed spoke in favor of Sunshine at the VTA Board meeting.
Richard,
I don’t know, but from what I read, Shirakawa “Shined” at the Willow Glen Forum:
http://www.georgeshirakawa.com/press13.html
We’ve got to to elect this political machine. Wow, he’s got it all. Just look at all his press releases. He’s a dynamo! Combine him with Cortese, and there wouldn’t be any trees left with all their self congratulatory missives.
#26- Richard,
“You did the mud slinging, not me. I think you should back up your facts. I respect your opinion as yours and maybe others too. I just don`t think you have to resort to mud slinging when you don`t like someone.”
Richard I know you are a kind man, and you mean well but your defense of Hobbs is a wasted effort. I do not appreciate you making comments claiming I am mud-slinging Hobbs when all I’ve done is present the facts as I know them to be from first hand knowledge and experience. You still have yet to refute the facts I’ve already given you.
You claim that because you attended one forum that I didn’t, that you some how have the advantage over me. Not so. I have been a volunteer in the same office Hobbs now runs for OVER 7 years now. I have first hand knowledge of his practices and I stand firm that he is a bad choice for BOS.
You want facts huh? Here you go Richard:
http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_9376158
When Hobb’s own colleagues who fight so diligently for the rights of the poor, the elderly, the sick, the disabled, the homeless, and for civil rights, don’t support Hobb’s bid for BOS, and find him impossible to work with that should be a real red flag to you, and any one else who is considering casting a vote for Hobbs.
#28- “Patricia Roach and Richard Hobbs were knowledgable with the problems pertaining to the sale of the County Property on San Carlos and Sunol to Green Republic, again they both were well informed.”
It is up to you Richard but I’d go with Patrica Roach then.
Let me see here. Hekyll or Jekyll?
Curly, Moe, or Larry?
Hobbs, Roach, or Shirakawa?
This is a choice that really isn’t a choice at all.
Rest assured that whichever of the 3 is elected we’ll be getting a career politician who believes that government has all the answers and if they can just take enough of our money they will solve all the peoples’ problems. In their misguided efforts they will continue to propel the County further along the path to squalid mediocrity.
What a racket these people have got going!
#9 Christan,
I agree with most of what you have said about the sale of the County property being sold on the corner of San Carlos and Sunol Streets.What we are talking about is “Smart Growth” here in San Jose.I fully support “Smart Growth” programs and fully understand the reasons why we must move in that direction.
Mayor Reed and our 4 City Council people wear two hats at Santa Clara County when they sit on the VTA Board of Directors, This puts these 5 people in a very difficult position, “as
explained by Council Person Nancy Pyle before the vote was cast to support Mayor Reed`s motion, and put our Mayor too in a difficult position.
There is a “conflict of interest” these 5 San Jose Council members face when they vote on the County VTA Board, these people are “stuck” wearing two hats”per Nancy Pyle” as County VTA Board members they must Vote to support the sale of the land to “Green Republic” B. Swenson and Van Every. But, as members of the San Jose City Council, they will once again have to deal with this project wearing another hat and, their decision then will force the same five Council persons to follow the San Jose “General Plan, which contains the Midtown Specific Plan”. In which case they will have to vote against the development because the development does not follow the City`s General Plan and this just might “kill the sale” of the property and return the project to the Santa Clara County.
Both Nancy Pyle and Mayor Reed made all of us in the packed County Chambers aware of the problem, they spoke to the other County Board members, the voters present and the developers about their conflict whearing both hats.The developers have to resubmit new plans that confirm with the city`s General plan before the project goes to the planning department.The sale is now a contingent sale.
Christian, eight groups,Council person Oliverio, and former Council Person Nancy Ianni spoke on the record in opposition to the project because it did not follow (1) the general Plan,the Midtown Specific Plan, and the principals of Smart Growth”.
Present were, “in opposition” presidents of Neighborhood groups,” Sherman Oaks, Burbank,-Buena Vista, Rose Garden, Shasta Hanchet,Willow Glen,District Six Leaders Assn, United Neighborhoods Assn.. Also District Six Council person Oliverio and former Council Person Nancy Ianni. In addition many others.Chair person Liz Knis for the County had to cut the speekers from two minuites to one minuites because of the large crowd in opposition.
All County Board members were aware of the reason San Jose City Council Members sitting on the Board were going to vote to approve and were aware this project could end up back at the county if they rejected it at the City level.
I have attended seven meetings on this project, I am an active member of the Willow Glen Neighbor Hood assn and the District Six leaders group. The Willow Glen Neighborhood Association president spoke in opposition to the plan as presented but, provided a conditional letter of support to the County Board if the developer went back to the drawing board and re-drafted their plans following the san Jose General Plan and Its Midtown General Plan and the principles of Smart Growth.
The Midtown Plan wa drafted during the Tom McHenery Administration and Council Person Nancy Ianni were part of the team that drafted the General and Midtown Specific Plan.
Also in strong opposition to the plan was Supervisor Ken Yeager who spoke out againsit the project at four County VTA Board meetings.Supervisor Yeager was previously Council person for District Six.
Christian, I hope this clears up things a little better.
Kathleen,
I agree with the others. You are posting inaccurate information to support your cause. FIrst, you talk about Hobb’s strong connection to labor. Yet, you fail to mention that Shirakawa sent out a press release about his endorsement by the labor council. I value the discussion on this blog and I believe it is important that the facts be facts and the emotional statements be just that. If your desire is to be taken seriously on something other than animal rights, than you should be factual. Also, as women there is nothing worse than complaining people want you in the kitchen and then having your boyfriend Christian defend you.
Kathleen,
Patricia Roach and Richard Hobbs were knowledgable with the problems pertaining to the sale of the County Property on San Carlos and Sunol to Green Republic, again they both were well informed.This has impressed many people in attendance at the Forum. I`m sorry you couldn`t attend.
Kathleen,
I`m trying to defend Hobbs,my concerns are with the concerns pointed out in that Mercury News OPED you furnished us. I am strongly concerned with both comments made on both candidates.You should be too.
I am not a political operative. I am a concerned citizen that is trying to protect our quality of life issues both here in San Jose and the County.I have attended many more meetings than the WGNA Forum.
The last thing we need is another City or County person that is tied so close to the developers and contractors and a known lobbiest.The Mercury news also warns us in the OPED of Georges close ties to this group.The developers are well supported now on the City Council and the County Boards.I also happen to respect two developers a lot. John Sobratto, Ed Thrift and their development organizations.
Green Republic B. Swenson and Van Avery both had almost compleeted the purchase of the VTA property on Sunol and San Carlos Streets from the County without any “community outreach”. It was a very secret deal until Mayor Reed sitting on the County VTA Board stopped them and ordered community outreach before he would allow the project to be approved for sale. The developers ignored the City of San Jose General Plan, The Midtown specific Plan`s. The developers with the approval of a select group of County managers were trying to finalize the sale of the property at the February 2008 meeting and ignoring the Santa Clara County development guide book also.The developers and their lobbiest almost got away with it in February.
I believe in “Smart Groth principles” and I know why we should support Smart Growth. But I also believe in the people on the Mayors staff that take the time to put together a General Plan.
I have little respect for those that try to sneak through a project solely “For Profit” without respect for the laws or rules of our City and County.
Infracture too is important ! Consider the impact of poor planning.Consider what high density development can do to a school district if the schools can`t keep up with development.
Most of the school districts in San Jose are the lowest in “dollars per student” in the County. Classes are over croweded already.This week in the State will mail over 28,000 pink slips to teachers and nurces in elementry, middle and high schools. This will mean even more students per class room next year.Now add the impact of dencification when the 2200 new homes that are about to come on the market here soon are filled, this will mean even more students per class.
There are students in our school districts that can`t get Medicare or medical coverage for serious dental problems that their families can`t afford. They sit in class rooms with terrible abscess teeth and headaches so bad they can`t concentrate in class. Many arrive in school without eating breakfast and some have no money for lunch.
These problems exhist here in San Jose because of serious budget problems at the City-County-State levels of Government.
We are overbuilding without City and County services that can keep up because of serious budget problems.This building needs to slow a bit and let our infracture needs get a chance to catch up.
The developers are not going to pay for our traffic conjection problems, repair our streets that are in poor condition, pay for more police officers and other infrastructure needs.They just want to build because the cost to borrow money is cheep today.They are “profit” driven.
Do we need another County/City official that will rubber stamp approvals quickly for developers because they are beholding to the developer community? That is what almost happened on the County property on Sunol and San Carlos Streets.
“Think about both candidates”.
The Mercury spoke about how quickly George can raise money. These doners expect favors in exchange for their dollars.
#32-Patricia,
“I agree with the others. You are posting inaccurate information to support your cause.”
What “cause” might that be I wonder? Please feel free to refute any of the facts I’ve given so far. Since you want to call Christian’s defense of my facts out into question, you may want to add a few others to that list too Patricia. The County’s CEO’s Office has gone on record reprimanding Hobbs for his unethical, and unprofessional behaviors during this campaign. Rather than owning up to his mistakes, Hobbs went on record denying the CEO’s complaints about him. Now if you know anything about government, reprimanding any department head publicly is like the parting of the Red Sea! A once in a lifetime event!
The Mercury News has gone on record refusing to endorse Hobbs because his OWN colleagues say he is self righteous, impossible, not difficult Patricia, impossible to work with. Clearly a view shared by many other people than just me, the lone Animal Rights Advocate. The Mercury News also correctly mentions the concerns they, and many others I might add, have about Hobb’s inability to be trusted to do the right thing for taxpayers, vital programs, and the County because he is so staunch in his defense of the Union. Now I don’t see any distortion of the facts here Patrica. If you support Hobbs more power to you, but have the integrity to say so, and support Hobbs openly and honestly by telling the truth about your affiliation with him. SJI encourages honest debates and presentation of the facts, or information, so please enlighten us with all the things you find so endearing about Hobbs.
“First, you talk about Hobb’s strong connection to labor. Yet, you fail to mention that Shirakawa sent out a press release about his endorsement by the labor council.”
Now why would I do that Patrica? I have nothing invested in George. I am not giving him money, I’m not working on his campaign, nor do I live in his district. As I understand it, the South Bay Labor Council has duel endorsed them, so what. I don’t think George would allow any vital program to go under if it came to cutting several County positions, but in my opinion, I think Hobbs would. Since I have worked in Social Justice my whole life, any BOS running for office who could cut those vital programs that the elderly, disable, the poor, or youth depends on deeply concerns me.
” I value the discussion on this blog and I believe it is important that the facts be facts and the emotional statements be just that.”
I agree with that 100%, so why did you post this?
“If your desire is to be taken seriously on something other than animal rights, than you should be factual. Also, as women there is nothing worse than complaining people want you in the kitchen and then having your boyfriend Christian defend you.
You assume from an emotional point of view that because Christian is my fiancé that he would just blindly defend me, inferring he has no brain of his own, nor an opinion of his own on Hobbs. Here are the “facts,” Christian has not only worked in OHR as a contractor, and volunteer with me for FIVE years now. He also knew Hobbs through his work for a Council Member prior to working at OHR. We’ve both watched the dreams, the visions, and the intent of the beloved Jim McEntee for OHR go straight down the toilet since Hobbs took over. I do not apologize for wanting to see the Office serve the people Jim wanted us to help, by speaking out against the way in which Hobbs has used it as a mere stepping stone to higher office.
Richard,
I have thought very carefully about George and Richard, and I still feel strongly that Hobbs is a bad choice for BOS. I also hear, and appreciate your concerns about George. It is unfortunate that in every election, we have to choose between the lesser of two evils. Perhaps someday we’ll actually get to vote on someone we really want in office, and perhaps someday more everyday, caring citizens that sit on volunteer commissions and boards for years, will run for office instead of the same old tired career politicians. (Okay, I can dream can’t I?)
You said, “Think about both candidates”.
Please remember there are three candidates running for this position, not just two. The media, in its usual one-sided fashion, has chosen to highlight only the candidates who have the most money, or most impressive titles, thus torpedoing any other candidate’s chances of getting votes, or known in the community, but who really cares and wants to change things for the better. What are Patricia Martinez-Roach’s thoughts on these issues? Don’t dismiss your own praises of her just because she isn’t a front-runner. From what you said yourself, she seems very well versed and knowledgeable about your concerns.
In short Richard, there have been many times that I have voted for the under dog simply because I believed in them. No, they didn’t always win, but at least I could walk a way from the voting booth feeling good that I cast my vote for the person, I thought would have done the best job for our community.
On that note, Don’t Forget To Vote Next Week, and may your candidate win, no matter who they are!
#31-John Galt,
Amen to that!
#31 John,
I agree.The County, especially the VTA is resisting “open government practices” aka,“Sunshine Reform.Any good politician worthy of our support should be wide open to open government.
VTA has been operating in secrecy for years, private meetings behind close doors.The current discussion on “what happened to “Measure A Funds” should not be a closed meeting by a select VTA committee. This discussion should be out into open.Measure A goes back to year 2000. We have serious transportation problems here on our freeways and roadways during week day commute hours.We need a comprehensive transportation program to get our City and County out of the mess we are in.With the new “densification program” going on in San Jose, “Things can only get worse.
Hello,
This is the real Patricia Martinez-Roach; the other one is spelled ROCHA. I think someone is playing with your blog.
I found out from a friend that you had this dialog. I think it’s great.
Please visit my web site! 254-9864
Patricia Martinez-Roach AKA Patricia Roach
#32-Patricia, your email address says
pa************@ya***.com
. Are you the esteemed Patricia Martinez-Roach, candidate for County Board of Supervisor who is running against Richard and George? If you are, why would you come on a public political blog like SJI and defend one of your rivals? Did Richard put you up to it, are you going to endorse him if you lose, or did Richard promise you a job in his office if he wins?
As to my defending Kathleen, I plead guilty. Chivalry is not dead Ms. Roach, and yes I have a brain of my own. As Kathleen said, I volunteer at OHR now and have for the last 5 years. I also know him from my days in City Hall and through mutual colleagues. I’ll be polite and leave it at that.
#39- Thank you for letting us know that someone on here is trying to mislead us into thinking they are you. It is not surprising.
Richard Zappelli has sung your praises here on SJI. We can always use another dedicated female for BOS. I wish you good luck in your bid for office!
All the candidates for this seat are below average. Unfortunately whomever gets elected will be there for 12 years.
#43- Oliver,
I have presented the facts, clearly you have a difference of opinion on them. If you chose to ignore the articles presented on this thread that support my statements, more power to you. But if you want to come on here and attack me rather than refute my facts, well I think that speaks to your credibility.
I’m glad Christian asked, not accused the poster named Patricia if she was the “real,” Patricia Roach running for BOS. If he hadn’t we wouldn’t have had the pleasure of the “real,” Ms. Roach letting us know it was not her. Ms. Patricia Roach showed integrity by coming on SJI and I’m glad she gave us her website. Now we can at least see her goals, and vision for BOS if she wins. I’m disappointed in the media for not giving her the coverage they have given the other two candidates. She deserves to be treated with fairness and equality in this race.
For those of you working on someone’s campaign, rather than blog hopping and posting personal attacks on supporters of rival candidates in an effort to side track the facts on your preferred candidate, why don’t you just have the integrity to tell us why you support that candidate, and let us make up our own minds? In every election it is the same thing, and it is getting really old.
So, Kathleen and Christian have solved the case of the Roach v. Rocha. So what if they have no evidence—that apparently doesn’t stop them speaking the “truth.”
Sure, it’s possible someone is toying with them on this blog, but isn’t also possible that #32 is a real person?
Jumping to conclusions with no facts is why folks tend to question your credibility on a regular basis.
Got facts? Let’s read them. Thanks.
A quick search shows that there is indeed a Patricia Rocha in San Jose. Kathleen and Christian, way to go on jumping to conclusions before doing ten seconds of research. You immediately made accusations.
The two of you immediately jumped to a conclusion that Ms Rocha was pretending to be Ms Roach. Is it difficult to grasp that there are almost a million people in this city, and that there are some names that might be similar to others? I’m sure that there are women named Cathy Flynn or Kelly Flynn in this valley. Are they impersonating you?
Furthermore, I don’t see evidence that anyone is working for any of the other candidates on this blog. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t immediately make them an operative of someone’s campaign. That’s completely asinine.
#39 – patricia Martinez-Roach:
Thank you for clarifying that the post was not yours, and as Kathleen said, thank you for your post. I think a number of people here will be interested in finding out what your positions will be, and getting to know you as a candidate before deciding on who to vote. Good luck to you!
#43 Oliver –
If you re-read the post I made, you will see that I ASKED
pa*************@ya***.com
if she was Patricia Martinez-Roach. I did not accuse. I also asked a number of other questions, that became mute when Ms. Martinez-Roach came online and confirmed that that post was not hers.
Maybe you can take some of your advice, and not jump to conclusions and make accusations before READING the posts carefully. It is nasty posts this one – that try to demean and bash others – that hurt your credibility.
#46 – Anonymous –
I will say the same thing to you I said to Oliver – if you READ my post, I ASKED if
pa*************@ya***.com
was Patricia Martinez-Roach. I did not accuse, like you are doing right now. Try following your own advice.
As to campaign workers on this blog posting for their candidate, it happens all the time. You can choose to believe it or not.
If there`s someone that truly deserves to be elected to our board, that person has to be Richard Hobbs. I had the opportunity to work with Richard when he was the project director of the KIN(Knowledge of Immigrant nationalities)study os Santa Clara County.While working with Richard I watched Hobbs work closely with representatives of Santa Clara County`s leading minorties.i was quite taken, not only by his knowledge of these minorties`cultural background, but also by his hands on approach and ability to work with these individuals. Taking into consideration the fact that more than 60 percent of Santa Clara County`s population is made up of immigrants, nobody else will be better qualified to represent this population than Hobbs.
Christan,Christan, excuse me but!
I said in #17 to Kathleen…Kathleen you have every right to express your opinion on candidates. You have no right to mis-lead people on facts. People might respect you more if you simply expressed your opinion and kept away from un necessary mud slinging.
Read my comments on #9. I simply said both Hobbs and Patricia did there homework, were both well informed with issues in the district and answered our questions. I did not single out Richard Hobbs and endorce him.
Again I`m not a political operative nor insider operative. I just a citizen concerned with what I believe are the “Quality of Life” issues in our district.
#50 – Richard Zappelli –
…Ok, I understand. Where in any post did I say you were an “insider operative” or “political operative”?
I did not accuse you of anything. In fact, I did not single anyone out. I simply said to Anonymous, “As to campaign workers on this blog posting for their candidate, it happens all the time. You can choose to believe it or not.” I do not believe you are a political insider – I think you are a caring neighborhood resident who has strong opinions – I admire that in you. I never said you endorsed any candidate, I never said you were working for any candidate, I never inferred that about you; I never named you or any blogger on SJI when I said that. I simply said that campaign workers come on here and support their candidates all the time.
Richard, in the future, if you think I have said something about you, or inferred something, please ask for clarification first, so we can avoid this type of exchange. I will be happy to clarify my comments for you, or anyone else. This should be a place where we exchange and discuss ideas, not attack each other.
Miss Roach-
If you are still looking in on this blog I want to ask you a few questions. I won’t vote for Hobbs because his only interest is in immigrants. My wife is an immigrant and she is proud of her American citizenship. She doesn’t agree with giving her a free ride just because of where she was born, and neither do I.
I wanted to ask you what you stand on immigration is?
I looked at the big bucks the County is spending on Hobb’s Immigration Program. Man, I’m blown a way. I know there are already lots of programs to help immigrants so why is almost $800,000.00 a year going into another program just like it? Can’t that be used for health care or other important things like crime? I have a friend who shares the Office of Human Relations newsletters with me. I haven’t seen anything about health care, housing, or anything but immigration on it. I think the late Jim McEntee would be really disappointed in what is going on in that office since he died. If you get in office are you going to look into that?
Another question I have is what do you think of our property taxes going up, and our property values going down? Is there any end of tax increases in sight? Do you support any taxes increases? If so what kind?
If you have the time can you give us a run down on what you want to do if you win? I think the poster who said the paper isn’t being fair to you is right. I have to vote next week and my vote is between you and George. I’d be grateful if you could. Thank you in advance.
Miss Pour- You said some things in your post that prove the Mercury News right. Hobbs isn’t going to make a good advocate for the rest of us in the County. Why would you vote for someone who only cares about immigrants? Don’t you own a home, have a sick parent who needs health care, or have a friend who needs help with money to eat? There is more to this office than one issue.
You said that 60% of our County is immigrants, does that mean the rest of us who aren’t don’t matter? I have looked at Hobb’s website. If a white person said what you just said we would be called racists. I noticed Hobbs or his buddies hasn’t added “for” Board of Supervisor yet and he is getting all kinds of immigrant comunity groups to write to the paper. I feel that it is wrong to ignore the rest of us who were born and raised here. He won’t get my vote.
Anonymous- I think you need a reality check. If you look at Hobb’s website or anyone else’s and you’ll see that that is exactly what his and other’s people are doing.
#49- Luisa A Pour,
That leaves 40% of us unrepresented. Anyone in political office should be a good representive of ALL the people ALL the time.
Now it’s just getting silly. Hobbs only represents immigrants? “Hobbs Immigration Program”? The BoS makes the County policy. There wouldn’t be any programs if they didn’t vote for them.
Hobbs’ website does not reflect this immigration “bias” that some of you are talking about. Is there more to this than meets the eye?
Smarten up folks. This blog is going to be on life support otherwise.
Patrica,
I listen to your presentation and rebutals at the Willow Glen Forum.My remarks previously remain about the three speakers. I believe both you and Richards were well informed, did your home work and answered our questions. I`d like to add that the two of you took a position on some difficult questions your opponent wouldn`t answer.
Both you and Richard said you would support bring “transparent government” to the County,“The Sunshine Process”. Your opponent shyed away from the question, thats OK it was his choice.
The County presently spends $2million per week on studies and consultants for BART to the east bay, that is over $100 million a year.Measure A was voted and passed by the voters in the year 2000. We still have no Carbon free buseses,Cal Train hasn`t been electrified,Light Rail to the East Ridge area was never built. Measure A raises $30 billion in tax dollars for the County VTA to do these things and solve our serious transportation problems in the County, “grid lock is on all our highway and freeway systems. Light Rail from downtown to Westfield Mall/Santana Row was part of the MidTown Specific Plan and General Plan, instead we got Palm Trees down San Carlos Street because VTA and insiders cancelled the Light Rail to Valley Fair. Where do you think all the Measure A Funds went? Whill you raise these questions if elected.Richard Hobbs if you are reading this blog could you also respond?
The San Jose Redevelopment Agency was sued by the County and a settlement was reached, the City of SJ Redevelopment gave the County $30million dollars to build “Urgent Care” facilities in non incorporated areas of the County. What did the County do with those funds, we still have no Urgent Care Units in these areas?
VTA a County organization still operates behind closed doors making secret deals with developers, insiders that own land in the County and want their poperty developed. Will you do all you can to bring these meetings into the open for voters to listen to.
VTA has a hand picked committee working behind closed doors asking questions about what happened to Measure A funds and BART`s future. Do you believe the Sunshine laws should be in place so taxpayers can hear what happened to all this money, not just this select committee.
We ask ourselves everyday if our traffic and grid locked freeways are better today 2008 than they were in the year 2000.
We ask ourselves how a $15 billion dollar BART system from downtown San Jose to the East Bay will solve our grid locked freeways,(#85,#87,#191,#280 and #237)here in Santa Clara County.Do you believe BART will solve these problems if we build it to the east bay cities.
The County and VTA and Swenson promised us a multilevel parking garage at Tamien Intermodal station in Willow Glen. The developer promised a 1.9 acre park at this location. Now the developer is backing down on these promices citing high costs of steel and concrete and increased labor costs, he says it doesn pencil financially.This same developer that claims to be having these problems was now promised the San Carlos Sunol Streets development on VTA owned land at that location.The developer plans to build two 20 and one 19 story high rises on this property.Why is the County rewarding him when he is trying to back out of his commitments at Tamien Station Intermodal Station in Willow Glen.Can we count on you or Richard to question this developers credibility if we elect you.Do either Richard or you recieve contributions from developers that would prevent you from asking the tough questions?
Again, I say Richard or you Patrica in the event Richard are reading this blog?I think this is one of the questions that give me reasons to hold back from voting for George.He recieves large sums of monies from developers and builders per the San Jose Mercury News.This sends up flags for me.
#53 Kathleen,
I read your response on #53. OK my point is where does that put George in the voters corner or with the developers, contractors and inside land owners.
This is why I am more interested in Patricia and Richards reply.George doesn`t have to tell me who he is going to support given a choice between voters and the developers group.
Do you still support George?
Thank you Richard Zapelli and Kathleen. You made my day!
I look forward to working with all of you in the future!
Interesting Information You Should Know.
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_9011261?source=rss
http://www.mercurynews.com/elections/ci_9167505
http://anhduong.info/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=305&Itemid=59
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/ci_9048492
#52 Carl S.
I must admit that I won’t have time to read all the comments, but I will do my best because it’s important to respond.
I am an immigrant; I never had any free rides. I have been working since I was 15 years-old. I was raised by a single mom in East San Jose. My sisters and I are all public schoolteachers. Graduated from SJSU and went through the EOP program with student loans. My brother is a businessman. We all worked, and struggled like everyone else. My mother worked for the county as a public health aide. I became a single mom and was involved in my son’s schools. I got elected and re-elected to school boards.
I do support immigrants and I believe that part of my job will be to bring people together as a BOS. This is not a complex issue; it’s a real issue which politicians are afraid to tackle. I am not afraid.
My agenda is not the immigrant agenda – my agenda is to serve with honesty and integrity.
Hope this helps…
#52 Richard Zapelli
When I get elected to the BOS I am going to hire you
you are well informed. You raised some very good questions; where is all that money?
I am not tied to any developer and have not raised any money in this election. I have spent my own funds.
In past elections I have had donations from developers. In 1992 I won a primary for city council in district 8. I lost the general election due to some developers and interest groups which worked to defeat me due to my strong support for open space and against high density housing.
As I look at the race for Supervisor in district 2, i feel very dissapointed about the quality, leadership, experience and knowledge of some of the candidates. I’m totally against George Shirakawa he is just a big spender of our tax dollars the Mercury news has endorse him and quoted “that he has been fair-minded and an effective advocate for minority children. His instincts, to fight for those he grew up with in East San Jose” I’m sorry but they are wrong….. BIG TIME…. George Shirakawa has been against those in more need he opposed the children health insurance after commiting to his residents to supported. He dosen’t do anything for the community. he just care about making his piggy bank more fat.
Richard Hobbs mmmmmmmm I think he is doing a good Job were is right now, he should stay there.
And Last well Patricia Martinez-Roach is not the Best But At least she knows the community understand the issues and she is Fighter. She would get things done for our families!
Obviously my ideal Candidate was Cindy Chavez or Jorge Gonzalez from San Jose Unified School District
I just want to share this with you people a prove a SHIRAKAWA LOCAL TAX EXPENDING.
George Shirakawa Jr.
Local Dining: $352.36 (Ranking: 8th)
Travel: $4,766.98 (Ranking: 6th)
Shirakawa wined and dined his former colleagues for two $200-plus meals while at a state school board convention in Long Beach in November 1995. In one case Shirakawa, formerly a member of the Franklin-McKinley school board, generously used taxpayer dollars to treat the Oak Grove school board to jumbo shrimp, New York steak, swordfish, mahi-mahi, lamb chops and lemon linguine. He also bought a couple of shots of Jack Daniel’s, scotch and red wine for his dinner guests, though Shirakawa says he personally didn’t drink any of it. (Shirakawa went so far as to say he never bills the city for his own bar tabs, although travel records from another trip indicate that he bought margaritas.) At the end of the five-day trip he had spent a total of $643.12 on meals. (In contrast, the city’s travel per diem for meals is $34 a day unless receipts are provided.) “I feel it’s justified because we get a lot of work done, we network, we establish good relations that carry throughout the year,” Shirakawa says.
During a recent National League of Cities convention held in San Antonio, Shirakawa spent $66 on valet parking—more than twice as much as it would have cost to park his car himself. When asked if he could have parked his car himself, Shirakawa replied, “Yeah, you could, I suppose, but obviously I didn’t do that. … I didn’t necessarily think about it ahead of time and say, I think I’ll charge taxpayers [extra for valet parking].”
http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/04.10.97/cover/govt-spend1d-9715.html
I just can believe that George Shirakawa, Jr., is the presumptive favorite in the race for supervisor in District 2….
Did you know that East Side Union High School Board of Trustee members George Shirakawa and Eddie Garcia are professional lobbyists? Did you know George Shirakawa is registered on The City of San Jose’s official lobbyist registry? Did you know Eddie Garcia is the vice-president of government affairs for the Bay Area for Comcast?. Did you know both men have strong ties to land developers? Did you know that ESUHSD’s school board formed sub-committees to deal with specific trustee management issues? Did you know that George Shirakawa and Eddie Garcia nominated themselves to the East Side Union Board of Trustees sub-committee on land acquisition and development? Did you know George Shirakawa claimed it was because he and Eddie had expertise in the land and developer issues?
Did you know at one time in history that type of expertise would have been called a conflict of interest? We didn’t mean to make you lose your lunch, we just thought you’d like to know!
Patricia Roach,
We need a strong candidate who isn’t afraid to take a stand on issues, and gives us straight answers to questions asked. I know you are really busy because June 3 rd is right around the corner here, but I was hoping you’d take the opportunity to really plow into the questions posed by Carl S. and Richard. This would be a great time for you to hook in the undecided voters because many members of the public read SJI even if they aren’t posting comments on here.
The question of taxes, immigration, VTA, health care, and others really need answers from candidates running. I was disappointed that you just gave a small bio, and a short detail lacking statement on immigration but did not say what you will do or stand for on these issues. If you are like Hobbs and your primary focus is going to be on the rights of immigrants, and immigrant programs you need to let us know that up front.
I’d like to add one question to the pot myself, if you lose and there is a run off, whom, if anyone will you endorse? My guess is you will endorse Hobbs, but I don’t know for sure. Can you tell us please?
Miguel,
Thanks for giving us some of the facts on George. I’m sorry but it is naive to think that many, many politicians don’t use tax payers money all the time in ways that are questionable to us, but every cent they spend on dinners with colleagues, courting new businesses, traveling, well it is all pretty much legal. No one is putting spending limits on them so they just take advantage of it.
Hobbs used the County’s Newsletters, their email lists, and even the annual report for OHR to campaign with on the taxpayers dime for months, and when he got caught doing it he denied it, and in one incident when confronted about trying to get county employees to make donations to his campaign, he used the old, “It is all a misunderstanding,” routine! (See #40- Articles attached.) He sent campaign contribution requests to County employees! Imagine your boss doing that to you. Wouldn’t you be fearful of losing your job if you did give him some money? YIKES!
“We didn’t mean to make you lose your lunch, we just thought you’d like to know!”
Who is “we”? Are you working on someone’s campaign?
You said: “Obviously my ideal Candidate was Cindy Chavez or Jorge Gonzalez from San Jose Unified School District.”
I agree that Cindy would have been awesome. I wish I knew why she didn’t run. She seems pretty happy teaching though. She’s a smart lady; I don’t think we’ve heard the end of this stellar leader yet!
Hey Richard Zappelli,
Why don’t you run for BOS or City Council? I’d work on your campaign!
Of the six candidates”Richard Hobbs is the best to perform well in office”.
Scott Herhold,Columnist
May 22nd,2008
#62-63 – Miguel Garibay:
I can certainly understand your points on George, and respect your opinion. And while I certainly don’t agree with everything George has done, I believe him to be the best candidate to succeed Blanca, because of his work as an elected official. I am familiar with the work he did as Council Member and Vice Mayor for San Jose. As Council Member for District 7, he took on the issue of Gangs, where he personally used his office to help rid a neighoborhood of a gang problem, and got City resources to help this impacted neighborhood free itself from gang activity. Another issue was when the company who recieved the city’s sidewalk repair contract (when trees lift the sidewalk, residents report it to the City, and this company goes out and repairs it, and the city bills the resident) was going out, finding broken sidewalks, and reporting them to get more business. This was putting a hardship on many residents, some of them elderly and on fixed incomes. It is one thing for residents to make complaints, but for the company to go out, canvas San Jose and make bogus complaints to increase their business was unethical. George got involved, and made sure this unethical practice stopped. He even went to great lengths to help a constituent, who as I understand it was elderly and dying, get a meeting with her idol, Rudy Galindo, before she passed. He did not do it for glory, or recognition; he did it out of kindness.
While I understand and respect your viewpoint, I believe the actions I mention are actions of someone who has a heart, someone who cares about the people they represent, and someone who will do their best to earn that respect from voters.
#65
Sorry, you`re not my type. I have no interest in public office.Non so ever.
Hey Kathleen,
Just to let you know, I’m not working in any campaign, I know the three candidates very well have work with them in the past in different projects or through my Job in the Community. My previous post was from a website http://www.unrulyrus.com/.
I don’t like Shirakawa, I rather have Patricia Or Richard
#66-Time for change. It certainly is and Hobbs isn’t about change, he is about self involvement and pushing his own agenda. The Mercury News Editorial Staff Endorsed George. Here is a statement from an article in the Merc about Hobbs:
“But people who’ve dealt with him professionally and as volunteers say he often comes off less as right than as self-righteous, alienating natural allies. Many have misgivings about Shirakawa but feel they can work with him.”
http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_9376158
#68- Richard, I’m not your type? You know I’m engaged Richard so why on earth would you say that! I don’t blame you for not wanting to run for office, I wouldn’t either.
#69- Thanks Miguel. I’ve worked with George and Hobbs and would take George hands down any day. I don’t know Patricia. Perhaps some day I’ll get to work with her too since we have the love of education and kids in common. Do you happen to know why Cindy didn’t run?
#52-Carl S.
I just checked and it looks like Richard changed his website since he got in trouble. It did not look like a few months ago when I first looked at it. I found this one being run by his supporters.
http://hobbscommunity.ning.com/
The Immigration Program at OHR will be cut eventually out of need. As to your comments about too many programs that are alike, I agree the fat needs to be cut. Duplication of government programs? No, say it isn’t so!
Richard,
I don’t live in your district so I can’t vote on these candidates, and since I’m not working on any one’s campaign, or donating any money, I’m not sure why you want to know but I’m fine with answering you anyway. If I could vote, I’d choose George because of the work he has done with youth, gangs, and yes, animals. Patricia Roach would not be a bad choice for someone torn between Hobbs and her though. I think now that you’ve sung her praises, and now that I’ve seen her website and talked to a few people, she’s worth your vote. I hope she comes back and answers the many questions posed to her in the last several posts.
I think you ought to consider giving George a call, or go to his headquarters and ask him directly whom he’d put first. He isn’t afraid to answer questions, but you just may not like his answers! I think to say all developers, or all lobbyists are terrible people isn’t really fair Richard. I know many politicians who’ve taken donations from people or groups, and have completely blown them off once in office. There are non-profit developers, and for profit developers that do donate large amounts of money to good causes Richard.
There are lobbyists that are fighting for good causes too Richard, and the word lobbyist has become something nasty like the label breeder has become to animal rescuers. There are a lot of loving, caring, responsible breeders Richard, and they do love the animals as much as I do. I think we have to look at the individual not their title.
Kathleen,
Re your #68 remark. I know your are engaged to Christian and I wish you both the very best. I am refering to your remark on #65, I have no interest in running for politics,if I were you are not my type to work on my behalf. I like people that respect the views of others, even if they don`t agree with my views.You have a problem with respecting the opinions of others.
I don`t agree with Tom on the BART program, Tom is well aware of my position on BART. But, I believe Tom has been very good for the City of San Jose on many other issues and I support and respect him on those other issues.
With you I get the feeling that if we don`t agree with you that we then have become your enemy.
I agree with you on annimal rights and support you for very good reasons. I was a 4H member and later when I was older became a 4-H judge in many Counties.I have two dogs and have raised dogs all my life.I am a animal lover.
The Metro reported that lobbyist Shirakawa used taxpayer money to wine and dine fellow school board members at conventions, running up travel and dining expenses in the thousands of dollars, while enjoying sumptous dinners of jumbo shrimp,New York steaks, swordfish, mahi mahi, lamb chops and lemon lingune. He also made sure that the taxpayers picked up the tab for some Jack Daniels, Scotch,and Red Wine along with the meal. (The Metro)
Sometimes I wonder if these people runing for the BOS really know what their Job entiles. I spend some time today reading their websites and issues that they plan to address and …..I’m sorry but they are weak!!!
they just mention the words universal health care, affordable housing, safety, but don’t provide any ideas or policies…
The role of county government is two-fold. First: To serve as an extension of the state and federal government by implementing state and federal laws on a county level, and disbursing state and federal funds countywide. Second: The county serves at the provider of municipal services for the residents living in unincorporated areas of the county.
this guys really beed to be advocates for our county no to their political agendas….
I would like to know…
How are they planning to address the issue of homelessness in our community?
What are some of your proposed solutions for the rising property values in Santa Clara County?
What ideas they have in addressing the issue of affordable housing?
How are they planning to create more employment opportunities?
what kind of enviromental policies or actions they are willing to promote in our county?
What are there ideas in any conervation in the local level?
And since they are representing a District mostly with latinos and working class families….What is are their opinions on how much fast food is consumed by children because the parents, being of working class, do not have time to cook healthy food and these lead to obesity…diabetes and other cronic illness.
What are their ideas to deal with 35 million cuts to SCVMS which serves as the county safety net and provides services to 90% of uninsured residents and 50% medical eligible patients in santa clara county?
I think we have the right to know if these candidates are capable of their the JOB that they are asking to be voted in…..
MARTINEZ-ROACH
“A fighter” from metro news
http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/10.26.05/nclb-0543.html
Student Bodies
A Silicon Valley school district has become the front line in a battle over No Child Left Behind
By Diane Solomon
PATRICIA MARTI-Roach says that before she ran for the East Side Union High School District’s board of trustees, she was constantly getting calls from Marine recruiters.
“They wanted my oldest son, David,” she says. “I finally asked them, ‘How did you get this number? This is a private number!’ They said, ‘We got it from the school district.’ I kept asking them to not call me.”
Her dealings with recruiters were one of the things that pushed her to run for the East Side board way back in 1994. And if the recruiting issue gave her headaches then, she thinks it’s even worse now.
What happened is the federally mandated No Child Left Behind Act of 2002, which requires public high schools to provide student names, addresses and phone numbers to military recruiters. A family’s consent is assumed unless they send their school a written request “opting out.”
Martinez-Roach meets monthly with the district’s students to listen to their concerns and bring them back to the board, and she’s hearing a lot more about recruiters.
“My students have been telling me about military recruiters. They’re roaming around their campuses and some students say they are invading their space,” she says. “Other students say that recruiters are cool, and they’re their ‘buddies.’ They go to football games; they hang out during lunchtime. One student said, ‘They listen to me when there’s something I want to talk about.’ Which got me thinking, ‘I’m glad the student had someone to talk to, but then I’m wondering if they were taking advantage? These are really just kids in adult bodies.”
Martinez-Roach isn’t the only one concerned. Now that No Child Left Behind has been in effect for a few years, districts like East Side Unified are taking a closer look at the impact it’s had on student and parent privacy rights.
The Army and its National Guard have already requested data for East Side Unified’s 11,821 juniors and seniors. With the Army and Army National Guard missing their recruiting quotas and no end in sight for the Iraq war, military recruiters are hungry for student bodies.
But this month, the East Side District threw a wrench in the works. At its Oct. 6 meeting, its board of trustees voted to delay providing student information to military recruiters until administrators were able to send another letter advising parents of their right to opt out.
The board had already sent out a letter and included opt-out information in its Parent Handbook. But they suspect the system has been less than effective so far. Once a parent opts out, the form is placed in the student’s permanent record. As of Oct. 6, the district had less than 200 opt-outs in its system—this for a district of 24,500 students.
Up In Arms
Parents in the East Side District also have other problems with the access that recruiters are getting.
Rubi Welch, whose son attends an East Side school, has joined a group of Silicon Valley parents who meet at the San Jose Peace Center to discuss recruitment issues at their children’s schools. Welch thinks that allowing military recruiters on campus sends a confusing message.
“We are teaching our children to not be in gangs, not to kill, not to do bodily harm to anybody,” she says. “So why are we allowing the military to come in here?”
Steve Morse, a coordinator for the Oakland-based GI Rights Hotline, says GI callers often say that there is a difference between what they were promised and what they got. He says recruiters might make themselves central to their recruits’ lives at first, but when things don’t go as promised with their jobs, deployment or benefits, he says, “they want to go back and talk to their recruiter who is then out of the picture. This is a shock to people, that what they were told doesn’t hold water.”
At the Oct. 6 meeting, East Side board members said they want a district military recruitment policy that is in compliance with No Child Left Behind, other applicable federal and state laws and their student privacy and safety policies. For now, there’s a little bit of wait-and-see as to whether such a complicated maneuver, which would put limits on recruiting while not endangering the district’s federal funding, is feasible. J. Manual Herrera directed Superintendent Bob Nuñez and his staff to analyze the law and existing policies and present a proposal at their Nov. 10 meeting.
“As board members,” Martinez-Roach said at the October meeting, “we have the power to send a message to our parents—to our community—to say, ‘We care about your privacy. We care about your safety.’ We want our students to be safe.”
#73- I was joking with you Richard! I don’t think you know me well enough to say I don’t respect the opinions of others, but fair enough Richard. You’re entitled to your opinion.
I grew up back east in the country and really enjoyed 4H. I’ll be saddened if the county fair disappears because 4H is there, and children learn so much from them. Having a pet as a child really teaches children how to be responsible adults. When I went home a few years ago, I went to see Farmer John’s beautiful horses. He breeds Clydesdales. God they are lovely.
Mercury News writter Scott Herhold calls Shirakawa a “candidate of same old thing, who “reminds’ him of another politician, ex Mayor Ron Gonzales.(Mercury News, 2/3/2008)
Herhold points out that Shirakawa takes tens of thousands of dollars from big developers in his school board races including money from contractors who benefit from East Side Union High School bond measures Shirakawa has voted for.For example, the Seville Group, a Pasadena based construction management firm has been paid more than $13 million under a 2002 bond and contributed” $20,000 to Shirakawa`s school board campaign in 2006. He also recieved $5,000 from Bruce Flyn & Associates which also recieved nearly $2 million from Shirakawa`s school district,“THESE COMPANIES RECIEVED NO-BID CONTRACTS. (Mercury News 1/29/2008)
Thanks Miguel for putting that up on Patricia. It really helps.
Richard Z. I looked at your posts and I think you should go back and read em. You are being pretty pushy yourself.
Kathleen I think you care a lot about the community and not just about the animals. Zappelli’s rude remark wasn’t right. You tried to compliment him and he acted like a jerk back. I’d hire you if I ever ran which I won’t because you speak your mind and you give the facts. Can’t please every body I guess.
Carl S and Kathleen,
I do not mean to sound pushy but, I do wish to be sounding upset.i don`t like to see people put words in my mouth or spin my cmments either.
Carl, maybe Kathleen can help you find my quote where Kathleen said that I said,…“To say all developers, or all lobbyest are terrible people isn`t really fair Richard”!
Carl you said “Kathleen speaks her mind and you give the facts”. Again go back and read this blog and give me the number where I called developers and lobbyest terrible people.If she gives the facts as you say, it should be easy for one or both of you to find that quote.
I said I knew of two developers I have a lot of respect for and gave there names, John Sobrato and Ed Thrift. I`m sure there are others that too have excellent reputations and the same goes for lobbyest.Steve Tedesco comes to mind as an example of a good lobbyest that lobbyed the City on behalf of the “Boys and Girls Clubs”. I`m sure there are others that are good too.
I respect Developers that do their outreach, listen to concerned neighborhood citizens and react accordingly.I also respect developers that practice the principles of “Smart Growth”.I really respect developers that give back to the community where they made their money. Sobrato and Thrift are examples of the type of people I speak of.
Developers are entitled to a profit and to be successful.But they should be held to follow the Cities General Plan and Specific Plans.
Carl how would you like it if I put words in your mouth.This is exactly what Kathleen did to me on #58 second paragraph. Again let me know where I called Developers and lobbyest terrible people in #58.You said she gives the facts, please find that quote.
Richard – You are taking things too personally again.
Once again, you are getting upset and attacking someone – this time it is Carl S., Kathleen without understanding what he is getting at, or asking Kathleen what she meant. Why don’t you re-read his post, and hers more objectively.
Developers and Lobbyists – Yes, you did mention Sobrato and Thrift as developers you like, but when you talk about developers and lobbyists, it is almost always in a negative manner, rather than to target the specific developers you have an issue with. It is understandable why people would see you as anti-developer or anti-lobbyist.
#79- I don’t see Richard as attacking anyone: although if he did it would be understandable since you, Kathleen, and Kathleen’s alter-ego Carl S are ganging up on him. (Carl S – who only pops up here to defend KBF, never posts otherwise and uses similar turns of phrase and grammar/spelling mistakes as KBF – and makes every single point with exactly the same reasoning as she does…hmmm)
Chivalry or not, it’s not entirely fair of you and Kathleen to try to one-two punch everyone you disagree with, and then cry foul when they react. Or filibuster them – long post after post refuting their statements, diminishing their opinions when they do not match your own.
It is two different things entirely to be mistrustful of some developers and to literally say they are “terrible people”. That is putting words in his mouth – to make a blanket, personal judgment on them all. RZ did not make the personal judgment – it was done for him.
Regarding the topic at hand, I am inclined to agree that Shirakawa is not the best candidate for the BOS. I have done my research, and heard from folks whose opinions I respect that Hobbs is a very smart man who would make a great addition to the BOS. I’ve already cast my ballot for him and hope that he wins. The crimes that the two of you lay out against him -forgetting the word “for” in his campaign signs!- are lesser in my eyes than those of a professional lobbyist who has eaten at the public trough for years.
#80-anonymous blogger,
Spoken like a true Hobbs supporter. If you are so proud of your affiliation with Hobbs why didn’t you just post your name instead of using “anonymous blogger?”
I don’t have an alter ego named Carl S. and to make an accusation like that is much like the pot calling the kettle black isn’t it?
As to Richard Zappelli, he is a grown man and he can defend himself just fine without your help.
#80 – Anonymous Blogger:
“I have done my research, and heard from folks whose opinions I respect that Hobbs is a very smart man who would make a great addition to the BOS.”
I’ve done my research too:
·http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_9376158
·http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_9011261?source=rss
·http://www.mercurynews.com/elections/ci_9167505
·http://anhduong.info/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=305&Itemid=59
·http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/ci_9048492
Kathleen and Christan,
I believe we are both looking for the same thing from our local Government leaders,especially at the County level where there is a serious need for open government.When I listen to your complaints and if you listen to my comments about the current problems at the County we can easily find common ground.We are both concerned about the back room deals in government that compromise our values of “Quality of life issues” and making sure our City and County remain a livable community.
Santa Clara County citizens access to government information is essential for developing and maintaining a civil and democratic society here. Information facilitates public knowledge and discussion and provides an important guide against abuses,mismanagement and corruption.“Openness and Transparency’ in the decision making process also helps to maintain “citizen trust” in government actions.This is what I look for in all government candidates before I support them.This is called “Sunshine-Transparent Government”.
Consider both your concerns and mine on this blog and we have common ground, we are asking or demanding open government from our government leaders.
Both Santa Clara County Water District Candidates are commited to open government at the Water District, judge has recently introduced the concept to the Water District and this is why I said I would like to see both candidates serve on the water board.
Both Patricia and Richard are open proponents of the “Sunshine Laws” and if elected will push for open Government at the BOS. Shirakawa is opposed to open government, when asked his position on Sunshine his comments have been consistant at all neighborhood Forums,“thats a difficult subject and I can`t take a position on that issue now”. There are members sitting on the BOS that are posturing the same as George, and continue to posture.
At the February 2008 meeting the request for “Sunshine Laws” to be initiated was requested on the record of Chair Liz Kniss by citizens and the June meeting is comming is next week and she has still not responded to several citizens requests for Sunshine at subsequent VTA Board meetings, again on the record.
Why would a politician or any government leader “not want Sunshine Laws”?? Ask yourself.
When I listen to your complaints on this blog I ask myself,wow, Kathleens complaints could be solved if we had Sunshine Laws in place at the County at all levels. Mayor Reed is a member of the VTA Board. At the February 2008 meeting he stood up after the second request was made and said we need Sushine at the County VTA. We are still waiting for Liz Kniss to respond, she supports George Shirakawa, she has endorced him.
Kathleen do you see a common ground for us,I do.We need a majority vote on the County Board to bring Sunshine to the County. A vote for George will be a set back for Sunshine.
The Unions, they support Sunshine. You just have to go to a City Council meeting to see them participate in the Sunshine process. Vallejo blames many of their problems on the lack of open government and all the back room dealings.
The Mercury News has always supported “developer candidates”, take the time to research the Mercury`s track record.They always defend all developers. Some or many should be supported but not all.
The paper did point out caution signs on both candidates in their “Opinion” position.Scott Herhold has been very open on developer problems.
Neighborhood groups support Sunshine, Smart Growth and densification if it is well planned.To densify and not take in Neighborhood concerns about traffic conditions, traffic calming,adequite school capacity to support densification, park development to help provide recreation for children when both familiy members are at work,adequite police protection etc. are all quality of life concerns that are covered with good “Outreach” to the neighborhoods.
A good example of this was the project that almost went through and was recomended for approval by the VTA Board by VTA senior development managers without any outreach.The whole deal was made through a series of back room meetings between VTA development managers, developers and heavy lobbiest support, it was a “done deal”.The plan was in violation of San Jose`s General Plan, the Midtown Specific Plan, The Santa Clara County`s own “Smart Growth Plan” developed by the County, The award was going to go to one developer that did not follow City and County guidelines.
Sunshine would address both your complaints and mine.The public has a “right to know” it is part of “human rights”.The public has a right to know what our elected officials are voting on.Can you agree we have common ground and we are both looking for the same result.
#83- Richard Zappelli,
Thank you for the kind effort you’ve made in trying to find common ground between us in your post. I don’t agree with your perception of Hobb’s regarding his supporting sunshine, or on everything you’ve said, but we can most certainly agree that we both share your concerns for open government, and that we want a better community. I think in future discussions we should keep that in mind, especially when we disagree on something or someone.
It’s clear that we need and independent voice without hidden agendas, Shirakawa and Hobbs both have to many interests with many groups unions and developers and obviously their own political agenda. We need someone that support open government, someone that would fight for the families and communities of district 2, someone that is part of this community and is willing to bring the issues of our children, youth and families to the table and address them now, we don’t want a lobbyist or politician we need a community activist. A Revel with a Cause (title attributed once to Supervisor Gloria Molina from LA) some one that wouldn’t quit until she gets an acceptable answer! I think that Patricia Martinez-Roach can be our Gloria Molina.
Patricia is a fighter, she is passionate but most important she has Integrity, Experience and is Independent
“I admire Patricia Martinez-Roach lifetime of work on behalf of children, youth and families, She has work as an ESL teacher for parents and Adults, I was an ESL student in a classroom next to her back in 1994 at Horace Mann Elementary, She has teach Parenting Classes, and advocated for our Youth as Board Member in the East Side High School Board and I trust and believe that she will deliver results is she is elected to the BOS,”
Martinez-Roach has earned a reputation as a fighter and a groundbreaker. She will be the second Latina ever elected to the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors,
“Patricia Martinez-Roach has been standing up for children and families throughout her career in public service,” “She is the candidate who best understands the issues facing District 2 in Santa Clara County.”
Patricia Martinez-Roach “A Strong Voice, that would work for us” The Community!
Miguel,
Patricia sounds like a very hard working woman. I wish her the best today. I’d like to see her beat Hobbs and go into the run off. It would be nice to have a woman on the BOS and one that cares about everyone, especially children!
One of the things I love so much about Blanca is that she has always fought for children and animals. She is such a kind and compassionate woman. I will really miss her.
:-(
Kathleen,
I believe Patricia has a big chance, and I really hope that people take this opportunity today to vote for a change! Patricia represents the change!
Independent, Integrity and Experience are some of her major qualifications!
Kathleen, I did not endorce Richard Hobbs or Patricia Roach,nor Judge or Dianna Foss as I am not allowed to as a Willow Glen Board member.I do like and respect all four of them.
Unfortunatly, there are six running for the District two supervisor seat, five of which represent change and, one that wants to protect the “status quo”no “Sunshine. The five could divide and share the vote for change and this would result in the “status quo” candidate`s win.
My problem with the candidate that would “Not” support Sunshine is personal.I have basic core values that I believe in that prevent me from supporting any candidate that is opposed to “transparent government”. I believe the voters have a right to know how elected and appointed government officials govern.