We are sitting exactly one week from the mayoral primary and now it’s time to start making some decisions on your vote. Whether you want to know or not, my vote next week for mayor is going to David Pandori. I have come to this decision because I feel we need a tough, yet principled leader who will take San Jose where it should have been years ago, and restore pride and trust in our city government. This will not be an easy task—being that the Gonzales regime probably stripped most of the honor and trust out of the mayor’s office—but I feel that Pandori can restore that pride and trust for us, while also getting things done.
In my eyes, a good leader is someone who says the difficult things when they need to be said and also has a plan to make things better. Pandori actually wrote a book about what needs to be done, so it gives me faith that he has a plethora of ideas—and they are good ones at that. Better parks, safer streets, stopping unneeded development and revitalizing downtown are all ideas I can get behind.
If we end up with Chavez, Cortese and Reed as our next mayor, I am afraid, though they are very different people than Ron Gonzales, that we might be in store for “more of the same.” We will get lots of talk about making San Jose better and little action because none of those people have proven they can rise to the task and make things happen. However, I feel that Cindy Chavez becoming mayor would be the most catastrophic of all. I feel that I could learn to live with the others if they are elected, but not Chavez. She exemplifies what is wrong with the current administration; she says all the right things and makes you believe she is on your side, but when it really comes down to it, I feel she mainly gives lip service. The last thing we need is four more years of lip service.
Mulcahy, on the other hand, could be a good politician someday. Who knows, he could surprise me and be a really good mayor. I just don’t know if I have the time or the patience to wait and see if that will happen. And I don’t think our city has the time to wait and see either. It’s possible that he would be a great council member—where he could learn more about the way a city is run—and he might have the qualities of a good leader someday, but not now.
So, when you are going to the polls next week or filling out your absentee ballot this week, think about if you have the time to wait for our city to become what you want it to be. And then think about who will take us there the quickest and who can be trusted. For me, it’s David Pandori in a landslide.
Single Gal, you may be the “Single Gal” but not single minded. David Pandori is the only candidate eligible to become mayor.
Cindy Chavez is a vote for more of Gonzo; that speaks for itself…
Reed and Cortese are where we depart – during the scandals of the Gonzo administration these two did too little to stop him and bring his bad behavior to the attention of San Jose citizens. Reed has never explained why he moved to end the investigations and in my mind that makes him duplicitous.
There is no substitute for experience and integrity. David Pandori has both. If people want San Jose to become a true big city to raise kids and work within reasonable reach of their jobs there’s no other choice.
I agree with Single Gal. Based on some of the items reported recently by the MN ie parking fees for weekends and evenings downtown. Extended hours for parking meters. This will just about kill any idea of going into town for any event. We need a strong mayor and council to defeat this proposal.
I’m sure Dave Pandori is the best vote and I really think we need to clean house to best possible extent and start over with new names. I hope Mike Mulcahy runs for a council seat in the next election. He would be a great replacement for Ken Yeager when Ken gets elected to the Board of supervisors.
First sentence, third paragraph lumps in Cortese and Reed with CC. I don’t think they are even on the same planet as Cindy. Our current Vice Mayor is simply Ron in drag who talks the touchy-feely language. I voted for Reed but would be happy with Pandori.
Should Pat Dando go to Jail?
This may surprise some, but those who have read this blog for a longtime will understand why my answer is an unequiviocal no!
Do I agree with the Chamber mailer? No. Do I think it was hypocritical? Yes. Should it be illegal? No.
We return to the idiotic plethera of questionable and facially unconstitutional ethics laws that many on this board have continuted to promote.
The Chamber piece has been loudly and effectively discredited—with no laws at all. Now, because it is in violation of San Jose Ethics Laws, we must bring in the attorneys.
There will be a decision to fine the Chamber. But I encourage the Chamber to challenge the decision in court .
The law explicitly limits free speech on the basis of content of political maililers. Such a law is clearly unconstitutional—maybe the Chamber can do us all a favor and redeem themselves partially by getting this law thrown out for good.
All bad decisions should not be illegal.
SG, I’m with you on this one. I think Pandori would have to screw up pretty badly over the next week to make me switch over to Mulcahy. But I’ll be pleased if either one of these guys makes the run-off.
Dave, Chuck, and most importantly Cindy are not even worth considering because as much as they will say otherwise, they are part of the current problem and not part of the solution.
Most astute, SG. Hopefully, others will do their homework as you have and realize that Pandori is the best hope to save our city.
Gee, how persuasive. An anonymous woman columnist on a Tom McEnery blog is voting for David Pandori. Who cares?
You ignore the fact that both Pandori and Cindy Chavez have been councilmembers representing the downtown District 3 for more or less eight years each. (Do you live downtown? As I recall, you recently wrote a column in which you marveled at Japantown as if you had never been there before.)
The records of Pandori and Chavez as downtown councilmembers are directly comparable, and Chavez has been far-and-away the more effective representative for her constituents, and as a consequence she’s far more popular among downtowners—i.e, people who are not involved in the labor movement—than Pandori. People like me who support the Chamber-of-Commerce (and McEnery-backed) candidate for city council but support Chavez for mayor.
Neither you, nor the Mercury News, nor any of the other hooded members of Pandori’s cyber mob have cared to make the direct comparison of the respective city council records of Pandori and Chavez because it shows your candidate in such a poor light. Pandori simply was not an effective councilmember, whereas Chavez has been extremely effective.
In the meantime, after he left office, Pandori was a phantom. He never showed up at neighborhood meetings or council meetings. He never weighed in on the issues of the day. He never bothered to challenge Ron Gonzales (or even Cindy Chavez) four years ago when they ran for re-election. He was MIA.
The real question is whether we are better off today in the greater downtown than we were eight years ago during the Pandori era? For me, and I believe for the vast majority of downtowners, the answer is a resounding “yes.”
That’s right everybody!!! All the mistakes and failueres of San Jose are Cindy’s fault. All the votes were 1-0. Chuck Reed did nothing wrong except make the Mr. Blackwell list for goofiest councilmember. Also the list for the most cotrolled councilmember. How do those wires Victor has implanted remain invisible? I got it!! The tie has a mind contril device in it. That is why despect the scrambled eggs stain that is sven months old, Chuck is not chaning it.
Campos and Pyle did nothing. It was all Cindy, Cindy, and Cindy. Judy Chirco did nothing. Well, according to the Merc, that is true!!! Forrest and Madison and Linda and Ken stood by and abostained. Cindy did it all!!!
What a master manipulator!!! Cindy should do something else as the great power behind the throne. Get Chuck to change ties and get Ron to actually regard the citizens as worthy.
I know that is impossible. I voted for Dave over the weekend by abstentee, but let us stop doing this Cindy, Cindy, and Cindy, crap,
Another post on this site saying how great Pandori is . . . shocking. Please stop grouping Chavez, Cortese, and Reed together – they’re CLEARLY not the same. You know that as well as I.
Interesting that the Merc, the McEnery’s and this website endorse Pandori, yet he’s dead last in the polls. Tough to be an effective leader when you are so hard to like. Same old story for Pandori. Mulcahy is clearly the best choice.
Mr. Gagliardi, have you by chance driven through District 3 – Cindy’s current district and David Pandori’s previous? It’s funny, when I drive through, which is where I live; I see a whole bunch of Pandori for Mayor yard signs. So please forgive me if I’m somewhat skeptical of your assertions. Mr. Pandori founded the Vendome Neighborhood Assoc. and couldn’t have written his campaign book without being in touch. Are you trying the Joseph Goebbels trick that Richard attempts? Oh yeah, I don’t wear a hood, it’s way to warm for that. I do regularly wear a hat though…
Again, whatever candidate you think is in the lead depends on the circle that you run in. Obviously, Don hangs out with everyone downtown who loves Cindy so of course she is “more effective” than Pandori was. I think that some of your buddies on here either didn’t live downtown or said that they weren’t involved in the community when Pandori was on the council. So their view is a little skewed, don’t cha think? Lots of people in my neighborhood speak very fondly of the days when Pandori was a councilmember like it was yesterday… I think that they were both good councilpeople on the neighborhood issues but Cindy is lacking in the leadership and ethics on the bigger issues which is why I am not voting for her.
#11 Al – don’t put too much weight in those polls. Many were done before Pandori got in the race or early on. Many people do not make decisions until next Tuesday. Everything is so close between the 5 candidates that nothing would surprise me. Any combination of the 5 could make the runoff!
Even on the blog for Don Gagliardi’s neigborhood, there are a number of people who have written that they won’t vote for Cindy. Now I’m sure that she has done many things to garner the support of many of the people in her district but the appeal does not have the universal quality that Don implies.
After David left office, he had a new career to pursue as an assistant DA and two children to raise. After wearing himself and his family out for 8 years during his tireless service on council, I think it was reasonable for him to take some time off from public affairs and take care of his own. I have two kids and I can’t imagine putting in as many hours away from my family as David did while on council. Did you consider Cindy to be unqualified the first time she ran because she hadn’t lived in or been active in the district (or City of San Jose) before she decided to run?
I certainly wouldn’t hold it against Cindy if she took some time for her family at some point. I’m sure she works very hard.
Do you have children Don? If you don’t, you can’t imagine the sacrifice involved.
Dexter (#12): I do more than drive through downtown every day. I live in it. I also personally know virtually every neighborhood leader in the downtown (including the current president of the Vendome Neighborhood Assn). We have gotten to know each other across neighborhood lines as a direct consequence of Cindy Chavez’s efforts to promote grass-roots democracy in her district through her annual neighborhood summits.
I don’t know whether Pandori “founded” the Vendome Neighborhood Assn., but I do know that Pandori has never participated in the Downtown Neighborhood Leadership Forum (DNLF), an organization of all the downtown neighborhood leaders dedicated to grappling with common issues our neighborhoods face. We meet regularly, and exchange emails nearly daily. If Pandori were really engaged in downtown neighborhood activism these last several years, I would think he would have had some involvement in our group.
As for references to “hooded” cyber-bloggers, I am referring to those, like Single Gal, who choose to remain anonymous while spewing unsubstantiated allegations about Chavez. Ok, you support Pandori, but stop suggesting it would be “catastrophic” if Chavez became mayor. That’s nonsense. Chavez is a good woman, and she has a good record as an elected official—a better record, as I’ve said, than Pandori in the very same job.
Sure, Pandori has some supporters downtown, and I’m not surprised his immediate neighbors would support him (you should see the Manny Diaz signs in the block abutting his house), but by and large the downtown is Chavez country. But you don’t have to believe me, the evidence will be forthcoming a week hence.
Vote for Micheal Malcahy. He’s the best for downtown prosperity. He’ll do wonderful things for the downtown area while everyone else worries about a better San Jose. We need a better downtown, albeit San Jose.
Single Gal,
What currently turns me off regarding Pandori is that he doesn’t appear to have the VISION of Michael Mulcahy (whom I’ll be voting for). Being a great city should be far more that just keeping Libraries open, keeping neighborhoods safe, and filling pot holes. Being a great city should also INCLUDE a World Class/Vibrant Downtown (with Santana Row-like retail and housing), an Airport with true international destinations, and professional sports other than NHL (be it MLB, NBA, or NFL)…San Jose Supersonics anyone? In closing, I think David Pandori would make a good Mayor of San Jose…he just needs to expand on his VISION!
Lumping people into the same groups is fun to do at this stage of the campaign. It seems as though Richard Robinson and Don Gagliardi are working in Mrs. Potter’s campaign office.
Being a good Councilperson is part of the qualifications for being mayor but a Councilperson is a doer and the Mayor is the leader. Takes special talent to be a leader and I have judged that Dave Pandori has the leadership qualities. That’s my opinion maybe not yours but, you know what? I don’t care.
Tony D – I have a vision for world peace – would you vote for me? Sorry, vision with nothing to back it up (like specifics and money) is just a pipe dream.
#13 (SJ Downtowner): What neighborhood do you live in where Pandori signs outnumber Chavez’s?
I have lived downtown since 1994. I remember well the second half of the Pandori era, and he was ineffective. He was so polarizing to his fellow councilmembers that he could not get anything accomplished for his constituents that involved council action. But you don’t have to take my view on Pandori’s effectiveness on the city council. You can hear about it from former Mayor Susan Hammer, who was in office during Pandori’s tenure. Hammer could not stomach Pandori, and that in itself was a problem for all of us downtowners. I remember.
Meanwhile, Chavez is supported for mayor by every other city councilperson she serves with except those two who are running for mayor themselves. She can command a majority of her fellow councilmembers simply by snapping her fingers. (No backroom deals necessary.) Witness as one example Chavez’s ability to instantaneously move forward sunshine reform when Chuck Reed, the Mercury News, the Metro, and David Pandori (who I don’t recall ever even trying during his eight-year-stint) could not budge the issue. (So what she came late to the issue—when she finally arrived, something actually happened.)
So, Chavez’s effectiveness vs. Pandori’s is not merely in the eye-of-the-beholder, and it is not merely a matter of what circles one runs in. It’s objective, provable fact that Cindy gets things done where others cannot.
Don, even though I’m not going to vote for her, it would not be a catastrophe if Cindy ended up as mayor. While she embraces the back room dealings of Gonzo, she most likely wouldn’t have the same level of negative impact unless she decides to keep Joe Guerra on in his same role. Any new mayor’s first order of business should be to can that guy’s ass and send him packing. It would be a very good gesture on Cindy’s part if she did just that if she gets elected, and could serve as the first step towards her redemption with us doubters who intend to vote against her.
As for Pandori’s lack of involvement in neighborhood meetings, etc, there have been a few speculative comments here as to why he might have been keeping a low profile. I’ll offer one more: maybe he found the Gonzo-Chavez regime’s behavior so revolting that he couldn’t muster up a shred of confidence in anything Cindy said she’d do to improve the neighborhood and found it all to be a waste of time.
And finally, just because a McEnery started this blog, that doesn’t mean that only opinions like his are allowed here. It think the archives would do a fine job of backing me up on that. I believe there’s only been one entry here that has ever been deleted due to content, and that entry apparently rubbed people on both sides of the mayoral debate the wrong way. The fact is, people who post things here are concerned citizens. And the majority seem to share similar feelings about Pandori (and to some extent Mulcahy) vs. Chavez.
Lucky for Cindy, we here are more tuned into City Hall than the average voter. I’d be thrilled on June 7th to find that the people of SJ have demonstrated that I underestimated their intelligence regarding this very important election, but am bracing myself for 4 more years of the same underhanded BS.
I might add that Don’s tone is starting to take on an alarmingly similar one to Reality Check, who has apparently been doing more harm than good to Cindy’s campaign, at least here on this blog, and hopefully out there walking the precincts with a chow-chow, a breed of dog that achieves a perfect match of personalities between the two of them.
#5. Rich-
Should Cindy Chavez go to jail?
No, but she should not be Mayor.
(Two can play this game…)
So no women is entitled to her own name whne she runs for office. Would Mr. Sturges stop stealing the free pizza for that Cortese has there and realize that he keeps slamming Cindy, whom I do not support, and does little else. Oh, I forgot, Cortese is telling him to do it. Eat a away, Mr. Sturges, and let Linda Lezotte and others know of your prejudice.
#2 Dexter, your obviously have not been paying very much attention to what has been going in in SJ politics over the past year.
Saying that Dave Cortese and Chuck Reed are essentially as responsible as Cindy Chavez for Gonzo’s city hall scandals because ‘these two did too little to stop him and bring his bad behavior to the attention of San Jose citizens’ is a complete misrepresentation of the facts and just complete nonsense.
Dave and Chuck have been the only two on the council who have been consistently and openly critical of what has been going on at city hall. I’ve seen many statements from both of them to the citizens of SJ…Dave even more so than Chuck…in the Merc and on the news….calling for the resignation of the mayor and city manager, and trying highlighting the issues related to Norcal, Cisco and the Grand Prix subsidy.
Last June, it wasn’t Dave Cortese or Chuck Reed who said that the grand jury report read like a ‘‘British tabloid”. No, this was Cindy at her best when she was still attempting to defend Gonzo. I guess she finaly was backed into a corner when the independent investigator’s report was issued in December.
The problem on the council isn’t Dave Cortese or Chuck Reed. It’s Cindy and the rest of the her labor backed cohorts on the council…Nora Campos, Nancy Pyle, Forrest Williams, Judy Chirco… who I lay the blame on. What have the citizens of SJ ever heard from these essentially worthless labor puppets on the council about the goings on at city hall?? Not so much as a peep!! They just line up behind Chavez and do as she does and will support her regardless of it is right or wrong for the city and its residents. These are the people that we need to get removed from the council.
And I also have lost all respect for both Ken Yeager and Linda LeZotte for supporting Chavez. They know exactly what has been going in with Gonzo and Cindy at City Hall, but I guess they will do whatver they need to do for the vote…..
Well, I leave for a few days and … not much has changed. While there are more substantial arguments, I guess I’m going to take on the role of Miss Manners…since our blog host can’t seem to do so.
Dan, it’s not polite to continue to call a person by a name she or he does not use. Besides that, you’re going to confuse somebody who may want to vote against “Mrs. Potter” and only finds “Cindy Chavez” on the ballot and mistakenly votes for her thinking she’s voting against your “Mrs. Potter”.
WG Dad, while it’s lovely of you to express your concern over the healthy family life Cindy has, you should not leave out the men in this race as it might show favortism on your part. Dave Pandori publicly stated that he is giving up his yearly camping trip with his son for this race. When asked at the same public forum, Chuck mentioned his “honey do” list so we should probably be just as concerned about the decaying state of his home life. Michael mentioned he was missing shopping at the farmer’s market for a mother’s day event, so we should also be concerned that he’s not doing his job “brinin’ home the bacon’ and is risking the lives of his family, mother and mother in law. Dave Cortese mentioned tutoring to at risk kids, so we should all be concerned about the rise in crime rates because he had to give that up…Since I’m assuming you didn’t mean it to be a sexist statement I will just assume you thought all these men had no family that might need/want them at home more often.
All: If somebody has broken the law, whether they are the chamber or a candidate, a polite society has specific rules about that and a list of punishments. We don’t remain a polite society by saying “yeah, they broke the law, but they shouldn’t be punished”. we live by the law or change it. And polite people who make a mistake admit it instead of defending it. Direct mailers enter people’s homes; we can’t be sure that the same people are reading the newspaper or watching tv. Having done canvassing work I can assure you that several weeks ago people told me (1) they wait until they get their ballot to decide (2) they depend on what materials they are given (3) incredibly they think in some cases they had already voted several weeks ago.
And, as for the Merc…it’s very impolite to invite people to your on line party and then declare your candidate in the middle. You didn’t set up the forum just for the public benefit; you asked people to participate hoping it would boost your profile. The candidates were gracious enough to accept and still bring their presence (and presents) to your little party.
We are lucky to have good candidates who have not (yet) sunk to ugly tactics. Bravo to all of them.
Dear Single Gal:
The notion that a Reed Administration will be “more of the same,” might be the craziest comment that I’ve ever read on San Jose Inside. (And I’ve read quite a few).
Chuck Reed stood up to Gonzales before it was fashionable. Chuck Reed continually votes against the Gonzales majority, and then gets criticised for not being a “consensus builder.” What good is a consensus, if the consensus works against the interests of the people of San Jose?
Standing up for what’s right is not always popular. It’s called leadership, and it’s exactly what our city needs right now.
I believe that this election is between Chavez, Cortese, and Reed. Pandori and Mulcahy are good men, but Pandori got in too late, and not enough people have known Mulcahy long enough to make him our city’s next mayor.
REED WILL LEAD!
Pete Campbell
#14 (Willow Glen Dad): my neighborhood does not have a blog. We do have an email group, and we circulate various perspectives, including from outside the neighborhood, but even so I cannot recall more than one or two anti-Cindy Chavez emails in the entire seven year history of the email group. (It’s of course another story on this San Jose Inside blog.) I think I have a better sense of the pulse of my neighborhood than you might be able to discern from Willow Glen, and Chavez is well-regarded here. Our current neighborhood association president (not me), for example, has publicly endorsed her.
I don’t blame David Pandori for taking time away from politics or neighborhood activism to spend more time with his family. But when you take eight years off, it means you haven’t been in the trenches and you cannot run on a record of having been involved. That’s why Pandori runs as an outsider; he has been one for some time.
I think you miss the point I’m making in noting Pandori’s absence from civic affairs these last eight years. Because of it, Pandori’s record consists entirely of his eight years on the city council in the 1990s. That record can be compared against the city council record of Cindy Chavez (as well as of Chuck Reed and Dave Cortese). I think, in comparing the records, you will find that Pandori comes up far less compelling a candidate than if you’re simply going by the recent mayoral debates.
I think the records are more important that campaign stump speeches or written campaign materials. And it’s curious to me that none of Pandori’s supporters ever seem to talk about what he accomplished while he was a city councilmember.
Randi,
Did you read my post?
I was making the comment that I thought that David Pandori might have withdrawn from public life for awhile to be with his family. I then said that I wouldn’t hold it against Cindy if she did the same at some point and then returned. I wrote it in response to Don’s comments that David wasn’t involved for several years.
What you wrote is completely unrelated.
Now we have heard everything!!!!!!!!!!!! A Chuck Reed shill, probably Victor’s mechanic, is writing an ode to the most opportunistic, dense guy on the City Council. Reed will lead when Victor tells him to lead. Reed will shut up when Victor tells him too, and Pete Campbell, the Reed Shill will dance down McKee Road with a Reed baseball cap singing “lootey, do, Victor, me and you!”
The voting record shows that Reed and Gonzo have the closest voting record of anyone on the Council when no one is looking. Reed advised people who got fined by the FPPC and seems to ask developers to meet him at other places besides City Hall.
Reed will lead, when developers that want to meet him at another location east of San Jose tell him to.
#21 – Looks like I hit a nerve with you…how did you get to be so angry?
I guess that Pandori did nothing worthwhile and effective while in office which is why everyone hates him and adores Cindy, right? Geez, you could try to give him a little credit as even Cindy’s detractors have give to her.
Susan Hammer – part of the Democratic machine supporting Cindy – was threatened by David when he was on the council and nixed his plan to get a sorely needed downtown grocery store way back when just because she didn’t like him. Great politics Susan. She has gone on to do great things since she left office but let me digress…
Oh wow, Cindy moved the sunshine reform forward, what a novel and daring move on her part. I don’t think that the citizens of this city would have even though of electing her mayor unless she did this. Call it self preservation.
I think that part of Cindy’s downfall will be her ability to get consensus from the Campos’s, Pyle’s and Chirco’s of the world. People are tired of the way that city hall has been run and are ready for a change.
I never said that the Pandori signs outnumber the Chavez signs in my neighborhood but now, come to mention it, they do. I have seen his signs in Willow Glen, Northside, Almaden, etc. so Pandori does have some reach.
I lived in district 3 during David Pandori’s term and about 1 year into Cindy’s. What I remember is that mayor Susan Hammer and the councilmember closest to her who was Margie Fernandes wanted to locate the largest homeless shelter in the city adjacent to your neighborhood. It would have been in an area of Fernandes district far away from residences in her district and thus qualified for meeting the condition of “dispersal” of such services. It was however directly adjacent to your District 3 neighborhood. It was a con.
An activist from your neighborhood who now lives in Naglee Park led the opposition. David took many arrows and took alot of heat from Hammer for fighting it. Your neighborhood won the fight and the shelter was located closer to where I live now. It was the right policy to oppose concentration of homeless services and David fought hard to stop it.
Certainly Cindy has done good things for your neigborhood but you ought to be grateful to David for that one. He expended much capital for an essential victory. You are living with fewer problems because of his hard work in that case.
BRAVO, Pete Campbell!!
My, how things are getting testy in this last week of fun, though….
Mark T and Dexter…..boy, I may be an “outsider,” but you guys are plain “out of it.” Either you haven’t been reading or listening to the San Jose news for the past year or you have been comatose. More likely, you do know the truth but owing to your allegiance to some other candidate(s) have chosen to fabricate the truth about Cortese and Reed.
Thank God Reed and Cortese have the integrity and the intellect to see through the BS going on at city hall and the strength to speak out in their many calls for action. Cortese in particular was quite outspoken and almost singlehandedly responsible for making San Jose residents aware of the problems at city hall. If not for these two gentlemen, this Mayor’s race would be issue-less because all the scandals would have remained under the rug and out of public view. There would be no platform of reform or ethics for any other candidate to stand on.
Hallelujah for Reed and Cortese…San Jose residents already owe them a great deal in terms of the messages they have conveyed and the awareness they’ve brought to us all…..and for educating their rival candidates on what the issues even are by speaking out.
Randi,
Cindy’s family priorities became clear during a debate City Hall. The question you referred to was written:
“if you weren’t running for office this year, what would you be doing with family and friends on this beautiful Saturday morning?”
You mention all of the other candidate’s answers, but you neglected Cindy’s. Here’s her answer:
“I would do what I’ve been doing for 7 years which is going to a lot of meetings and getting a lot of work done”
Mind you this was a day before Mother’s Day. Every other candidate talked about spending time with their family.
There is NOTHING that Cindy could bring to San Jose that is worth more than the well being of her young child. He should not take a back seat to running the City of San Jose. If her supporters really loved Cindy, they would give her back to her family. She could become a PTA parent, or a volunteer, and participate fully in her 5 year old son’s life.
SJD, re: #31 I don’t get how what you’re saying relates to what I wrote in #21 so am assuming you were targeting entry #20 since I pretty much agree with your message.
Had to laugh at a post further up that praised Cindy for getting the Council behind sunshine reforms, for locking up all those votes right away and getting it done.
Well duh, she’s Vice-Locked-Up-Vote-Haver right now so how can we not expect more of the same if she’s elected?
You guys (and gals) are all nuts!!
Just In:
I work at the Superior Court and the new rumor of the day is that the Grand Jury has decided to not release its investigation until after the election. The reason given was that its release would affect the results of the election and that they think the grand jury should not be in the business of influencing elections.
There was some spirited discussion that by not releasing these important facts, they are influencing the election. I personally believe that standing by and withholding information to the electorate is far worse then putting out the facts and letting the voters decide.
I never had much confidence in the process, but now I have lost all faith!
Rusty
The more serious concern is most of these guys work for the candidates.
It’s easy to lock-up a majority of votes when all you have to do is call the South Bay Labor Council and have them issue a directive to their mindless followers on the council.
If you ever wondered why Nora, Judy, and Nancy don’t speak, it is clearly because the SBLC simply tells them whether to vote yes or no, and doesn’t give them more details than they can handle.
Remember the words of Neil Struthers (i think it was him, if not it was one of the other puppeteers) “we don’t have to lobby them, we got them elected”
PS-I’m glad Neil and Nora never talk about any city issues at home!
#32 (Willow Glen Dad): Although I was dumbstruck by the NIMBYism of some of my neighbors, I agree that opposing a 250-bed homeless shelter (which would have been the largest in the Bay Area in a downtown already over-concentrated with such facilities) was the right thing to do, and I am grateful for David Pandori’s involvement, for which I take your word (I was still a newbie homeowner then).
Several years later, Cindy Chavez helped defeat a 125-bed rehab center in an area adjacent to Watson Park not too far from where the homeless shelter would have been. Again, I was ashamed by the NIMBYism of some of my neighbors, but again, as a land-use matter, the particular project was over-sized and ill-conceived.
So, I’d say, Pandori and Chavez are even in each having championed the defeat of unduly large social service facilities in or around my neighborhood. (I’d like to think that in each case the massive turnout of residents opposing the respective projects had something to do with their defeat, as well.)
#24. You came back! Only this time you’re trying to hide behind a phoney name. But, I have your real name here in my files from your previous posts. Yes I agree with you if you mean that I am against female Ms. Cindy Chavez as mayor then you have me judged correctly. I’m sure Ms. Chavez would not appreciate being called chattel to Mr. Potter. I’m concerned about where you get your opinions about people. I must tell you that I come from a family of males who don’t feel it is their duty to lower the seat afterwards. That’s because of the equal pay for equal work laws. I’ve even stopped opening doors and standing to one side while a female passes through. Equals are equals right? I don’t even walk on the street side of a female to protect her anymore because now, she is equal. The ones who get my respect are the elderly males and females. Or should I say gentlemen and females. They’ve lived life and earned it. Keep whining and you’ll fit the mould of a whiney female with her emotions out on sleeve of her blouse. You might check to see if I spelled whiney correctly.
let’s all remember that it really doesn’t matter is Dave, Chuck, David, or Michael get elected mayor if council Districts 1 and 3 are won by James and Diaz. All four of them will be ineffectual unless they are able to get at least a couple of sensible minds on the council.
There is still time to help make a difference in these two campaigns while walking for your favorite mayoral candidate this weekend. I suggest anyone who is walking for one of the 4 ‘white hats’ for mayor do so in D-1 or D-3. It is always good if you can kill two birds with one stone.
Anyone hear about the new chamber poll?
I heard it is the first poll to show Cindy trailing by 2 pts to Reed and tied with Cortese.
#24 Maybe I should have addressed the post to Randi Kinman.
What a collection of thoughts we have today. Must be something in the air. David’s record on the Council does not compare to Cindy’s? Thankfully, that is true. David never voted for illegal project after illegal project that cost the city millions of dollars like Cindy has. David never supported an ethically challenged mayor like Cindy has. David never told people one thing and then did the opposite like Cindy has. You are right—David’s record on the Council is nothing like Cindy’s—Thank God!
Who was it wee, little, Danny? Who was the gal that gave you such a terrible attitude towards us gals. She must have been quite a stinker!!
SG, Malcontent et al,
You have a right to be wrong. And just because you are wrong doesn’t mean you should go to jail.
Just to be fair, I also have a right to be wrong. And if it occurs, you have a right to point it out.
If everyone were a NIMBY, where would all these projects go?
Council person (breath one): I want to help the homeless, provide shelter to the abused, help the adicted.
Council person (breath two): This project is not at all in character with the neighborhood. We must be diligent in planning and move this to D-?, they deserve to be punshed more.
Council person (breath one): We need places for our youth to go after school. If we occupy their minds and bodies they will stay away from gangs and violence.
Council person (breath two): This project by Salvation Army is wonderful. But we can’t build it there – oh no, not there either. Umm, not there either.
Council person (breath three): I’m so disappointed the SA Kroc center went to San Francisco.
Campos (breath one): We can’t build the Salvation Army on the current golf course, it will displace golfers.
Chavez (breath one): Let’s build the Salvation Army center near Roosevelt Park, we will only have to displace 16 low income families.
Campos ( breath two):I’m so disappointed the SA Kroc center went to San Francisco, but the golf course is under utilized. I propose we let this developer build homes here.
Chavez (breath one): I am shocked that we are given this Grand Prix info so late.
Chavez (breath two): Oops, I knew about this months ago.
Chavez (breath three): I am a champion for open government.
Leaves you breathless doen’t it?
Dan’s got files. Files on the posters on this blog. Files on the people putting flouride in his water. Files on all those women that do not answer his personal ads. Files on the Communists and all of his neighbors whom he photographs. He really has something for Cindy and her husband. Just cannot leave it alone. Likes to talk about them at the 7-Eleven when he is munching his microwave burrito. Hey, Potter, will you please apologize for cutting in line at the market, or Cindy, will you admit that the Hoosiers DVD was late so Dan can get his boss, the woman who owns the video store he works at, to put that 2 days off his vacation time, for yelling at you.
In #15, Don Gagliardi wrote:
“… Cindy Chavez’s efforts to promote grass-roots democracy in her district through her annual neighborhood summits.”
– –
Unless the definition of the word has been turned inside out, Cindy Chavez would be praised for her commitment to democracy only in that bizarro world where Joe Guerra is worshipped for his diplomacy. C’mon, secret deals and last minute surprises aren’t exactly what the Founders had in mind when deciding upon a representative form of government.
Contrary to Mr. Gagliardi’s assumption, democracy is promoted by holding true to its principles, not by making nice with the neighbors. All the while Ms. Chavez was sharing smiles and promises with her constituents, she was sharing dirty little secrets with the mayor—and next to nothing with those representing the rest of the city.
If the voters were to properly judge Ms. Chavez on how she has handled political power and the public trust she would, very soon, find herself encumbered by nothing more ethically challenging than motherhood; not to mention those daily, pestering pop-in visits by a very bored Ron Gonzales.
I live in Milpitas so I stay out of San Jose’s business, but I do enjoy this web site. However, poster number 30 stated, “Reed advised people who got fined by the FPPC and seems to ask developers to meet him at other places besides City Hall.”
I don’t know about the FPPC fine, but it was a standing joke early this year among some real estate agents & brokers in Milpitas that Chuck Reed meets with developers in a real estate office on Dempsey Road in Milpitas under the cover of a land planning committee meeting of the Berryessa neighborhood association…to apparently discuss Berryessa development deals. Not having been present at any such meetings, I cannot give details but it appears that Reed, Berryessa leaders, and developers mix it up at that real estate office.
Part of the joking about Reed’s Milpitas meetings was because Reed’s chief aide is reputed to be a member of the Milpitas city council.
Can you image if we all see things as being this bad, how bad it must be for city employees to work around these incompetent fools everyday?
Point well taken on Chuck Reed and Dave Cortese – lumping them together may have been A LITTLE unfair. The have spoken out about Ron G. but I still am not voting for them. But I back my points about Cindy. I think it would be CATASTROPHIC if she were Mayor because I do not trust her to get anything of significance done or be able to lead the council.
What is all this criticism about Pandori being “polarizing”? What do people mean by that? I think that strong mayors with strong personalities are not going to be liked by all, and I admire the quality that says I do not need to be liked, I need to do what I have to do to get things done.
And Don, whether you respect my opinion or not is really irrelevant to me (anonymous or not.) No one is forcing you to read, but is Cindy paying you to be on here? Just asking…
The beauty of this site is you do not have to agree with me, I think getting the discussion going is the best part. I respect those that give solid reasons for voting for Mulcahy, Reed, etc. I just cannot, no matter what many of you say, get behind voting for Cindy.
I wrote CBS 5 about the poll they did which did not include David Pandori as one of the choices. I made 2 points in the email (regretfully I did not save a copy):
1. They had their heads up their butts
2. If they can’t pay enough attention to San Jose politics to know that there are 5 major candidates for mayor, just stop reporting on San Jose.
Here’s the response I got:
“Thank you for writing.
The decision to leave Mr. Pandori off the poll was made by our polling
firm, which departed from standard procedure by failing to discuss that
change with us. I regret that decision.
Although newspaper editorial endorsements do not automatically reflect
viability nor confer it, the Mercury News endorsement does make it
appear that Survey USA was hasty in dropping Mr. Pandori from this week’s
survey. We will have a new poll out on Friday, June 2, which will
include two additional candidates, one of whom is Pandori. We are noting this
on our website. (
<http://cbs5.com/politics/local_story_143181340.html>)
We take our coverage of the San Jose mayor’s race very seriously, as we
do all of our San Jose coverage. One of the very first mayoral debates,
in city council chambers, was moderated by our anchor and streamed live
on our website. Our reporters—Thuy Vu, Len Ramirez, Tony Russomanno
and Allen Martin—are long-time South Bay residents, as are our news
photographers and South Bay office staffers. And we recently moved our
South Bay newsroom into larger, centrally located offices in the
Knight-Ridder building. I hope you will watch our newscasts and continue to
give us feedback. And we’ll try to keep our heads held up.
Regards,
Dan Rosenheim
Vice President and News Director
CBS 5
855 Battery Street
San Francisco, CA 94127
415 765-8618 ”
“…the particular project was over-sized and ill-conceived.”
Doesn’t this just describe San Jose to a “t” ?
Everywhere you look, the over-sizing and ill-conceiving continues to this day at an unrelenting and ever quickening pace.
Should SJ fail the upcoming idiot test, I’m packing up the U-haul and heading to the green pastures of Milpitas.
As election day nears, the acerbic rating of this blog rises. HHHmm.
I still don’t have my absentee ballot, which I read has something to do with a wrong size envelope. Bush league (no offense to our president and former president).
I have been out of county for about two weeks. I see a COC piece that seems to be full of factually accurate statements, and then I hear that there is a huge controversy about it. I must confess that I am not fully conversant with SJ’s ordinance that governs these pieces. I see Fox—father and son—fighting about it in the Murky News editorial page.
Don Gagliardi has taken over RR’s position as the mass contributor of long apologies about Cindy and he adds an anti-David tone to it.
I, for one, think this town is in big trouble from a leadership point of view.
I am in Judy “The Mute for 4 years” Chirco’s district, and I am given a choice of a person from whom I have literally heard nada, zilch, zero for four years, and two guys I’ve never heard of either, one of whom is running a campaign as silent as Chirco has been for her first four years in office.
The incumbent councilpersons who are running for mayor were silent witnesses (except for Cindy, who was either an accomplice or a co-conspirator) until recently of the Gonzo-Guerra takeover of our town (don’t EVEN think we are a city, despite our population numbers).
I am struggling mightily to avoid being a complete anti-incumbent person (even if he/she is running for a different office), but I may lose that battle.
I’d sure like to see/read Pandori’s book. How do I get a copy?
And pundits wonder aloud why there is so much apathy among the voters.
Take a look around—at all levels, government is not of the people, by the people and absolutely not FOR the people any longer.
Time, perhaps, for another Boston Tea Party
don, you are supporting the wrong candidate. michael mulcahy will bring soccer back to san jose. I dont think this is the case with cindy chavez. michael said he was the person that encouraged lew to open the franchise office in san jose and he is working with him to bring soccer back!
57 – Get David’s book here: http://bettersanjose.com/book/Better_San_Jose_The_Book.pdf
There’s gotta be more reason to vote for Mulcahy than the faint hope that he might bring soccer back to SJ. There are so many more pressing problems facing us as a city that soccer ain’t even on the radar.
Just like a household, you don’t get the frills until you’ve gotten the basics taken care of.
JohnMichael. I’m sure you can visit Dave Pandori’s web site and read a copy of his book or download it. I’m sure they will send you one if you ask. I’d be glad to drop one off at your office.
Hey #53 (Single Gal): Tell us who you are and I’ll happily sign over to you everything Cindy Chavez is paying me—which is nothing.
It just rocks your world, doesn’t it, to think that someone who’s not a campaign staffer, who’s not in the Labor movement, who’s not a developer, who’s reasonably well informed, who attends city council meetings and speaks up at them, who’s spent a good part of his spare time volunteering to make San Jose a better place, and whose only stake in this election is a better San Jose, would actually support Cindy Chavez for mayor? I must be on the take. Yeah, that’s the ticket.
My part-time job became my fulltime job at the airport and let me say this, only a few are voting for one of the five major candidates, but most to my surprise they are voting for one of the other five candidates they have felt confident enough by either email or picking up the phone and speaking to the other five candidates.
I’ve taken a close look at the financial statements and what do these other candidates do at their current job, I still believe like so many voters that someone has to be mayor from the outside.
With one week left I will continue to spread the word around for Larry Flores, he will be hurting Cindy at the polls with Union votes, so many of us stand with him instead of Cindy because she decided to get backing from Non-Union company’s.
Anyways only June 6Th we’ll know for sure what happens.
Good Luck to the five lesser-known Candidates.
GM
61—You just described me exactly—except I’m supporting Pandori.
Guess you better not paint with such a wide brush—it distorts your picture of reality.
Why doesn’t the San Jose Mercury News, or for that matter, any valley news organization see it your way Don?
Today, at 3:54 PM, I received an email blast from Cindy Chavez promoting her “education agenda focusing on five key areas.”
I read it with interest, and as I did I kept thinking that I had read this all somewhere before. Being a political junkie, as well as a pack-rat, I dug through my piles of election related mail to see if it had been in a mailer from her. Oddly enough, I realized that although I receive her emails, I have not received any election mail from her (I have from all of the other 4 candidates).
What I did find was a mailer from Jay James where he lays out his four point education plan. Imagine that – the text of several points was exactly the same as Chavez’s – VERBATIM! It literally looks like a cut and paste copy job.
I’m not sure who copied who, but it is obvious that there was some plagiarism here.
Do any labor candidates have original ideas? Or are they all just ventriloquist dummies delivering the same labor message?
Here’s a link to Cindy’s: http://www.cindychavez4mayor.com/pdfs/ChavezEduBooklet.pdf
Jays doesn’t have his online, but if SJI has the ability to post an attachment, I will be glad to email it in to them.
#30 above hints at Chuck Reed’s giving advice that led to an FPPC fine. Here is the real story. The Berryessa Union School District (BUSD) tried to pass a bond measure twice, once in early 1998 and again in late 1999.
Chuck Reed was very active in both efforts, and was a member of the campaign committee both times. I opposed the 1998 measure (which was defeated by the voters) and I supported the 1999 measure (which was approved by the voters), although I was not a member of the campaign committee.
It turns out that the committees in support of both measures shared the same treasurer who failed to file proper paperwork and forms with the FPPC, and the treasurer and both committees were ultimately fined $26,000 in 2005.
You can read about it at:
http://www.26kfine.net
It doesn’t show that Reed operated in a personally corrupt way as he has been accused of in other contexts, but it surely reveals his abrasive style and lack of teamwork in the community.
It’s pretty clear than Berryessa leaders have needed to get together to have a fundraising event to pay off this fine, but Reed has adopted a hands-off attitude which is troubling because he was the leading member of both campaign committees and has more expertise in fundraising rules and reporting than anyone else. (Readers may recall that he was educated when he got into trouble while he was Margie Fernandez’ campaign committee treasurer.)
While most other media in San Jose have ignored this story, Reed made it very clear to the Berryessa Sun that the blame fell completely on the treasurer and that the treasurer needed to clear it up himself.
A true community leader would have stepped up to the plate to clear this matter up, do some fundraising, and get this problem solved. If you go to the web site above, you will be able to go to a link to read the Berryessa Sun article which exposes the cold-hearted attitude of Reed toward the hapless treasurer.
#63 (Voter): I have no idea who you are since you refuse to identify yourself. You have no credibility with me whatsoever.
#64 (Merc Reader): The Mercury News does not support, nor has it ever supported, Cindy Chavez because she is the Labor-backed candidate. It doesn’t matter what Chavez does or does not do, or what kind of person she is, she will never get that paper’s endorsement. In case you didn’t know, Knight Ridder and whoever owns them now, are Big Business, and therefore they aren’t in the habit of backing Labor candidates.
You’ll have to ask Dan Pulcrano why the Metro supports who it does, but it’s also true that the Metro does not support Chavez or David Pandori.
The other “community” papers don’t do business downtown, so I don’t know nor care what they think.
As for the ethnic papers, someone will have to translate for me first.
SG, we see eye to eye on this. I’ll be voting for David Pandori, but could live with 3 others. Cindy is the worst of the choices. While her apologist ditto heads (RR and others) claim that people don’t care about the process as long as the decisions are good and by the way of course Cindy won’t make that mistake again, everyone should read her chat in the Mercury News where she states that the Grand Prix deal was done in the open. http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/elections/qa_forum.htm?forumId=2470 .
#78 Lets let some housing go to some other cities – we need to concentrate on getting tax dollars here from businesses. Pandori does know that and has compared our tax dollars vs all other cities. He is not against growth – he just wants to start at the core instead of keeping our massive sprawl. That is not popular with developers because they want to start with a clean slate to build – cheaper for them but not good for our city.
#82 Pandori is the only candidate who isn’t all talk. You got that so wrong. Who else has concrete plans to back up ideas and not just sound bytes? Read his book and you will see all of his “talk” and how he plans to walk the walk.
#37&79;
Just think the D.A.‘s office, where Pandori works, could cost him the election. First I heard he got into the race late because he felt it was his duty to finish a gang case he was prosecuting. Now there is a man with principles. Second I hear they have proof Cindy tried to get more money for the Norcal workers before the scandal was made public. You say the D.A.‘s office has decided not to make their findings public until July? Mind you Cindy is presumed innocent until the report says otherwise. But if what I hear is true, Pandori the honest guy who fights for justice and is the only candidate qualified to get us out of this mess, may not get elected because the D.A’s office held back the truth from the people. Where is the justice in that? We need to know the facts before the election. If Cindy knew nothing as she and her camp has claimed then it is only fair to remove this cloud over her head. But if she played any role in keeping it secret from the public, a la the Grand Prix, then the public needs to know for the sake of the future of this city.
You sure are hung-up on identity. So you reveal your name—that does nothing for most of us. Many think you are a shill for Cindy, etc. They’d think the same even if you didn’t use your name.
Perhaps if you expanded your vision beyond your neighborhood (and helped Cindy to do the same) you would truly help make San Jose a better place. Until you do that, I’ll continue to back leaders who have a vision of the entire city and not selected portions of it.
BTW, how do you know my name is not Voter? My parents were Mr and Mrs Voter. We don’t really know if you are using a real name , do we?
Lets just discuss issues and not worry about names.
Don G.
You say let’s compare Pandori’s record vs. Chavez’s. I say bring it on! Let’s start first with voting records. And please none of those childish excuses like many of the other council members voted to break the law too.
Lets start with land use issues first.
A judge ruled that Cindy voted to break the law on the following projects:
1…The Tropicana cost taxpayers $8,000,000
2…County Fairgrounds cost taxpayers $36,000,000.
3…The Fox Markovitz Building…$3,000,000
4…North San Jose Don, can you remember how many million that one cost us? There have been so many lost lawsuits!!
After you compare David’s voting record on land use issues let’s compare votes on projects that wasted taxpayers money, like Cindy voting for the $499,000,000 City Hall. That was how many hundred million over budget?? How about the $11,000,000 of our money she voted to give Norcal that was not legally owed to them. Then there was the $8,000,000 tent she voted to build, the $4,000,000 Grand Prix. Don this is going to be so much fun. Cindy has thrown away a hundred million here and a hundred million there…that adds up to some real money.
Don, please start with the land use issues that David voted in favor of and later resulted in a court case which cost the taxpayers. Then, we will go to the projects. This is your big chance. Bring it on!
Your points are well taken, but no where have I heard that Mike Potter (Cindy’s husband) is raising their son. In fact he too has a demanding job in government that requires well over 40 hours a week committment. Mom gone 60+ hours, Dad gone 60+ hours, who’s there for Brennan?
No wonder she’s pushing for after school programs – Brennan has to go somewhere!
Look at todays Merc. Once again David tells us all the things we should do or should have done yet not one word on where all the money will come from to pay for these things. He wants us to pay for widening 101, 3 interchanges, light rail to the airport and BART. The only mention of money is we will force the airlines to pay for the light rail expansion.
About jobs, if you hear him at candidate forum he consistantly says no building in Coyote Vallley, no planning, nothing. In the next breath he complains the council was not ready to act when opportunities have come our way. You cannot have it both ways. Every candidate has said they would not build housing in Coyote Valley without jobs but it does not stop David from saying over and over again that the council is planning on doing just that.
All the guy does is talk in sound bites, I have read the book and found nothing there.
KH
Don –
It takes much more than you “not working for Cindy” to rock my world.
But I digress….
If there is any truth to the report being witheld and it confirms what most of us suspect about Cindy, it will be tragic. On the other hand, if all of Cindy’s supporters faced reality, the would not vote for her anyway and thereport would make no difference. Not likely to happen, though.
If she gets into the run-off, the report will finish her off but it will have finished off one other candidate who should have been in the run-off. If there is a report to release and it is ready to go it should be released immediately. To do otherwise does a major disservice to the voters and the candidates.
What a waste of blog space!!!! Its amazing that politicos will waste so much of their time creating propaganda that they believe will dupe the public into thinking this space is open and fairminded. Wish these same politicos had been around to fight for BART, education, fair wages, building communities, saving the Earthquakes soccer team.
Thanks for making up my mind on this election!
Don
# 70 says you are a preservationist.
Did you know that over the past four years Forrest Williams has even had a better voting record supporting historic preservation than Cindy. How important is preservation to you if you are voting for Cindy.
Enough is g————d enough about the family stuff here. I am proud to call Mike Potter and Cindy Chavez friends of mine. When my nephew and I were at a San Jose State football game, this family that all of you are so expert at talking about came up to us. I never saw a more loving couple of parents and a son that enjoyed being around them. Who is watching the kids while you are posting your blogs about kids that are none of your damn business!!!
Dear Single Gal,
I am glad your voting however your vote for Mayor does not support the single lifestyle. Pandori is like a Christian Fundamentalist when it comes to nightlife. If was King there would be no bars, nightclubs or liquor stores. As a former SF resident the SJ nightlife is in its infancy and Pandori would squash it. SJ already has a culture of get up, go to work and go to bed. Pandori might perhaps sponsor a non drinking social event in park. Single Gal I have enjoyed your humor but I as SingleGuy disagree with your choice. See you out on the town next Tuesday night!
90 – It’s as fair as you want to make it. Got something of substance to say? Then say it. It’s very easy to pop-up and fire a shot that offers nothing and then disappear.
Got a thought about the election? Lets hear it.
Yo Insiders!
I will not be voting for Cindy Chavez, but can we please knock off these petty personal attacks on Cindy’s name and family. It adds nothing of value to our discussion on San Jose and only makes you and your candidate look foolish.
There is more than enough material in Cindy’s voting record and platform to attack. Stick to the issues!
Randi and others
Let me start by saying that I feel that Pandori is the only choice for mayor. The man is the only candidate with a vision for this great city. We don’t need to question Cindy’s abilities as a parent or why she goes by Chavez. Those are her choices and should not be part of the mayoral debate. It is easy to into the trap and follow the low road that others have taken in this election. I’m sure David would want all of his supporters to take the high road as he has done. Cindy’s record is soooo bad ‘you need not deal in other matters.
David Pandori has many good ideas but after reading his collection of campaign speeches that he refers to as a book, I still don’t know how he plans to pay for them. He constantly complains aobut the North First Street plans that Chuck Reed championed as bad planning, but as I see it aloowing our biggest employers to grow their businesses on their current locations will help us raise the money we need to pay for many of those projects.
He does not like the housing piece of Reed’s plan but again where does he want the new housing to go? He agreed with PACT to build more affordable housing, we can’t put it all downtown.
I just don’t see how his plans will work out.
Ken Henderson
#37 Re: Superior Court, I’m with you if there is any truth to that rumor. The Grand Jury needs to release their findings BEFORE the election. It might avoid the need for a run-off, who knows?
JMO #56, I’m voting for anyone but Judy. I think one of those guys actually filed a statement so already he’s got Judy beat where accomplishments over the last 4 years are concerned. She needs to see that at least some of her constituents in D-9 are not asleep and are onto her.
Speaking of the do-nothings and say-nothings on the Council, I know where I work the bosses are looking for achievements on a quarterly basis. If the same were required of Council members, people like Chirco, Pyle, Campos and Williams would have been toast long ago.
Don it is nice to have you back.
I have been waiting for your answer to my question. If the D.A.‘s report finds that Cindy had prior knowlede of the Narcal scandal a la The Grand Prix will you stand by your promise to speak out against and pull your support of her campaign? Also will you support an other candidate?
It is long been recognized that it is the parent’s responsibility not yours or others and your sexism is clear for everyone to see. You nameless jerk – you should be embarrassed to use those tactics as part of any political attack against any candidate especially a woman candidate
Someone who dares to speak the truth on San Jose Inside?
Watch yourself Ken Henderson, too many facts could lead you to realize that Pandori is all talk. It is a much more blissful existence if you believe, like everyone else on this site, that Pandori is San Jose’s messiah. I think we have all learned that logic plays no role in San Jose politics, and Pandori is no exception.
# 86 Wow he is a man of principle and fighting for truth and justice. Let’s throw a big S on his chest and a red cape on his back. If Superman snatches one of the top two spots, who will challenge him in the epic battle to rule San Jose. Perhaps Capitan America (Reed), Dorian Gray (Mulchay), Two-Face (Cortese), or Xena (Chavez). Part one comes to a theater near you on June 6th.
Dan # 60: Thanks. I got it last night, read it through, and will be voting for Pandori as a result of what I read.
#78 Ken
I do not speak for Pandori but I do agree that a project of this size needs greater review. It also should have included neighboring cities. By the way do you know the answer to # 72’s question. How much did that NSJ law suit cost us? It is clear in Pandori’s book that he understands the importance of bringing buisness to S.J. In fact that is what he says we need to do in Coyote before housing. Low cost housing would have been perfect in the Del Monte Plant#3 but Chuck and Cindy voted to demolish it for an other K.B. homes project. If you look at the statistics you will find we still are the bedroom for the valley. We need to expand our tax base yet implement smart growth, not just growth for the sake of growing.
Randi,
Dan may have ‘pulled your chain’ (no female dog reference here), but he did help you expose your true colors.
You are the throwback of a segment of the feminist movement that could accurately be called the ‘anti-male’ movement.
You look so hard for male sexism that you know MUST be there that you actually create it. Your mode of perception is so skewed that you can’t see things for what they are.
Hold the door open, you’re a sexist that is demeaning women. Don’t hold the door open and you are a bigot. I doubt there is anything a man could do in relation to you that would not be considered sexist in your eyes.
It seems to me that the popular opinion is that women can’t be sexist, just as minorities can’t be racist. The whole idea that the terms ‘reverse racism’ and ‘reverse sexism’ exist is proof of that. There is no ‘reverse’ in these matters. Man or Woman, Minority or Majority, sexism and racism are just that.
PS.
Should Brennan’s last name be Potter or Chavez? Does anyone know what it is?
YANK YANK
Don #61: I have no indication that you are “on the take”; but I cannot help but wonder how an involved and apparantly intelligent man like yourself can support a person who followed in lockstep behind the most corrupt, morally bankrupt mayoralty this city has ever known.
#87 Ken,
You are about as open minded as Cindy Chavez is for open government. Clearly you did not actually bother to read Pandori’s book or understand his vision independent of the predisposed opinion fed to you by your current councilmember.
Do you even commute? From D3 to where?
David Pandori’s editorial today was enlightening. Why? Traffic is the voters’ #1 concern. Today Pandori provided real solutions beyond Bart. When asked about how to improve traffic congestion, Chavez and other candidates only offer that they support Bart. Duh! Bart might solve our problems in 20 years.
You asked how Pandori proposes to finance his traffic improvements. Read pages 40-42 of Pandori’s book http://www.bettersanjose.com/book. The answer is simple, setting priorities to make San Jose better and not voting for wasteful spending, i.e. $4 million for car race, $40+ million and rising for a baseball stadium without a team, $36 to settle a lawsuit with the county, cost overruns on city hall, etc, etc. All items that Cindy Chavez voted for because she is backed by lobbyists, developers, unions and other special interests. How many people in your neighborhood sent emails to Cindy saying we want a Grand Prix and would like to cut 55 crossing guard positions to pay for it?
If Cindy Chavez cared about traffic congestion and improving air quality for our kids, and we know Don doesn’t, Cindy would think before she voted to waste our money.
Sigh…the problem, Dan, is you can’t see your chain being yanked…in blogshpere no one can see you smile. While this has been amusing, it’s not very productive…so, on to the issues.
Bigger,
Your right, Chavez did support all those things and that is why I am not supporting her. Reed voted against all those things you mentioned and some others you didn’t that would have saved us even more money.
David says he would change priorities…great they certainly need changing but his solutions if you can call them that are incomplete at best. Where do we get the money for the parks he talks about? To build the interchanges and 101 widening? Expand light rail?
Where is the plan to grow our economy? Add jobs? Increase tax revenues, attract business, tourists, and conventions. San Jose needs to attract people from our neighboring cities to spend their money here, that means retail, entertainment, and restaurants.
Change our priorities…please tell me there is more to the grand plan that that.
Ken – I think you should actually read the book again. Pandori’s legal knowledge will keep the city out of the courts, saving big $$$. He says he will create a parks charter fund like the counties to imnplement his parks plan. While improving the infrastructure, wide the freeways, light to the airport are just things to attract businesses to the area. He plans on preserving open space to grow business rather than bedrooms.
Randi. I wonder if you realize that your chain has been pulled and your response was predicted. You are really vulnerable. You need to cool down and realize that there are people in this world who don’t care whether a person is male or female. The person should be judged for their abilities to perform the tasks assigned not whether they are male or female. I don’t judge Cindy Chavez because she is Cindy Potter nor do I think about her in any other way than she is a person who I will not vote for. Of course we teach our children good manners and respect for each other regardless of the sex. Yes when I’m present, the door gets opened and I do walk on the street side. I do lower the seat. But like I said, I got you to make a predictable response and as I began this, I really pulled your chain. Welcome to the world of bloggers.
Don – sounds like you can head your own group – “Angry White Men for Cindy!” I know that she has done right by you in your neighborhood but that does not mean that Pandori did not – just not on your watch.
Dan, Dan, Dan…settle down a little or you’ll blow a gasket and wind up in a hospital with a female doctor. And, that post wasn’t mine, so you need to direct your anger elsewhere.
Sorry to hear that your family has such cretinous habits (it’s nothing to do with male/female; it’s about safety when kids are in the house and being polite) in the bathroom, but what, tell me, please, does this have to do with equal pay? And why would you feel it necessary to share such information?
But as a whole offline topic, where would you get females to help you carry on the family traditions? Male order? And what do you do with the girl babies who come out of these unions?
I’m sure your mother would be appalled that you don’t open doors, and if I were to stop being that polite to people my mother would come down and hit me upside the head. It’s not the 60’s. People of both sexes are showing civility and politeness by opening doors; it’s not about helping the fair sex, it’s just good manners. Today a teenage girl held the door for myself and several others including an elderly gentleman and a mom with kids. It’s a daily occurance everywhere because we are teaching kids that they have a right to live in a polite society and the responsibility to treat each other with respect.
And you can’t make me mad about this because I assume that you are (surely) being satirical or are trying to rouse a response when you discuss “..gentlemen and females.” And if you truly are that angry about women in politics (or anywhere else outside the home) it’s truly a shame that your mother, grandmother, teacher, waitress or bad date made you feel so helpless and humiliated you could only transfer it to anger. Oh, yes, I can also assure you that I am neither “moldy” or “whiny”, am glad to wear my opinions on my sleeves and other pieces of clothing and wouldn’t think of embarrassing you with spell check because this format is an easy one in which to commit such errors.
WGDad I did read your post. If Cindy chooses to find the balance in her life that allows her to run for this office at this time, it is, indeed a hard road, but so worthwhile. You can’t use Pandori’s statement that he left the public eye to raise a family when he was a DA on high profile cases (from experience I know it’s more than a regular workweek) and his claims/proof that he’s been heavily involved in the community at the same time. It’s just about finding what avenue works best for you at the time.
And, Full Time Family…where do I start with you? You’re the one who believes that there’s nothing beyond the mom at home style of living, right? You just sign your name differently each time. You’ve made statements that assume you know what goes on in Cindy’s life. Are you sure the other candidates aren’t dealing with the other side of the coin? Are any of them dealing with alcoholic or drug using spouses? How about abuse? You just assume that because she’s female her only place is in the home and that her children can’t survive with her in a job. My mother would differ with you, and for that matter, so would most of the people I know. And how demeaning an outlook to take about the men … are they incapable of parenting or is their only job to be a breadwinner? Having been involved in volunteer work, including PTA, it can be grinding, suck away your energy, time and money and, frankly, not worth the effort at times. And, again, you are assuming that somehow Cindy does not participate in the raising of her child…and, you didn’t fully state the other candidates points. I believe it was Chuck (could have been Dave) who pointed out that since there was a council meeting coming up he would normally be reading the staff reports and doing his homework on Saturday. It’s the traditional day to do so and it’s also the traditional day to visit the neighborhoods, open community centers and parks and help celebrate the hard work each council member does.
It’s not easy no matter who you are when you choose a road of public service. There’s no money in it, people are constantly throwing rocks and insults your way and you are always in a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” position. It does not need to be made harder for anybody to cling to the belief that your way is the only right way or to single out the only woman in the election for some (not so subtle) comment that does not address the issues or the candidate’s position on issues. Each of the candidates has had to try to find the right way, many of them knowing they have very little chance of this election going their way.
We are, indeed, lucky to have people of character, strength and guts to run for this or any office.
Don
I can see why you are endorsing Cindy. You are a big fish in a little sea. You have her ear, so if she gets elected she will help you in your little area. All you and Cindy seem to care about is her district In fact at times only part of her district.. 90% of what you blog about does not affect 95% of the citizens of S.J. Where do you volunteer in San Jose outside of your neighborhood downtown. You don’t even speak for all of the downtown.
Pandori has a great ability to see the big picture. As a council person he did that and as a mayor he will continue to do that. As for what has Pandori been doing since he left office? He has been working hard to make the Santa Clara County a saffer place to live. He has prosecuted them all, from Gangbangers to corrupt Judges. What about his efforts making sure we had proper access to the airport before it was enlarged? In the past eight years he has done a hundred fold more for the good of our community than Cindy. But then again you and Cindy only see your little neighborhood as the whole community. And as for Hammers endorsement of Chavez, Susan was not above backroom deals herself. You as a preservationist should remember the deal she struck with Lew Wolff over the Montgomery Hotel. Cindy and Gonzo have just taken it to an all- time low. I agree with you, Cindy has got a lot done while in office. Most has been behind closed doors and has cost the taxpayers millions. Pandori is head and sholders above Chavez.