As I drive around San Jose, it’s obvious that each of the five major candidates (not including Stanley the Modified Pig) has a chokehold on their neighborhoods; if you look around downtown near San Pedro, the place is littered with Pandori signs, over off First and Second Streets you see Chavez signs, and you cannot walk in Willow Glen without tripping over a Mulcahy sign. The same can be said for Berryessa with Chuck Reed and Evergreen with David Cortese. Each neighborhood resident either knows their current or former council member, or is going with the “familiarity” factor, almost saying, “____ is from my neighborhood, so I am supporting them.” But who is going to bridge the gap to gain crossover appeal in neighborhoods they are not from?
I have seen support grow for Pandori on lawns in South San Jose—perhaps because those residents are supportive of his view on development in Coyote Valley—but where else have we seen candidates being supported in neighborhoods that are not their own or are outside their districts? Are people voting on party lines or is this about sticking with your camp and not being swayed into another?
Also, I just wanted to mention how things have been hopping here at San Jose Inside lately, I believe due to a slew of Cindy Chavez supporters flooding the pages. But I wonder if, instead of letter-stuffing parties and walking precincts, they are now recruiting people to blog at the Chavez headquarters? Maybe the other candidates need to get on board!
This election is heating up and it’s starting to get fun…
I have to agree with Dan Sturges.. it always amazes me when people running for office claim they’re not politicians. By definition they are (and I spend waaaay to much time on Dictionary.com):
Politician: One who holds or seeks a political office.
They make it sound like being a politician is something bad. Just as in every profession, there are good politicians (hmmm, give me time and I’ll think of one…) and there are bad politicians (Cindy Chavez). (That was just too easy)
#5 Don – I think that the Cindy people that are being referred to are the Reality Checks of the world who are bashing everyone in their path – not you and Lisa and Rich. You actually have some substance behind what you all say.
And would be be so crazy to think that some in Naglee Park might not like Cindy?
At the risk of mixing our metaphors, it seems to me—from the storied ‘hoods up the Alameda—that the question is not one of ‘bridging’ but one of ‘embracing.’ As long as sj voters punch their ballots (wait, do we still do that with electronic voting?) along parochial neighborhood lines, the unholy coaltion of big business/big government/big labor triumvurate will continue to wield city power, parsing out tidbits to various constituencies while the overall city suffers from bad planning and piecemeal decision making.
The real question, I think, is rather WHO has the citywide vision and clarity of purpose to communicate that all the really important decisions affect everybody, from traffic to city revenue to gangs to parks.
It’s a sign of our maturity as a citizentry to be able to look beyond the What’s In It For Me rhetoric of traditional politics and the Bright Shiny Baubles of professional sports and think holistically about what policies take advantage of our sizable opportunities as a unit, and act accordingly.
It takes a broad vision, and—dare I say it?—a certain bluntness to get us there.
Funny, I thought Cindy was running for Mayor of San Jose. Apparently, she is only running for Mayor of Downtown. That clearly illustrates the problem—she doesn’t have a vision for the WHOLE city. Too bad, she had potential.
Like Don G, no one from Cindy’s campaign has pointed me in this direction. I did, as Don said, join because I had been identified as having magical powers. Don’t I wish!
After trying to clear up the spelling of my name and what my efforts are I found this site to be rather entertaining. So, I stuck around. In fact, I’ve asked some of the folks at Cindy’s campaign about this site only to find they were not paying any attention to it. When Don says I aided him he’s referring to the bit about actually submitting to the site.
Yes, David has some supporters in NP. He seems to be a sweet guy and that’s to be expected – no one can make everyone happy. I’ve never met him myself but the folks who like him tell me he’s nice. The NP mailing list is huge but the number of folks who contribute is relatively small.
Chuck is a great guy, he’s very sweet and focused and I like him very much. I had the pleasure of serving on CDBG with him when he was our Council liason and grew to like and respect him very much.
Dave is more of a mystery, he’s now our Council liason for CDBG but has been more difficult to get to know. He hasn’t been to many, if any, of the CDBG meetings this year choosing instead to campaign.
Michael Mulcahey may not have ever been elected but he’s certainly a politician – in spite of his protestations to the contrary.
Cindy, in addition to being nice, smart, talented and effective, has concrete accomplishments from each of the neighborhoods in her district. She also has accomplishments from outside her district throughout the rest of the city. I was surprised at how widespread her efforts had been and the diversity of people she’s assisted.
For example, she helped get a church up and running in the Evergreen area – and they are very greatful to her for that. It wasn’t an easy task. The church is amazing with beautiful space for meetings, entertaining and youth as well as quiet spaces.
Don, I thought that other neighborhoods and businesses were a leary of being included in the SNI project? What about the area near Bascom & Moorpark? I seem to remember something about them voting to not be included too…Anyone have more info?
I noted a while a go that Cindy has a large, unified and loyal following.
The personal attacks on Cindy have been made largely by those supporting other candidates, those who hate Ron Gonzalez and others who do not know Cindy.
Many of the attacks have been vitrolic and uninformed. Her supporters are passionate, they know her and they need to speak out to set the record straight.
There is no doubt that the other camps are trying despartately to equate her with Gonzalez. But it won’t work for the following reasons.
1) She isn’t Gonzalez. Her style, manner and decision making are completely opposite his go it alone style.
2) She has the support good government advocates like Susan Hammer, Zoe Lofgren, Mike Honda, Sheriff Laurie Smith, and a host organizations ranging from affordable housing advocates, neighborhood groups and even, surprisingly, labor organizations.
3) She has the support of a majority of the City Council. As was noted, people tend to know, like and trust their own City Councilmember.
4) She has successfully opposed the Mayor on issues such as the Childrens Health Initiative that matter to people.
5) She was the only Councilmember who could get a censure motion on Ron through the Council. When she did, Ron went quietly and humbly.
If Cindy has a flaw, it is that she doesn’t grandstand or tell you what a great person she is or how she, alone, saved San Jose from disaster. She doesn’t throw people under the bus just because it is politically expedient to do so.
Her perceived flaw is actually her biggest asset. For in empowering people, building consensus, showing loyalty and above all, sharing credit—she has amassed an army of folks, myself included, who are willing to tell her story.
The difference between the candidates is that while all of the men are saying vote for me, Cindy has leaders of all walks of life saying—vote for her.
It is a subtle, but significant difference.
SG – Chavez supporters flooding the pages of SJI? Heavens no! They all just happened to spontaneously start showing up here in lockstep.
I’d just like to know if it was a specific instruction given to specific individuals, or an implied action given to a number of Chavez supporters. Either way, clearly the word has gone out to blog the hell out of SJI on behalf of the Cindster and take attention away from the big bad PandoriMonster, Chuck ‘n Dave and that guy who’s not a politician. Those guys keep talking about ISSUES, not about how NICE Cindy is.
Good old machine politics revving’ up, and it’s only April. You’re right, it’s starting to get fun…
he inside the hall, shut up and turn out the lights when you leave tonight!
We’re waiting for the cindiacs to put a positive spin on the nearly $40 million settlement with the county and how Cindy’s vote to sue the County was a good one for the city. Please, tell us how smart that decision was and how that is another example of her leadership.
You’ve raised a very interesting question. If the home districts are for the most part safe for each of the respective candidates then where will the battle for Mayor be won or lost? Will it be the Almaden Valley, West San Jose, Santa Teresa or something in between. Students of political science and campaigns will be analyzing these post-election results for weeks.
District 2 has to be the most apathetic district in the city. Looking at Cortese’s list of events, no candidate forums are schedule anywhere in the district. I have yet to see a sign for any candidate.
Well… tonight’s debate was a yawn.
The big shocker was Chuck’s surprise ending when he announced that in a recent poll, he is in the lead! What poll was that? Personally I thought Mr. Pink was in lead.
The funny thing is Pandori supporters are starting to come out of the woodwork on the beloved CCA/Naglee Park e-mail listserver, which was dominated by the Chavez supporters and her talking points memo. These are the same people that just started posting here at SJI.
But now some on the CCA/Naglee Park listserver are starting to openly come out against Chavez and talking about the things David Pandori has achieved. This blasphemy is driving some of them nuts!
Though many refuse to believe it, Chavez is very polarizing person. And people in her neighborhood will speak in hushed tones as to why they don’t like her. It had been this way for several years with many people I know in her district. Hmmmm…
So, they have their work cut out for them. I’m sure they have their “independent expenditure groups” ready to start swinging away.
As that astute political observer Rodney King opined, “Can’t we all just get along?”
Akin to Will Rogers, all I know is what I read in SJI & The Murky News.
Cindy has certainly created some buzz (no-one else has nicknames for their supporters yet “Cindinistas” and “Cindiacs”). Buzz is good, unless the word “molest” appears near your name.
But I still have trouble believing the Cindy her supporters speak of really exists. She was as quiet about the Gonzo indiscretions and underhandedness as PiusXII was about The Holocaust.
I certainly hope to hear some substance soon in place of the usual platitudes; ‘cuz I ain’t made up my mind yet.
Dear San Jose:
Regarding #16’s comments (Robinson).
I have not read or seen any “personal” attacks on Cindy Chavez. One can strongly object to a person’s politics without crticizing them personally.
I think it’s both fair and accurate to point out that Vice-Mayor Chavez has been on the same side of Mr. Gonzales on most every major policy issue over the past 7 years. It is also fair to remind people that the vice-mayor voted to end the independent investigation into the Norcal matter.
Isn’t it fair to pose the following question to San Jose voters: Will a vote for Cindy Chavez be a vote for four more years of Gonzales?
For me, this campaign is about the reformers (Reed and Cortese) vs. the status quo (Chavez).
Pete Campbell
p.s. I’m a Reed supporter.
Oh, I don’t know, Steve #19—remember the only 2,000 or so in D7 who voted to replace Terry Gregory with Madison Nguyen?
I can assure you that neither Lisa Jensen nor I was instructed to start posting here by the Cindy Chavez campaign. The more prosaic truth is that I’ve been following this blog for quite awhile without feeling the need to chime in. Then I noticed that some dimwit (with an axe to grind about his personal pocketbook with no regard for the larger public interest) spoke about a “Linda Jensen” in the University neighborhood supposedly having undue influence in city hall, in obvious reference to Lisa. I laughed, called her, told her take a look, and she responded online. It looked like fun, so (with some instructions from her as how to logistically proceed) I jumped in, and found that this blog is somewhat addictive. If we downtown neighobrhood folks offer fairness and balance to the steady diet of anti-Chavez nonsense, so much the better.
As I recall Rich Robinson has been keeping sanity to these discussion vis-a-vis Chavez for sometime, so the notion that he “spontaneously” showed up here is demonstrably false.
As for some folks in Naglee Park backing David Pandori being evidence of a general insurrection among downtown residents against Chavez, dream on. Those who know downtown neighborhood politics will confirm that Naglee Park is sui generis, a lone neighborhood in revolt against the Strong Neighborhoods Initiative (SNI) because certain of its residents fear that the redevelopment agency is coming to take their homes from them, despite the fact that not one residence anywhere in the city has ever been taken by eminent domain as part of SNI nor is any likely ever to be, and despite the fact that every other neighborhood within SNI city-wide is thrilled about its inclusion in SNI. No doubt some Naglee Park hysteria-mongers blame Chavez for not yet relieving their paranoid fears of condemnation proceedings by removing the neighborhood from the program at a cost of half a million dollars or more, but Naglee Park is hardly representative of the downtown at large.
!7 – Thanks for your most eloquent response. Hopefully you do not represent the majority of Cindy’s brain trust.
16 – Another well written but rather empty of substance support of CS. Big deal, she opposed the mayor once or twice. She didn’t oppose on him on any of the major scandals and the DA’s report will soon let us know just how involved she was in some of them. As for the censure, she was too little and way too late on that. The only reason she jumped on the bandwagon was she had to so people like you could say she was a leader in censuring the maor. How naive do you think we are?
I, too, know Cindy and have worked with her many times. I agree she is nice. My experience, more than once, and the experience of many others I know, is that she tells you one thing and does another. Or she tells you she will do something and nothing further ever happens, or if it happens it is weeks or months after the time she said she would get back to you.
My major complaint with Cindy is she is not straight with people. Rather than tell you she won’t support something or will not do what you ask, she will tell you what you want to hear and then ignore her own words.
She likes to use the public process and tell people how open she is—except when she ignores that public process and people have wasted months or years in meetings only to have her ignore the work that was done.
These are not attacks as some of her rabid posters will quickly try to claim. They are personal experiences over many years of involvement in the city.
I could go on but will await the flood of responses telling me to ingore what I say because Cindy is a nice person.
Sounds like it’s time for the Cindinistas to be given a new memo with fresh talking points. The first one got old REAL fast!
Hey, Inside the Hall, #23: Why don’t you give some examples of Cindy Chavez dropping the ball or saying one thing then doing another? I suppose then you would have to identify yourself. As it is, your post is “pretty empty of substance,” to borrow your phrase.
#16 Rich – How did Cindy save San Jose from disaster?
I think the thing that Cindy fans are missing is that when people disagree with her views or what she has done, that is not a personal attack.
And you say that Cindy opposed the mayor on issues like Children’s Health Initiative? I think that is such a minor issue in relation to everything else that she should have been opposing Gonzales for that it hardly warrants any mention at all.
You must not get out alot because there are signs for Mulcahy in South San Jose particularly Monterey Rd. and Almaden Expressway. Most of the people I have talked in the South are supporting Reed. Pandori doesn’t have a chance, he is pompous, making it a point to walk in front of everyone during the debate at the California Theater, I felt was rude, it wasn’t a court room.
In response to #3, It was an interesting annoucement, what poll was it? AARP’s?
Thanks, Don. Since I still have to work with Cindy I can’t give specifics but I can tell you they involved several areas, one if which was land use (no, I am not a developer.) I assume you have never had a problem with Cindy doing what you want or not being completely truthful with you, but I and many others have not had that experience. Perhaps others will share their less than positive experiences with Cindy. BTW – these problems have occurred with people both inside and outside the Hall.
26 (and others) – Would you really vote or not vote for someone because they did or did not stand in front of a podium during a debate? This is the problem with the electorate—they would rather criticize style than listen to the substance. David scored strongly on raising critical issues that most of the other candidates did not or just read pre-written responses that barely addressed the issue.
I don’t care a candidate wears å silly tie if they address the issues and have a vision for the city that is vastly different from the current direction we are going.
Maybe next time you folks who have trouble with where a candidate stands on stage should just listen to the audio and then you could focus on where they stand on the issues.
#19 – There is a huge (and hugely illegal) sign for Cortese over 101 south outside a house. Wondering if the owner will be fined or simply asked to remove it.
#23 – Cindy is about the most honest person you could meet. Calling her a liar is highly inappropriate and, with Mr. Gagliardi, I’d like to hear specifics. Her office is the single busiest council office, the phones never stop ringing and staff is often attending community meetings. If some things get delayed it’s an understandable mistake. In my dealings with that office, if there is something urgent that needs immediate attention I ask that it be treated as such.
#25 – I believe #16 was intending to say that Cindy does not tell everyone she saved the city from disaster while others may have done so.
Rich-
Regarding your 5th point I seriously doubt that Cindy was the “only” member of the council who could have gotten a censure motion passed. Even the Laryngitis Twins (Pyle and Chirco) could have gotten Gonzales censured.
Following her pattern, Cindy waited until it was clear which way the wind was blowing and then jumped out in front of an issue that had been painfully obvious for months.
Of course the censure motion passed. Who would have opposed it? That’s not leadership, that’s bandwagon politics.
(Disclaimer: This observation is not a personal attack on Cindy who is indeed very NICE. Sheesh! )
Great discusion but at times on / off the topic about San Jose’s next Mayor as our city’s political leader and as it has been pointed out all the candidates have their plusses and minuses to be our next political leader
Let’s look for a minute at the defination of Leadership especially Political Leadership
from Concepts of Leadership http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/leadcon.html
Leadership is a process by which a person influences others to accomplish an objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and coherent.
Leaders carry out this process by applying their leadership attributes, such as beliefs, values, ethics, character, knowledge, and skills.
Political Framework
In an effective leadership situation, the leader is an advocate, whose leadership style is coalition and building. While in an ineffective leadership situation, the leader is a hustler, whose leadership style is manipulation.
Political leaders clarify what they want and what they can get; they assess the distribution of power and interests; they build linkages to other stakeholders, use persuasion first, then use negotiation and coercion only if necessary.
So who is San Jose’s best Political Leader and why should they be our next Mayor
Let’s hear for each Mayor candidate’s supporters about their candidate’s leadership style, ability and attributes, such as beliefs, values, ethics, character, knowledge, and skills.
Thanks
30 – I said she was untruthful, not a liar. We could parse that further but I don’t think it is necessary.
I doubt she is the most honest person I could meet. I think she is basically a a good person, perhaps promising too much to too many which is where she gets into trouble.
I stand by my comments based on first hand experience and supported by second hand input.
Didn’t she take credit for inventing the Internet?
Just some comments from the peanut gallery..
I am happy that folks like Cate and Lisa have joined in on the conversation. Seems like it had got a bit lopsided on the site. We have heard from a few other camps – it would be great to have it more balanced.
I agree with SJ Downtowner: People like Reality Check make a bad name for Ms. Chavez and her supporters. It’s about style.
Thanks “Inside The Hall” – I would expect for every candidate to have a good and bad side.
Many people on this site have talked about VISION. I have preached it too. Let’s hear more about City-Wide, big picture issues. Where is it? Otherwise it seems like “all talk” to me. I wish more candidates would take advantage of this forum.
SG – I have seen the regional placement of signs too. It is going to be fun to see how it all plays out.
#15 I can answer your questions on the neighbors in the Bascom/Moorpark area. It is in the Burbank/Del Monte SNI and I’m the current pres. If any of you look at a map, it’s a checkerboard of unincorporated and incorporated properties. You literally have a situation where at times people have complained about the fact they can’t figure out which agency has jurisdiction over repairing basic streets and sidewalks, who should be the appropriate emergency responding agency and a host of other issues. The B/DM NAC is so large that it encompasses multiple neighborhood associations and a business district (also dealing with the city/county issue).
One of the neighborhood associations (primarily county residents) became concerned that RDA was going to come kick them out, steal their homes and create havoc. They were fed an amazing variety of implausable scenarios which generated more fear and frenzy. Many of the calmer ones simply didn’t want to be placed in the position of looking at annexation as they believe that they are better served, have more freedom and would be better off remaining in the unincorporated arena. And, let’s face it, some of the businesses would be severely impacted if they were to be under the City’s rules and regs.
Because of RDA law, the unincorporated portions of the B/DM NAC can’t be included for funding or development…you can’t spend RDA money in a county pocket unless there is an agreement between the City and County. And while the County sent representatives from numerous departments to each and every meeting, while they were glad to participate all along, they were somehow surprised when asked to vote to “accept” the plan.
With all that said, there has been all along a high level of participation of “county folks” in the NAC. We respected the wishes of one neighborhood organization to be excluded from our board or to be listed as a participating member, but their residents still come to every meeting and are full participants. They sit on our board, chair projects and welcome the advantages of spending city money to help design and repair infrastructure, build parks and improve our neighborhoods. Thanks to RDA funding our business district has a formal plan for revitalization that will help it continue to grow as a neighborhood business district. While the vocal “antis” have faded away, we have developed an amazing group of volunteers who have been able to bring both City and County together for joint projects.
So, the short answer to your question is yes and no. Yes, people were leery when we heard “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”, but that didn’t stop any of us from figuring out we didn’t have many chances like this…we got over it.
Randi
If only lawn signs were a sign of support—it is clear that SJI is spinning as best it can that there is a Pandori movement afoot, that he is relevant—lawn signs are nice but they do not win elections, just ask Andy Diaz, his signs litter our City every couple of years—Unfortunatley money plays an important role in elections as do endorsements and Pandori does not have much of either one because not too many people want to open their wallets and flush their dollars down the drain on a candidacy that has no chance of success and he has been missing in action for years and off the radar screen of organizations such as the Chamber of Commerce that endorse in races such as this. His poll numbers are in single digits according to Chuck Reed’s poll, his fundraising is paltry and his anti-everything stance will turn off voters. There is a time to get negative but when you start there and finish there it just turns voters off. Here is a primer for all the wanna be campaign managers out there. When you are broke you gotta generate free press, and to do that you must attack because it makes you different from the rest. Since Davey Pandori is broke and devoid of any major endorsements or surrogates with credibility he must continue to fly off the handle every chance he can to generate free press. This flash in the pan will subside and the press will grow wary of his constant attacks and begin to ask the following questions: Where has he been during these make or break issues such as Coyote Valley, Sunshine Ordinance and the toughest restrictions on the off-sale of alcohol in the state? If these were the issues that he says will define San Jose, where has he been? Why did he not use this “growing support” from South San Jose to impact these issues? His candidacy is an ego trip and it is sad that he will get trounced come June.
Bridging the differences of our neigbohoods will be of critical importance for our new Mayor and that is why over the remainder of the campaign we should all listen for not just what candidates are against, that is easy, or for the softball things that they will all be for—what we should listen for is what they will do and how will they do it. Then how will they pay for it. Single Gal be careful about not using your real name, you could get attacked by some on this site.
37—Thanks for the primer, as you would see it. Others might say you took a page from another primer—if you got nothing to say then tear down the other guy. David has been far from negative but he has told it like it is. Dave and Chuck have also done so to a lesser extent and Michael to an even lesser extent. Cindy seems to think everything is pretty good the way it is.
The situation is so bad in SJ that just to talk about what is happening could be perceived as negative when in reality it is just telling the truth. You can wallow in the canned prewritten responses and hope for the best. I prefer someone who faces reality and calls it like it is.
You do make a few good points though about listening to candidates—I hope you will follow your own advice.
Increased availability of Alcohol sales at Gas Stations? I cannot believe MADD would advocate this. Back up this claim or quit repeating it.
Reality Check, does “wanna be campaign mangers” include Justin or are you are lecturing us from your current position? Let’s all pray that if Cindy ever does get elected, she doesn’t hire you on staff. This could be worse than Joe Guerra in a dress.
Time Magazine’s current issue has an article –
Pssst! Who’s behind the decline of Politics ( Consultants ) on page 64-69 from Joe Klien’s Book – Politics Lost, How American Democracy was Trivialized by People Who Think We’re Stupid
Summary at
http://www.randomhouse.com/doubleday/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9780385510271
The country is being run by pollsters. Few politicians are able to win the voters’ trust. Blame abounds and personal responsibility is nowhere to be found.
Klein begins his analysis—campaign by campaign—of how things went wrong.
Consultants have drained a good deal of the life from our democracy – Specialists in caution, they fear anything they haven’t tested
———-
Interesting but probably controversial comments partially since Joe Klein is very controversial
Thanks for the info Randi. It sounds like clearer heads finally did prevail but I heard that the city (Susan Schick) really mucked up the delivery of the SNI plan. Sounds like more of a testament to you and your neighbors than the city. Good job!
Mr. Carville—Safest large city in the nation, new community centers, fire stations, libraries and parks coming on line (the City needs to work on how best to staff the facilities that are not replacing existing ones), a cop and firefighter respond when you need one, taxes are in line with other cities in the area, the airport is being redone and never in the history of our city has there been more neighbhorood participation in decisions that reflect their individual priorities. Give me Cortese or Chavez or Reed over the “outsiders” who say one thing and do another.
I support those candidates and elected officials who have solutions to real problems like dealing with those that harm our children by strengthening Megans Law and improving how our city monitors registered sex offenders, I support planning, not building, but planning for growth—and agree with Mr. Pandori that our city did not grow as it should have in the 1970’s but disagree with him that it is wrong to plan for growth. I would not look kindly on any elected official who would support building in Coyote without the jobs. But planning for how it could work is smart in my opinion. And when it comes to lobbyists, don’t preach on the topic and then hire one to run your campaign. Not one Pandori, Reed or Mulcahy supporter has said this is wrong. Why is that?
Those that say the wheels are coming off in our city clearly did not read the results of the Citywide poll released by the Mercury News just this week. Here is a link:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/14307266.htm
Real problems need real plans and solutions not just simplistic knee jerk sound bites necessary to garner free press when one can not raise money from their growing list of supporters.
Anyone know where are these mysterious poll results? I need a reality check.
You can’t beat the hypocrisy of Chuck’s campaign literature. Check out this nugget from his Voting Records flyer:
“Chuck proposed plugging loophole allowing unions to pay “volunteers” to work city elections with having to report it or being bound by campaign contribution limits.
Chavez vote NO”
Isn’t Chuck still accepting checks from lobbyists too?
How many votes will it take to get into the runoff?
Remember, his name is Stanley, spelled S-t-a-n-l-e-y, Pink. Say it to yourself enough times so that when you go to the polls you won’t forget it. He say he doesn’t mind if you call him a politician. That would just make him a political pig.
Reality—Woven within your post are some good thoughts but you like to leave out key information when it doesn’t fit your argument. “Safest Big City In America” is a nice slogan but it doesn’t mean much. Statistics can be manipulated to make just about any case you want. If we had more police to cover our sprawling city then more crimes would be reported and the numbers would reflect the true crime rate. It is also known that many minority residents do not report crimes because of a cultural distrust of police. I’m not saying the streets are crawling with criminals but slogans like this don’t really mean anything.
You talk about community centers, libraries, etc. but we don’t have adequate funding to properly staff them or in some cases even keep them open. The city is deficient in parkland and the parks we have are suffering because we can’t staff them or even keep the restrooms open.
What the airport will be like remains to be one, but right now the “newest” terminal is woefully inadequate and an embarrassment to anyone who travels in and out of SJC.
You talk about it being smart to plan for Coyote Valley but you don’t say that the planning is being done by a group stacked by the Mayor that guarantees a developer friendly plan. I don’t think that is smart. And when did David say it was not smart to plan for growth?
The citywide poll was done by the city—do you really expect anything but a glowing report from a city poll?
Those who think the wheels are not coming off simply do not have a clear understanding of the wreckage that has been caused during these last 7 years. In addition to continual violations of the City Charter, the now well known backroom politics, an atmosphere of vindictiveness and vendetta driven policy, the revolving door of mayoral staffers who have violated the spirit if not the law itself, etc. etc. To pretend that everything is OK is worse than hiding your head in the sand.
You are correct though that real problems need real solutions. First, though you have to acknowledge the problems. When do you plan to do that?
Although my disappointment with Ms. Chavez’s performance as vice-mayor is profound, the sudden avalanche of heartfelt input to this site from her supporters has convinced me that she has proved herself an invaluable asset to the people of this city. Therefore, I suggest that Cindy Chavez be named to a new post, that of San Jose’s Helpfulness Czar, with duties to include listening politely, exuding friendliness, attending neighborhood meetings, reviving attention to all “cracks and crevices” projects, and expressing grand, pie-in-the-sky good wishes for everyone.
(I do suggest the Czar position be subjected to voter approval every two years as experience has shown that, absent the reinvigorating effects of regular elections, helpfulness, energy, and concern tend to have a very short shelf-life in the bureaucratic community.)
I offer this suggestion as a genuine attempt at compromise. Clearly it is unreasonable to expect the many citizens who have received so much help from Cindy Chavez to turn their backs on her future, just as it is unreasonable to expect those disappointed by her lack of leadership to support her for mayor. My proposal will make good use of Ms. Chavez’s considerable talents, without subjecting the city to her now obvious shortcomings. We must remember that this election is about choosing someone with the courage necessary to LEAD a big city (we should leave the charm and poise categories to the pageant folks).
If we can spirit this Czar solution through the council quickly, SJI can get back to discussing only qualified mayoral candidates—in other words, those who haven’t already blown a once-in-a-career opportunity to demonstrate true leadership.
#39 Hiiiiiiiii ALLLLL—MADD supported the strengthening of the ordinance that governs the off sale of alcohol in San Jose. They supported it because the revamped ordinance is the strongest of its kind in the State. A small excerpt from the Mercury News:
San Jose Mercury News (CA)
June 18, 2005
Section: Local
Edition: Morning Final
Page: 1B
SAN JOSE COUNCIL CALLS FOR LAW TO LET GAS STATIONS SELL ALCOHOL
JESSIE MANGALIMAN, Mercury News
San Jose has moved a step closer to lifting the city’s ban on alcohol sales at gasoline stations after the city council this week instructed the city attorney to draft a new ordinance that eventually could rescind or revise a 1985 law that prohibits gas stations from selling liquor and groceries.
Council members told the city attorney and the city planning department—the offices that will draft the ordinance—to ‘‘strengthen and expand’’ the city’s alcohol ordinances.
Some council members said the proposed change could allow the city to bolster its campaign against illegal liquor sales to minors by punishing gas station operators that are ‘‘bad neighbors,’’ while giving small businesses a competitive advantage. Some older San Jose gasoline stations sell alcohol, the result of being grandfathered in when the ban took effect in 1985.
When the change was first raised in 2003, groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving and the Traffic Safe Communities Network opposed it, saying the city doesn’t need more places selling alcohol, encouraging drinking by teens and young adults.
But this time, MADD officials said they support the city’s proposed plan, which passed 9-0 Tuesday, with Councilman Dave Cortese abstaining on the advice of the city attorney because his family owns a gas station in San Jose.
Barbara Jacobson, a victim’s advocate for the Bay Area chapter of MADD, said in an e-mail that the organization ‘‘has reviewed and is supportive of the guidelines that the city of San Jose and Arco have developed.’’ Arco is a gasoline company that owns stations in San Jose.
‘‘MADD’s initial concern was that the stores seemed to link alcohol and gasoline,’’ Jacobson wrote. ‘‘However, it is apparent that alcohol is readily available at many locations in the vicinity of gas stations.’’
#43 Reality Check – don’t know who you are but I’ve been very much enjoying your posts. Pay no attention to those who complain about your sensible and logical statements.
RC has remained thoughtful, hasn’t been nasty and continues to plug fact over fantasy.
#47 Carville – what on earth are you talking about the airport being woefully inadequate. I travel on business quite often and would take SJC over SFO or OAK any day of the week. Easy in, easy out. My complaint about the airport would be the curfew violators who fly over my house. (oh, did I just tell you where I lived?)
Lincoln #29 makes a valid point.
Most people support the person who “won” the “debate”. Most people think the winner is the person that agrees with him/her on some hot-button issue, which may be a miniscule part of the job the candidate is seeking, and is sometimes totally irrelevant; e.g. a city council taking a position on an issue over which it has no control, like immigration reform.
The whole thing becomes some ridiculous self-fulfilling prophesy.
I have yet to hear more than platitudes/slogans/sound bites from anyone running for mayor; but that doesn’t surprise me. I have also yet to discern leadership qualities in any candidate. They spout what their handlers tell them to spout.
#30: Please explain to me how a sign authorized by the owner of private property to be on that person’s property is “hugely (or even marginally) illegal.
I have only hearsay, but it’s from several credible people, that the last person to get Cindy’s ear is the person likely to get what he/she asked for on a given issue. I have also heard that she tends to bite off more than she can possibly ever chew. Sometimes you hafta just say no.
Carville, the mysterious stats come from the FBI and are based on first total number of reported violent crimes and violent crimes per 100,000 citizens and second total number murders and murders per 100,000 citizens. Reality is not playing statiscal games with smoke and mirrors – unless you would like to call the FBI on the carpet?
As to the airport it is a wonderful place to travel through being much preferred over the other bay area airports because it is smaller and more convinent.
This city has increased parks, play areas, libraries and improved the downtown – whatever wreckage you think you’re seeing must be in your mind. Visit the MLK or Selma Olinder or FCC or the new Opera house. Thank goodness the UA snuck out of town so the locally owned and operated Camera’s could expand into that space.
Didn’t think I would ever agree with finfan on anything, but today’s the day. Cindy for Czar!
Carville—What I mean by “Safest large City in the Nation” is that our city has done a solid job of dealing with the systemic issues that contribute to crime and neighborhoods in decline and as a result our city is safer by any reasonable measure than any other large city and for that matter our neighbors in SF and Oakland. For example, if a neighborhood has graffiti, street lights that do not work, abandoned cars and absentee landlords that do not take care of their property it tends to breed crime. With Neighborhood Revitalization and SNI there has been a keen awareness by some city leaders and by our residents and businesses in our neighborhoods that by organizing and working with the police department, anti-graffiti and code enforcement that these issues that breed crime can be dealt with and thus prevent crime from gaining a foothold in their respective neighborhood. There are a few neighborhoods and areas in our city where gangs try and pop their heads up but our police department does a great job of attacking these areas and by and large San Jose has been successful by working with neigborhoods to help themselves. Is it crime free, no, but it is safer by a long shot in comparison to other cities our size. More can be done and I hope our next Mayor puts the dollars necessary toward not giving an inch to crime and making it even safer.
My post acknowledged the problem with staffing our new community facilities. I think that there ought not be one current park that has any cuts in order to staff new ones, this will be a challenge but it makes little sense to me to take from one park or library to give to another. But the voters passed the bond measures to update our aging facilities and build new ones and I think there is money to be found in the city budget to fund what ought to be priorities such as libraries, parks and community centers.
Here is a link to the poll and you can judge for yourself:
http://www.sanjoseca.gov/
Mr. Pandori has stated that he would stop the plannning process in Coyote, Evergreen and North First Street. It has been a cornerstone of his debate lingo—I stand by what I said, plan Coyote but no building until jobs are there. Period.
If the Mayor was running for re-election your points in your last paragraph would be valid—he is not. And at any time if the sentiment against the Mayor was anywhere near what it has been on SJI, a recall would have been a slam dunk, why did you not lead one?
But for those who are running for Mayor that continue to rant about special interests and lobbyists and then as their first decision in their run for Mayor is to hire a lobbyist to run their campaign smacks just a tad bit of hypocrisy. Would you not agree?
Reality #43: Thanks for the link.
In it I read: ““On balance, it’s a very good situation,’’ said Brooke Myhre, the city’s manager of performance development. “About as good as we could hope for in terms of issues.’‘
Can someone please tell me what a manager of performance development is or does? How much do we pay this person? I try to parse that title…hhhmm, a person who manages the development of performance. I still don’t get it. Talk about words devoid of content.
How many others like Brooke do we have managing some imponderable? Like the public art lady. I sure hope they earn a lot less than a cop or a firefighter. Do they help Cate develop the performance of her neighborhood?
50 – SJC may be fairly easy to get in and out of but after you are inside it is a mess. Have you actually gone through the multiple lines to check baggage then to go through security while the lines back-up throughout the terminal and crisscross back and forth in some Kafka-like maze? If you have I don’t know how you could think that it is adequate for an international airport in a large city. And don’t get me started on the joke of trying to get a rental car there.
Matalin—Never said the statistics were mysterious. And thanks for supporting my case. The key word in your response is “reported” as in “…total number of reported violent crimes and violent crimes per 100,000 citizens…” As I said, when we are understaffed with police fewer crimes get reported.
As for the airport, I too prefer it to SFO and OAK, but that doesn’t make it adequate.
e-mail from Paula Birdsong, California Executive Director of MADD
Good Morning,
I have received your email question regarding the repeal of a ban of alcohol at gas stations in San Jose. MADD is not opposed to the lawful sale of alcohol. We advocate responsible behavior regarding alcohol that is purchased at any establishment. We also work to prevent underage drinking and supported tougher training to retailers regarding fake IDs. MADD is opposed to the act of drinking and then choosing to get behind
the wheel of a car. We know all too well the deadly consequences of that act. Open container laws apply wherever alcohol is purchased – at a gas station or the grocery store.
Thank you for your email and inquiry.
A follow-up e-mail was sent:
Do you advocate increasing the convenience and availability of lawfully purchased alcohol?
Paula Birdsong, California Executive Director of MADD replied:
No, we do not.
Hooray for Cindy!
She saved 3 minutes off my 87 commute. Now I can fill-up on beer and gas in one stop.
She’s got my vote!
Now if Mulcahy can get us a BevMo on Lincoln, we’ll be living large.
#50 – WOW. Did I read that right? That’s a bold statement about our airport. The airport – as a facility – is TERRIBLE for San Jose’s image as a big city. Period. That place exemplifies San Jose’s identity crisis.
I wish I had time to start in on this – so many examples. I could name many airports in both big and small markets that would put ours to shame.
Because I love my city I will throw in one positive nugget…I like that cell phone waiting area at SJC. Perfect for that 12:15 a.m. arrival I was waiting for.
Sorry Also Single Gal, as a lifelong resident, you hit one of my sore points about this place.
Would it surprise you that San Jose has a 59.8% higher rate of Aggravated Rape than New York City?
#59 Hiiiiiiii Allllll,
Read the ordinance, it is what MADD supported not your loaded, get it, loaded, question to Paula Birdsong. Hate to repeat a previous post, sorry:
Scenario #1
Current gas station with a mini mart that sells beer and wine. No problems in the past with crime, underage issues, etc. They want to revamp their station so it looks like those in other cities, you know, new, well lit, more pumps, clean new bathrooms, convienience. To be able to invest millions and create construction jobs, and bring new tax dollars to the city they have to agree to: not sell malt liquor, not sell fortified wines, no hard liquor, no .375 bottles, provide a mandatory training for their clerks on a host of issues including underage drinking—id check—state and local alcohol policy—etc., no signage in the windows or at the pumps promoting beer and wine, they must pay into a self funding inspection program where the city will perform random inspections to ensure compliance, no single can or bottle sales, they must have adequate lighting, remove any graffitti in 48 hours, and be responsible for not creating any crime within 300 feet of their business. The list goes on and on. These are mandatory non-negotiable requirements, now the Planning Commission and the City Council can add any additional requirements they deem sufficient to level the business playing field for gas stations and to protect neighborhoods. Notification requirements for neighborhoods was increased and this is for an existing gas station that already sells beer and wine and has had no problems with crime. Residents get a new station with all the amenities and the business gets to make more money.
Scenario #2
A new site is proposed. The ordinance makes it virtually impossible to build a new station with beer and wine unless of course you meet the following mandatory requirements: can not be situated where there are 3 other alcohol outlets within 1000 feet, can not be in a pre-designated high crime police beat building block, can not be situated within 500 feet of a school, community center, library, hospital, clinic, day care facility, park, and other sensitive locations, can not be in an area that is already overconcentrated, a Safe Neighborhood Initiative area. You then have to agree to all the mandaroty conditions in Scenario #1 and then the Planning Commission and or Council can add other conditions as they see fit.
There are new notification requirements so that no suprises happen and the neighborhoods are engaged early. For all the reasons listed above this is a good pro business pro neighborhoods compromise. That is why Mothers Against Drunk Driving endorsed this new ordinance. That is right the organization dedicated day in and day out to stopping drinking and driving, Mothers Against Drunk Driving endorsed the new ordinance.
I think Scott Herhold in the MN did a great service to each of the major candidates for Mayor with his articles this past week. He had each candidate pick out an area they wanted to be interviewed in. Each of the candidates picked out interesting areas. I was impressed with each one. Some of their ideas I liked better than others. I think each is a fine citizen of San Jose. One of the candidates claims he is not a polititian but I beg to differ with him. If he is running for elected office to be voted on by the people, he is a polititian whether he states a political party or not.
We seem to have a bit of common ground of agreement but on other things we will continue to agree to disagree.
We do have many good and safe neighborhoods and the police do a decent job keeping the crime rate down but my previous comments still stand. I still maintain that basic city services are suffering—you acknowledge some of that in the staffing issues with parks and community centers. You mention street lights—do you know how long it takes to get a street light changed? First the outage must be reported by a citizen which sometimes takes forever, then it can take many weeks for replacement. I asked the police department once why they couldn’t report the outage as a routine part of their neighborhood patrols (since it is a crime and safety issue if the streets are dark) and was told it wasn’t their job.
This mayor should have been recalled but that is a major undertaking for a citizen to undertake. Unfortunately, many people in this city were not paying attention to what this mayor was doing with the assistance of the council and the former city manager. Those of us who have been appalled at his abuses are counting the days until he cleans out his desk.
As for your obsession with a campaign run by a lobbyist, I don’t quite see the problem. There is a big difference between lobbying and running a campaign. They are two different things and ideally çampaigns would be grassroots run by local community people, but until our entire campaign process is overhauled we have to make the best of a bad situation. I don’t see any hypocrisy at the campaign level. If, after being elected, a lobbyist is hired as a staffperson then there is a problem.
I wonder how many write-in votes Stanley Pink will get?
As you can read, Paula Birdsong, CALIFORNIA Executive Director of MADD, would not take a position on the ordinance, other than to say they do not advocate increasing the convenience and availability of lawfully purchased alcohol, which as you would agree, the ordinance does among other things.
A Local MADD advocate may not have communicated with State on this, which seems to be the case.
And, Police Chief Rob Davis clearly states why they are opposed to changing the current law, and allowing more liquor outlets.
http://www.sanjoseca.gov/clerk/Agenda/10_04_05docs/100405_04.03sup.pdf
What does the council know that Chief Davis doesn’t get?
We as a community need to start the decision on important isssues
San Jose has a significant city tax revenue problem because we have less city tax revenues per resident and jobs per employed resident than other cities in Santa Clara County which results in less city services to include public safety etc
We are the #10 largest city with #34 city staffing level with a staff that has more workload than most other cities and yes we can always improve staff focus, productivity and city services but compared to other cities our city staff is very good and efficient
Our tax shorfall is due to many decades of now questionable public policy, economic development and land use decisions especially extensive residential building in green field areas like Coyote Valley and open areas etc rather than infill development where the city infrastructure exists or would be less expensive to install as we are now doing.
We also put most of the jobs in North San Jose and most of the new housing in central or south San Jose resulting in some of the worst traffic problems in the US rather than have jobs, homes and retail near each other
Our development fees and other requirements on developers for new green field residential development which used up more city tax revenues to install or fix infrastructure problems have been less than other cities in the county while our commercial / retail development policies are more restrictive and our fees are above the county average resulting in less jobs and retail tax and property tax revenues especially with a very long development approval process
The opposite of what San Jose needs.
The decades of spending billions on downtown development while it has produced a nice downtown is still not where many businesses want to go and until recently restrictions on retail, housing and office building heights in North San Jose combined with longer permit times and a business community / city economic development that did not aggressively recruit new companies to offset these actual or perceived issues was at a cost – we have lost many jobs to other local cities as well as other states and now countries as well as and large amounts of retail sales taxes
]
Here is what the Council knows:
there is no correlation between the places people can buy alcohol and alcohol consumption.
We tried banning alcohol once in this country, it doesn’t work. I got a better, republican idea,—let’s tax it even more.
The ability to tax is the ability to eliminate—if we want to erradicate bad behavior—do it with tax policy—not regulations that make no sense.
Perhaps we can start by raising the sales tax even higher so our residents will want to go outside of the county whenever possible to shop, especially for big-ticket items.
Seems like you got your hand caught in the cookie jar Mr. Gagliardi.—-“steady diet of anti-Chavez nonsense.” If someone is coming out in favor of one candidate over another I really doubt that it is “anti-Chavez” nonsense anymore than it is anti-anybody nonsense. It seems like you Chavez supporters really get hysterical when someone has anything positive to say about any another candidate. Stanley Pink is my man!
Al Koholic 65,
The reason the Police Chief is against alcohol at gas stations is his religion. He’s a Moonie or morman or something like that. Alcohol is against is religion. He feels we all should live that way.
Living next to Al Koholic must be tough, you have my sympathy, but I hope he heard right about the Texas Hold’em….can’t wait to shuffle up and deal…
I agree Ed, we shouldn’t be building houses in Coyote valley. Traffic is already bad enough on 87. We need to find ways to bring more real jobs to downtown San Jose like Adobe. We should be looking at expanding the San Jose SBC.
Personally I think Pandori is the guy to do it.
#57 Pilot – Perhaps we’re not travelling through the same airport. The SJC I travel through has a single baggage check line and no Kafka-like mazes (though I do like the image that creates).
Since I travel primarily to the East coast or ex US I tend to leave first thing in the morning, with the occasional flight later in the day. Maybe Franz and his torturous lines make an appearance on your behalf. The biggest problem I ever had was when they made me take my sandals off, it was early and I was annoyed as they could easily see the lack of fissionable materials between my toes. I did however survive to get on the plane.
I’ve been to many airports on many continents, world wide, some better, some worse. I anticipate our airport will continue to improve over time.
The missing component in the airports future is a BART station. Our illustrious Mayor chose instead to send BART to Santa Clara forcing airport patrons to return by people mover. That factor, in my mind, means our airport will not ever be in the same class as other international airports.
But, as a resident near the airport, I very much enjoy a short taxi ride to and from the airport. Going through the luggage checks is no different, and in some cases actually better than, many airports.
On my return recently from the capital city in a popular, industrialized and wealthy country I did, literally, go through multiple luggage or other lines. The 30 minute line to check in (no self check available), the 45m line to get through luggage check, the 20 minute line to pay some mysterious additional exit tax previously unmentioned, and finally the 15 minute line to get into the international terminal. Since I was travelling first class I did at least have a pleasant rest during the ensuing 18 hour flight.
Shelly, #61, not sure what bold statement you’re refering to.
#79 “I’ve been to many airports on many continents, world wide, some better, some worse.”
How many is that? So I guess you’ve been to about 7 airports worldwide. SJC is a poor example of an International Airport.
#65 Paula Birdsong wrote the support position paper for San Jose’s ordinance revision which I repeat is the toughest in the state. Phone your council member and ask them to fax or mail you a copy of the support position paper/statement from Paula Birdsong. You are correct in your assumption that local MADD chapters can not take these types of positions, it is the state and national level that takes positions and this is why Paula authored the support position paper/statement. If you were just a little more up front with her and a tad more specific with her she would have told you so. Now go to your meeting.
Carville—Candidate Pandori says lobbyists are controlling city hall and elected officials do them favors. He says they have undue influence. He hires a consultant who works for nothing during the campaign and gets paid a huge success fee if candidate Pandori wins. Election is over and now lobbyist approaches Pandori on projects while Pandori owes lobbyist/ex-campaign consultant money—see article for your review—
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/09/19/MN194252.DTL
I see hypocrisy on this one and Reed and Mulcahy share a little of the hypocrisy also—Pandori should detail his “arrangement” with Ross…open government and all….
Ed Rast—Jobs and economic development are going to be hot topics at tomorrow’s Rotary Club Forum—How will the jobs to housing imbalance be leveled? How will San Jose be able to recruit corporations to our city if there is not enough affordable housing? And how will RDA play a role in attracting new business to our downtown? These are questions I hope get answered.
Again, WHY are we so wrapped up in the alcohol at gas stations issue? The bottom line is that no one in the neighborhoods, or MADD or the police ASKED to have alcohol sold in these places. And the police chief has no alterior motive – come on. Can we move on to some bigger issues here or are people just trying to deflect from talking about the tough issues?
#71—Ask Al Koholic, and how do you know who asked for it or not, where were you when this item was discussed? Did you speak against it when it was before council? Oh that is right, no one spoke against it when it came to council, not you, not Pandori, not McLobbyist, no one—what are the tought issues you want to talk about?
JD #80. That is a very interesting question. The blur of airports had blended, but in the interest of being up front and honest I gave some thought to the question.
Off the top of my head, I was able to identify 30 different, international airports I’ve used. I’ve only been to five continents in response to your next question. Not many for some frequent travellers but it has given me some appreciation of our airport.
What would I like to see at our airport? I’d like to see the restaurants and shops available after passing through the luggage screen in the C terminal. I’d like to have more shopping and more San Jose specific goodies to take over seas. I’d like to see Peet’s or another local roaster replacing that other joint.
My name is Al, and I’ve been sober since…… well, the last time I got gassed up.
In John Zamora’s passionate plea before the council, his final words were,
“I ask you, please use your common sense. You can’t possibly believe that selling alcoholic beverages to thousands of motorists while driving by NEW, CONVINIENT outlets and gas stations, targeting them will have a positive impact on the safety and welfare of the community you represent.”
#81 says in regard to SJI:
I’d like to have more shopping and more San Jose specific goodies to take over seas
Shop before you fly.
Personally, I prefer an airport that is sparse, gets me in and out with minimal time and effort, and does a great job of controlling traffic.
Back in the early 80s when I was a frequent business flyer I loved SJ airport. I always booked flights from SJC, even if I had to change flights in Chicago, or wherever. I would arrive 15-30 minutes before departure, park in the lot across from the terminal, check the bag, and be on the plane in no time. Returning was just as simple. Get the bag, get in the car, and leave.
This is one of the few examples of where things were better in the past.
Nice reply AlsoSingleGal. I too think terminal C needs improvement, although it makes me feel very presidential coming down the steps on to the tarmac. I didn’t mean to be harsh, I just think it’s funny how things on this blog get exaggerated. I’ve given up on daytime tv, this has much more drama.
Support – I’m with ASG. I don’t have time prior to my travel to hunt down San Jose branded items but know that the local airport should be stocking them.
If I did have time I’m not sure where I’d go. SJ seems bereft of interesting or unique branded items. If you have a source please point me there. On the other hand, it isn’t clear to me why the request for shopping locations in the airport would be of any concern. If you don’t have an interest in shopping – don’t bother visiting the shops.
I am also one who chooses ease of entry and exit. In spite of the changes post 9/11 I still find SJC to be simple to get in to and out of.
I have heard that there is a move afoot to license push-cart vendors in San Jose to sell, off-site, alcoholic beverages. Off-site meaning they would not be allowed to carry bottle openers of any type or corkscrews and consumption could not begin until the buyer was at least 10 yards from the vendor. These vendors could purchase the proper licenses from the City and the ABC to walk our neighborhoods peddling their wares much the same as the vendors who push carts to sell ice cream and other delicacies. I got this information through someone in the Stanley Pink for mayor campaign.
Al Koholic or Bundy or amo—read the ordinance, get a sponsor and fixate on getting yourself focused on something else. You should not get so MADD about San Jose being able to create jobs and protect neighborhoods at the same time. Cheers!
Oh great, Also Single’s recipe to improve SJC is MORE SHOPPING! Sheesh. Go to Valley Fair the day before. I wanna get through the line and get on the bloody plane to my destination.
My neighbor told me that the city was considering allowing gas stations to have Texas Hold’em tables.
Is this true?
I thought he was crazy – but given that we’re talking about CH I thought I’d doublecheck.
In an attempt to answer my own question:
http://www.sjc.org/improve.html
After thinking about it a little, how does increasing the number of alcohol outlets help the city. With the passage of the ordinance I now have 8 places within a mile of my home to purchase beer instead of the previous 4. Now I only have so much beer money to spend. So now I will be buying from the least expensive outlet, thereby lowering the tax revenue for the city. While revenue for one outlet will increase, at others it will decrease. Who benefits?
I can only summize that the Council wants me to drink more that way I’ll be so drunk I won’t care about the shananagans going at CH.
I just don’t see any benefits to increasing the number of outlet. Just potential for greater problems.
#88 HIII Johhhnnn,
The strictest ordinance governing the placement and regulation of outlets for alcohol in the State only became law in February of this year—so it had no impact on the number of current alcohol outlets in your neighborhood—but what the ordinance will do for you is not allow another one in your neighborhood and if one of these operators is causing problems there is expedited enforcement and a swift process to either get the operator in line or close them..In fact if one of your outlets for alcohol is a gas station and the gas station wants to refurbish it will have to decrease the amount of alcohol it makes available…that is right, in order to build a new state of the art gas station with a convienience store, to replace an existing gas station that already sells alcohol, they could not sell fortified wines, malt liquor, single cans or bottles, no .375 ml bottles, no airplane sized bottles, no alcohol advertising in the windows or gas islands, and a whole host of other mandatory conditions—so with this ordinance there will be a decrease in the amount of alcohol in your particular neighborhood if, and I write if, one of your current outlets for alcohol is a gas station and they want to refurbish it—Oh ya, read the ordinance to find out more about the mandatory conditions and the expanded areas where no alcohol will be allowed in our city…
I finally figure out what we could do with the New City Hall. Make it a distillery and brewery!
Then require all the bars, restaurants, nightclubs, liquor stores and gas stations to sell the city of San Jose official beers and liquor.
Imagine:
Ron Gonzales “Back Room” Ale
Cindy Chavez Tequilla
Ken Jeager imitation Jeagermeister
There could even be a Salamader Pale Ale for the Golf Courses!
I finally got home and wanted to comment about the airport and after I finished typing…well, I lost it. Sorry if I am double posting.
Briefly..
San Jose was a convenient airport and suitable in the 1980’s. My disappointment is in the vision (there’s that word again) for the airport. The result is an airport that lacks in the asthetics, space and services necessary to be a top notch facility.
There are many ways to evaluate the airport. One is from a resident’s perspective and the other is from the visitor’s. I think it is shortsighted to think about the airport from simply one point of view.
For a visitor, this is their first and last impression of our city. No wonder why we have to tell them we are the 10th largest city or the Capital of Silicon Valley. Even Ontario, Ca has a nicer airport and convenient parking. John Wayne…I could go on. (I’ll wait for the negative feedback on these two.)
I could bash the airport – but it makes me grumpy. Let me just try one more…My travels often bring me to Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. Their airport reminds me of San Jose: easy parking, airport stairs, a shop or two and a bar. Yes, our SJC reminds me of an airport in a third world country. Go figure.
In closing, I would love to hear from someone who could bring some facts to the table about our airport and its evolution. Maybe I’ll become more sympathetic and less embarassed.
I ask little of an airport—that it have convenient non-gouge-priced parking; that I can get through security in a reasonable amount of time; and that rental car lots aren’t way far away. HHmm, I guess that must be a lot to ask, since I can’t think of an airport that meets all of those few criteria.
I don’t want to shop. I’d like some decent and fairly priced food to be available; and a bar to wait in with some TV’s if there is a delay in my flight.
To call SJC an international airport is a big stretch. Why not go all the way and call it an intergalactic airport?
Walking outside to plane and deplane is hokey.
Oddly enough, the old terminal is much easier to deal with than the new one. I try whenever possible to fly the airlines that fly out of the old terminal.
The baggage screening requirements post 9/11 changed forever how terminals must be designed; so many facilites will have to start afresh.
But as hokey as it is, I’ll take SJC to fly out of over SFO any day. In fact, if there is a one stop flight out of SJC and a nonstop out of SFO, I’ll still take SJC 80% of the time.
I do not believe that one discerns the character of a city by its airport. It’s just a station on the way to somewhere else. No-one lives there.
#89 RC
I am by no means an communtiy activist and know very little about city politics and procedures, just a regular citizen. I came across this site while surfing the web and found it very entertaining. It has however started me thinking. I have not read the ordinance perhaps you have a link to it so I can better understand.
However, you failed to answer my question.
Who is increasing the number of alcohol outlets is beneficial to the city?
Your response raises even more issues. I realize I may be stretching things but I’ll wax on anyway.
When my local gas stations begin selling alcohol they are then discouraged from upgrading their facility because they will want to maintain their revenue levels. Thus causing my neighborhood to deteriorate.
The stripmalls where the liquor stores are will attract few customers thus also causing the stripmall to detriorate.
You say there will be strict enforcement when/if there is a problem. Great another neighorhood problem. I’m already dealing with potholes, broken street lights, taggers and annoying code violating neighbors. And I think I live in one of the quiter neighborhoods in the city.
Please tell me why this is a good thing. I would like to read the ordinance.
JMOC –
I agree with your overall comments. I agree that the old terminal can be a better experience than the newer one. I also want a terminal I can get in and out of.
Here is my problem. It is a perfect example of a bad master plan. Why there wasn’t enough foresight to get the expansion/master plan done correctly the first time? Now, we are starting over with new plan/look for the airport. The American terminal, now, has revealed itself as a short term solution.
Bad master planning generally costs the people more money in the long term. That’s what concerns me about San Jose: there is not a cohesive or long term plan that works. Look at Downtown or the Santana Row debacle, Guadalupe River Park, our Light Rail system.
We can’t get these things done right – it makes me really nervous for Coyote Valley.
To me, the Arena and California Theatre seem to be the primary public facilities that make a bold statement. (I’ll throw in the Rep and The Tech to be nice.)
I’ll add the library to that short list.
#92—Hiiiiii Johhhhhnnnnn—-
Your question, “Who is increasing the number of alcohol outlets is beneficial to the city?” is a good one, sort of—no one I know believes it is a good thing in areas that are overconcentrated, in high crime areas, within 500 feet of a school, community center, hospital, day care provider, senior center, library, within 1000 feet of 3 other alcohol licenses (this includes restaurants), college, university, or other sensitive area. Oh and did I forget, SNI areas were added to this list. This new ordinance codified these requirements for the first time and added a whole host of additional mandatory conditions—Some background…
Some twenty years ago the city said no more concurrent sale of gasoline and acohol, it was the usual knee jerk response to a problem that does not exist. There is no data that supports the premise that if you fill up at a gas station and walk into the mini mart and buy alcohol that you are going to drink and drive, it is on site sales that contribute to drinking and driving, bars—restaurants—nightclubs, not a mini mart.
Way back when San Jose defined alcohol as a food so this meant no food or alcohol sales with gasoline. Thus for 20 plus years most gas stations deteriorated and many look like dumps. If you had a gas station with food and alcohol before the ordinance change 20 years ago you were able to keep doing what you were doing. But if you wanted to knock down the older site and build a newer one, then you would lose the ability to sell alcohol. The economics did not make sense to gas station owners so no new stations and no refurbishing of old ones took place. Are you still with me.
San Jose struck a balance—strengthen the overall ordinance governing alcohol at bars, nightclubs, restaurants, etc. Expand the areas in the city where the city can say no to all types of alcohol outlets and allow existing gas stations that sell alcohol that there have not been any community problems at refurbish their stores and not lose their license if they; don’t sell malt liquor, fortified wines, single cans or bottles, .375 bottles, no signage in the windows or at the pumps, mandatory employee training on underage drinking, and a whole list of mandatory conditions. For a new site, you have to find one that is not within 150 feet of residences and all the other conditions above and then go through a public process where the community has expanded tools to say no to an alcohol outlet if it is a gas station, bar, nightclub, restaurant that sells wine with dinner, etc.
Neighborhoods are protected, businesses can expand and either refurbish existing sites or open new ones with or without alochol depending on the location and community input. Remember in the past since alcohol was considered a food item, even if a gas station wanted to they could not sell gas and just food only—it was not allowed.
It was for these reasons, the strictest ordinance on the governing of alcohol in the state, that MADD endorsed the new ordinance.
Check the city clerk for a copy of the entire ordinance——hope this helps—-I need a drink
Well, the record pretty much confirms # 21’s comment that Cindy went along with Gonzo/Guerra for most of the least seven years. The word “VichY” springs to my mind.
So now all the neighborhood mavens spring to her defense to try to convince us that she’d be just peachy for the city, ‘cuz shes nice and she listens. HHmm, a staunch supporter of failed policies, mendacity, and bullying is now gonna be the nice, cutesy, bearer of good tidings to all who come to her throne? I don’t think so.
My word!! All this angst about alcohol sales. Have you nothing better to think about?
I would like to focus the discussion on the question of how to bridge the gap. I will ignore all the political grandstanding and ask a simple question – who is interested in building the bridge to close the gap? I suggest that if the people have time for this blogging they have time to go out and work to close that gap. That is a sound means of getting this City to a better place for its residents. All its residents.
#24 and #30 Don and Also Single Gal I respect your loyalty to Cindy . But is it blind ? You state how honest she is, if it comes out that she knew any thing about the Norcal fix ahead of time would you change your support for her .
In response to a question way up above… by city ordinance campaign signs are limited to 10 square feet in size. Cindy’s signs at her campaign office are much too big, Mucahy’s sign at Lincoln/Willow are too big, Dave’s sign is too big – unless it is a actual commercial billboard, then it’s okay.
I wonder why the sitting council members are allowed to have these big signs, when I know for a fact that the council candidates from outside city hall have been forced to take down their large sighns on Winchester Blvd. by code enforcement. I know this because I am one of the property owners and they had my permission. When signs were replaced by my neighbor, code enforcement threatened to make them take down a fence that was out of code if they put them back up! (even though by written policy, code enforcement doesn’t enforce the fence regulation anymore).
Talk about the city taking sides in a political race. Guess that’s what happens when a planning commissioner throws his weight around city hall.
It’s funny, now everytime I put up a sign, it’s stolen within 48 hours! So much for my political free speech. Only the insiders may apply………