Right now it looks like the next few months of the campaign will be dominated with talk about the scandals at City Hall. There’s certainly been a lot to talk about: the growth of City Hall lobbyists, decision-making going on behind closed doors, the garbage scandal with Norcal, City Hall cost over-runs, the Cisco phone contract at City Hall, gift giving, controversy about secret fundraising, and the censure and resignation of ex-councilman Terry Gregory and more.
The Mercury News recently declared in a story on the mayor’s race that the campaigns are going to be about reform. It seems that the paper will be intent on focusing on that theme too because it has played a major role in exposing the scandals. At a time when the paper’s future is in question with its acquisition and sale, I sense there will be a “moral obligation” to write about reform even more. After all, that’s what a good local newspaper does.
We need to talk about reform, but if that’s all the voters hear about during the next few months—City Hall scandals—that would be a scandal.
I want to improve the campaign for mayor by talking about other issues. Yes, I do believe that city hall needs to change. We do need to limit the role of the new industry of lobbyists who the current council has accommodated. We do need to strengthen the office of the city manager, to prevent politics from penetrating the professional administration of the city. We need to stop the year-round fundraising. Most of all, we need to stop the secrecy of decision-making that has taken place. Good sunshine laws are needed.
But we need to talk about other issues too.
During the last seven years, the city council has turned back the clock on planning and development in San Jose. In the 1960’s and 1970’s the city made a lot of bad development and transportation decisions. While other cities were capturing a mix of jobs and housing, San Jose became the bedroom community for Silicon Valley. Our city grew more congested and poorer as a result of it. Without capturing jobs, the city’s tax base suffered. By building thousands of houses at the south end of the city, far away from the jobs to the north, today’s traffic problems took root.
Now, it seems that the current city council wants to make those same bad decisions again. I plan on letting the voters hear about these decisions, but I want to do more than that. We need to talk about how this city ought to grow.
If we can get past the scandals.
Formerly a member of the San Jose City Council (1991-98) and prosecutor for the DA’s office, David Pandori is a candidate for mayor.
One thing is striking that hasn’t been written yet…a lobbyist is actually running for City Council. Until less than a year ago (May 2005), Manny Diaz was a registered lobbyist in San Jose…does that strike anyone else as odd?
In the May 2005 lobbyist report—Diaz was registered to lobby for a firm looking to get a contract at the airport. Now he wants a job deciding about contracts at the airport?
Let’s extend lightrail to Morgan Hill. That way all of the people who move to the Coyote Valley will utilize it for commuting to their jobs… in India, The Phillipines, Taiwan, Viet Nam?
Oh that won’t work will it? Well what if we expand the airport, lengthen the runways so we could facilitate 747’s and other large aircraft that one generally finds at an Internatinal airport. Nah, just better to call it an International airport and add the name of a local boy who made good. Especially after the State, County and City has spent so much money on new roadbeds to accommadate the ever increasing traffic that the airport generates. Whoops! Sorry! I meant International airport.
But at least we can take lightrail to Los Gatos now… Well not exactly, it only goes to Campbell. Who in hell wants to go to Campbell that badly? Residents? Only if we continue to build those Moscuvite housing projects along the routes. Used to be if you lived along a railroad track it was a place you wanted to move FROM. Now the builders think it’s a great place to move TO.
So, is there any candidate who will throw the money back at the developers or the trade unions and vow to sit down and come out with a PLAN for a change. Probably not but it’s nice to think about.
We can’t afford to provide adequate police and fire protection for what we currently have let alone add so much more south. Let’s provide the infrastructure first or, at least, on an as we build basis. I can’t stand too many more Station 23’s in a remodled 3 bedroom-2 bath house. Somehow doesn’t fit the image of Californias third largest city or does it…
Someone like Manny running for council would be odd in most cities, but not SJ. It’s just business as usual here. You sometimes can’t tell the difference between a lobbyist and a councilmember.
How about the planning commission—labor leader Jay James is running for council, sits as a planning commissioner and is raising thousands of dollars for his campaign. No conflict there?
Until we get serious about conflicts and the appearance of conflicts, we will get the government we deserve.
David,
Thanks for this post. You are right-on with your statements about planning and development decisions over the past several years.
At this point, it’s time to focus on building up, not out, on getting a synergy going downtown, on public safety/basic services and on things like maintaining the infrastructure that’s been largely ignored so as to result in crumbling streets all over town.
Dear San Jose:
Tuesday’s council meeting on the sunshine ordinance was most illuminating. The problem is not just corruption, it’s also incompetence. It is, at times, almost embarrasing to listen to some of the things that come out of our so called leaders’ mouths. The quality of discourse is mind-numbingly dull.
It’s a pity that the Mercury News did not report about Dave Cortese’s excellent objections to the fact that a select group of people were invited over to one of the councilmember’s house to discuss the issue. Cortese questioned how his and Chuck Reed’s suggestions were voted out by the rest of the council (except yeager) while the rest of the memo was approved.
I find it especially ironic that the people who have taken it upon themselves to craft a sunshine ordinance are the very same people who voted to end the Norcal investigation. It’s the height of hypocracy.
Pete Campbell
p.s. Did you read about Mayor Corruptus “crashing” a VTA meeting? I predict the council will do nothing.
I agree with David that we need frank talk beyond the scandals and address issues that this election has to pronounce some judgment about. These topics would include governance, citizen leadership, and vision. By addressing these core fundamentals principles we ensure that evils such as corruption and cronyism are less likely to occur.
Currently, we have no compelling story about the future of San Jose or even how we can become a united City dedicated to purposes like citizens genuinely influencing the public’s business, lessening congestion, bringing jobs and work closer together, and living within our means. When I see the various campaign literature it all reads like so much pap. No doubt some smart person is testing phrases to see what works. What I read almost strikes me as computer generated with the computer plugged into some voter-meter.
Finally, let us strive to have a City where it is well recognized that if personal financial gain is at stake, public servants must exercise high standards. If a public official, while they are holding a position of public trust, is lobbying a government entity for official permissions so they can reap that gain, then we need to have a citizen-government partnership that says that this is wrong, just plain wrong. Public service does not have to me public beggary but it does mean service before all.
———————————————
Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages that mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.—Daniel Webster
In response to Pete, #6: I was one of the “select group” of 35 neighborhood leaders from across the city invited to Vice Mayor Chavez’s house to hear our ideas for sunshine reforms. I was joined by among others, Ed Rast, the chair of United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County, who has posted frequently on this blog site. There was nothing sinister whatsoever about the meeting (ask Ed), and Dave Cortese’s implication otherwise was a blatant cheap shot.
I support open government and, like Rast, have worked toward it. Indeed, I spent two-years of monthly early-morning meetings co-chairing the task force of residents and developers who re-wrote the city’s outreach policy to give earlier and better notice of development proposals.
I appreciate that the vice mayor asked my opinions about useful reforms. No one else bothered to, including the Mercury News. She’s to be commended for what she did.
What scandals?
I must have been away.
Right now four guys are tripping over themselves to out-reform the others so they can take on Cindy in a run-off.
Reed and Cortese lack gravitas. Having been on the Council their carpings are those of toothless lions. Sure, they roar a lot, but they are unable to find any following for their positions. If they were elected, it is clear they could not govern.
Mulcahy is rich and an outsider. But his inexperience in government is a huge limitation. Like Arnold, he would need on the job training and his ability to govern might be limited by his business interests.
He certainly has the money to compete, so you can’t dismiss him entirely.
That leaves David as the wild card. A former Councilmember he has none of the baggage of the current Councilmembers. He also has the experience of government.
He comes from District 3, as does Cindy.
Cindy is in the best position to win everything in terms of support and money, but nothing is a certain in politics.
It’s an uphill battle for any of the four to catch fire, but if Pandori gets funding, he’s my bet to win the primary. It is a big “if”.
As much as I am for Cindy, Pandori would provide the biggest contrast and has the best potential to eat into her base.
From a poliitcal perspective, it would be better theatre than the others—Mulchay being a possible exception because of his money and outsider status.
But Cindy will have to wait and see. . .
Pete-
It gets even better.
Mayor Twilight Zone had a news conference today to propose campaign ethics reforms! Seriously.
I guess he came up with the idea while he was crashing the VTA/BART meeting.
Gonzo showing up to chair the VTA meeting reminds me of Saddam insisting he is still the President of Iraq. There is an apparent disconnect with reality. Maybe it was the shock and awe of the censure vote? Or maybe he really IS that arrogant?
Lo, how the mighty have fallen!
San Jose City Council
Good posts today and excellent points made by David Pandori. What was that line from the movie O Brother Who Art Thou, “We got to get some of that reform!” Everyone is saying that as their platform but what does it actually mean?! They all had a chance to do it over the past 8 years and look what they let Gonzales get away with – and continue to get away with. I think that he has finally lost it…
Even Rich Robinson’s post was good though I wonder what his alterior motive is for saying David will be in the runoff with Cindy…Rich?
Regarding Message #8
Hello Dan,
I think it is great the a sunshine law is under consideration however, I think its present scope is too limited and won’t get the job done because it does not go far enough in addressing the root causes of the problem. The law is structurally weak because it has an implicit over reliance on good behavior without enough focus on systematic solutions. It also does not address improving governance efficiency either. The inefficiency is what many people fear open government means
Here are a few principles and amendments that would better enable the sunshine law to
achieve its objectives.
1. Focus on breaking down communication barriers.
2. Focus on creating a group of citizen leaders. Residents are often experts already. They should be recognized as part of the solution.
3. SJ City Hall staff is a significant part of the problem and they must be included in any truly effective solution. Ironically, certain principles of good government have made government less amenable to being open.
4. Who delivers the policy message is very important. The City should diversify its messengers.
If the laws under discussion were augmented as I have outlined, we could have a much more effective and efficient governance.
Mike Alvarado
Yes, Gonzales really is that arrogant and he runs his office the same way. Yes, it is highly likely the Council will again do nothing about his latest escapade of chairing a committee he shouldn’t even have attended. And what about the people on that committee who just sat there while Gonzo took over? Did Cindy just go along until she can confirm what he did was wrong and then she will take action? This is the time for leadership—again—will anybody step up?
As we citizens search for a way to reign in our local government, it would be wise for us to recognize our own limitations. Yes, we have the vote, which allows us to elect people and decide issues, but realistically, in effecting the day-to-day business of government, the voting public is the weak force.
Examine the great successes of local government and you will discover the strong force: proud, ethical, appointed professionals. The firefighters who turned their occupation into a science, the cops who fought for professional standards, the civil servants who took an oath to stand-up to political pressure. On a day-to-day basis, our government is kept functional and honest by employees who hold themselves accountable to both the law and their professional standards.
Ron Gonzales is not a government professional. He is a politician and, like him or not, he is not a particularly rare incarnation of that often vile species. Expect more like him.
Del Borgsdorf is a government professional. He violated the standards of his profession, and perhaps even the law. We cannot afford another like him.
However it is that our scandalous past is addressed via reform, this most critical area must not be overlooked. We cannot legislate sleeze out of the political animal, but we can legislate accountability in—and weakness out—of the city manager’s position. We must restore the strong force.
Three quick comments on openness, ethics, transparency, and fairness…
Fraudulent Outreach Policy Drafted In Secret
We should be careful in talking about transparency and sunshine because the entire recently adopted, and seriously flawed, city outreach policy was developed behind closed doors, and the process excluded all neighborhood associations (to the best of my knowledge) in favor of including only leaders of the SNI PACs, etc., along with developers and other business interests. The new city outreach policy is a sham and simply disguises the failure of city departments to do outreach by talking a lot about outreach. It’s a stunning example of fraud on the public.
Yeager No Friend Of Transparency
City Council Member Ken Yeager gets no pass on his leadership role with ethics. At one of his meetings on a Tuesday, as I recall, it became apparent that our neighborhood association review work done with the posted ethics text on Sunday was rendered useless because he simply yanked the Sunday version off the Internet and had a new version substituted just before the meeting, leaving residents present at his Tuesday meeting without any way to quickly identify the points they wanted to make. His device of shifting the text around in secrecy renders any claims he has to transparency null and void. While I appreciate many things he has done, he betrayed every concept of outreach, ethics, sunshine, fairness, and transparency with his little trick with the text of the ethics document just before a critical meeting of his ethics committee.
Commending The New City Clerk
Last, I would like to commend the new city clerk, Lee Price, for what appears to be her personal and professional attention to this matter of fairness and transparency. Before she became city clerk, I had plenty of experience with one of her predecessors who, for example, gave a letter to our cardroom reform petition drive telling us how many signatures we needed to collect, and then after we filed a much larger number, she issued a second letter claiming a still larger number was necessary. I don’t know if I’m doing Lee Price’s career any good by praising her work, but every activity I have seen her undertake has seemed to me to have been lawful, fair, open, helpful, and transparent. She is a breath of fresh air in city hall, and a standing reproach to the idea that every problem requires a new ordinance. The Mercury News is wrong about its much-touted support for a “sunshine” ordinance unless people of good faith and honest intentions (like Lee Price) staff the city agencies we have to trust.
Finfan I actually agree with you for once. Keep it up.
Good points, David. Yes, Coyote Valley is Dutch Hamman legend all over again… downright bad planning. Coyote Valley will sap our infrastructure and resources beyond imagination – thousands of homes, commuters choking the highways, police and fire services stretched beyond the limit, etc. But who will stop it? Me thinks it’s a fait accompli.
SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS 3/23/06
Local section
Chavez leads in mayoral spending
She has raised $429,686
She will probably reach the max of $708,643
My question is-
The Central Labor Council has raised over $230,000 it’s obvious who it’s going to.
Wouldn’t that make her over the limit?
Front page
Mayor makes unexpected appearance
San Jose Vice Mayor Cindy Chavez, who is chair of the VTA board of directors and a member of the Bart policy board.
Sat next to Ron Gonzales as he voted along with the others to save $105 million to consolidate two stations into one!
Looks BAD, Smells BAD, Was BAD!
My question is-
Are they Siamese twins jointed at the hips?
Two questions, does some one have the answers for me?
Oh, that makes three…
GM
I can’t open the paper w/o seeing some more craziness from the representatives at City Hall. Makes for some good laughs, but it is really sad to happen to the 10th largest city in the nation.
I just wonder what life would be like if the election was different eight years ago: Tony West, Pat Dando….. Indeed, Pandori’s message is right on the money. As current council members running for Mayor – who some would say came on the council with higher aspirations (just as Gonzalez), they talk reform, but are part of the problem. Rather, talk about the future direction of the city which you have controlled for so long.
I believe Pandori left office without any aspirations, but to continue to work for some public good being as a lowly Deputy District Attorney, and working as a volunteer to see Guadalupe Gardens open and would be happy to continue his quiet life.
But having a Masters in City Planning (his web site states) got the better of him. He feels he has the solutions and wants to address them. Hats off to him. We’ve seen what career building (political) public servants have done to this city, I’m willing to give someone with some Masters in City Planning a try. I’ve seen what happens when we elect MASTERS OF SCHMOOZING.
With the current city council making the planning decisions, it’s deja vu all over again.
Sunshine? It sure has been dark out there. Foxes like it real dark. Wonder if there are any hens left in the hen house to worry about?
Lets just look at where Cindy came from, where she gets funded (big bucks) and where she wants to be. Guess she may just be the next. Foxey Lady!
Question: Can we get past the scandals?
My unofficial scorecard based on the 19 responses so far:
Let’s talk about development = 6
Let’s talk about the scandals = 13
I have to admit. The 13 posts are better reads.
How about a compromise. Anyone interested in talking about scandalous development? I’ve got a few.
No need to wonder…
How about the planning commission—labor leader Jay James is running for council, sits as a planning commissioner and is raising thousands of dollars for his campaign. No conflict there?
The labor groups bring us more of the same… as much as Cindy will be more of Ron, Jay will be more of Cindy…. Soon we will have 11 city leaders following one voice: LABOR!
How is it that a group that represents a meer 20% or less of the population control 70+% of the council and their decisions?
As far as the closed open government meeting at Cindy’s house….. how is it that none of the neighborhood association leaders I know were invited? What about our citizen leaders that serve in other capacities like commissions? I bet she invited Jay James, a candidate that will be her loyal lapdog. Did she invite any of the outside mayoral candidate or council candidates? Are they not citizen leaders?
Excellent comments from Dave Pandori. By having housing on one side of the city, and your job base over 10 miles away, it creates all sorts of nasty situations. That it takes 45-60 minutes to access by light rail or bus does not help matters, and only contributes to California having the nation’s second dirtiest air…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060322/ap_on_re_us/air_pollution
with consequences of higher risks of cancer, of course, from being forced to drive in gridlock
as a result. This creates many of the empty buses and light rail trains you see throughout San Jose and the Valley as a whole – particulary during the non-commute hours.
As for light rail in Campbell: residents use it heavily, based on the full parking lot at Winchester light rail station. It’s mainly used
to access downtown San Jose, from observations. Beyond that, people tend to
use the #60 bus to access the jobs in Santa Clara.
I am writing something for KLIV as a Free Speech Editorial on Ron’s Meeting Crasher role at the VTA/BART meeting. Someone from my group reminded me on how Ron is too beholden to big developers, construction firms, and their respective unions to let BART to San Jose go.
#22 If you’ve happened to catch Jay James and Pete Constant at a D1 candidate forum – you know there’s a night and day choice.
A candidate that’d actually be good for SJ – Pete Constant.
And then there’s Jay James, yet again more labor and likely to give us more of the same CH that we’ve grown all to accustomed too.
From the Merc:
“For council races, to which individual contributors may donate $250 apiece, the most intense competition is in Districts 1 and 3. In District 1, candidate Jay James reported $33,779 for the campaign so far; Pete Constant reported $14,678.”
Follow the money?
Hopefully D1 is awake and paying attention.
In response to Dale, #16 re “Fraudulent Outreach Policy Drafted in Secret”: Your allegations are quite ridiculous. As mentioned, I co-chaired the task force that re-drafted the outreach policy, #6-30. The process grew out of discussions between then planning director Stephen Haase and elected Strong Neighborhoods Initiative (SNI) Project Area Committee (PAC) members (resident volunteers like myself). Early in the process, the effort was reported prominently in the Mercury News (Janice Rombeck). Once a preliminary draft was created (after about a year), developer representatives were invited to attend the monthly meetings and a revised draft was created (after about another year). The revised draft was then presented to neighborhood groups throughout the city in a series of community meetings (over a period of two months or more) to solicit further input. The draft was extremely well received in all of the several community meetings I attended. The final draft was then presented to the planning commission and to city council during ordinary publicly noticed meetings before being adopted. It was an open process throughout—and the result was a great victory for neighborhoods and for transparent government which both neighborhood leaders and developers are proud of. The new policy calls for earlier, wider, better notice of development proposals to residents while giving developers clearer guidance of what is required of them and also ensuring the development application process moves expeditiously. It is manifestly better than the old one.
Now whether the new policy is being adhered to in all cases is another question . . .
With the greatest of respect to Don Gagliardi, I must reject his contention that the outreach policy was “was an open process throughout—and the result was a great victory for neighborhoods and for transparent government which both neighborhood leaders and developers are proud of.”
It may have seemed to him to have been so, but then it always seems to insiders to have been an open process. The outreach policy development was a closed process and, as a consequence, it is a deeply flawed, fraudulent policy.
The memo that discussed the Public Outreach policy, how it was developed and the dozens of public meetings through the city to get the information out to everyone prior to the Planning Commission and City Council public meetings which were also widely noticed and very well attended along with newspaper articles
There were more notices and public meetings as well as neighborhood association meetings on this revised policy that almost anything in the last 2 years.
It made substantial changes in actual public notification ( on site signs, email notification , languages etc ) for planning and development projects but there are still a few items than need to be completely implemented by City Manager and departmetns as well as a meeting is bing scheduled to review and recommend more improvements to public outreach
http://www.sanjoseca.gov/planning/hearings/2004Agendas/documents/Outreach Policy Update PC Memo.pdf
As a member of the Horizon 2000 task force and one of the members that crafted the “triggers” to begin planning of Coyote Valley, I have been dismayed and hopeless over the current Task Force and their work. The planning trigger that was part of the General Plan for 20 years essentially stated that we would not begin planning until the jobs were somewhat in place. The explicit reason we wrote this policy in place was because we knew that to plan housing meant a mandate to build it. And, we knew that we did not want additional housing until the jobs were evident. This was to preclude a worsening of the traffic and aggravating the tax imbalance that continues today.
This Council eliminated the policy and initiated the Coyote Planning Task Force, in a perfect example of screwing the intent of the last 20 years to plan for jobs first.
No one that has one iota of common sense can think that building 30,000 housing units in Coyote will do anything but cause huge traffic problems on 101 (just when we got it moving) and that serving those 30,000 housing units will cause an even greater strain on service delivery….
Is your Community Center closing? Are your streets falling apart? Do you think that will improve when another mini city exists in Coyote?
You go David, and thank God someone is telling it like it is.
I believe the largest problem is that many of us don’t really know how big San Jose is. We are still operating under a governmental structure that was put in place when we were transitioning from an agricultureal society to one of manufacturing and research. The PEOPLE are different. They don’t care about government as long as it doesn’t get in the way of their current project. Ask anyone on the street what they know about “sunshine” rules and the answer you will get is “no man it’s still raining”.
Don’t vote for Cindy (sorry Mr. Robinson, lobbiest) and maybe Mr. Pandori has to much money and owns to much property but who better to serve?
Perhaps he could be his own man and not someone who is bought and paid for by my double nemesis Unions and Developers. By the way, shame on those pols who take money from both. Yeah you Cindy. God, I love a mystrey. Who’s next?
Lets get past all of the intricacy of debate over the micro level politics and look at the macro situation. The fact is that this City is in a state of rampant unbrideld, no questions asked, housing mania. Through the magic of rezoning and backroom deals, we have allowed “Smart Growth” to justify the destruction of community assets, destroying more industrial and retail business deemed as properties not meeting their economic potential. The result, a total disregard for the General Plan, removing (now or in the future) such assets such as the Saddle Rack, Lou’s Village, the Flea Market, countless historical sights, and viable industrial business such as trucking yards, sheet metal and body shops, the Hacienda Center, bowling alleys, sausage factories, to name only a few, replaced by faceless multi-family human warehouses showing no evidence of community contribution. Ignored are traffic impacts, or the simple fact that housing prices continue to climb despite the claim that all of this fever paced development will solve a “shortage” (if the emphasis is hight tech jobs, then expect high tech morgages!). If nothing else, these gloried HUD projects constitute a net drain on the already strapped budget (because no concurrent job creation is happening). We build new community centers and libraries while closing others due to budget contraints on staffing. This Cities obsession with high density housing is destroying so much of what is necessary to succeed at winning any basic game of “SIM City”. I sometimes think my son’s cability in this computer game makes him more qualified than any of SJ’s Council, Mayor Planning Commision, or City Planners. Importantly, how is the proposed Sunshine legislation going to limit the impact of the “smoked filled rooms” that RDA uses to woo landlords into selling out?
Hi David,
I would like to wish you the best of luck in your campaign. I know you have your own website but I hope you continue to blog here.
As a younger person, I understand that our government officials are going to face red tape and special interests. How would you, as mayor, show (not tell) the public that you are working on their behalf. I think it will be difficult to make this community feel like their needs really matter – making this diverse city “whole” again. I would like to hear your strategic approach to this.
In my opinion, many people aren’t interested in moving beyond the scandal because:
A) Scandals are fun
B) The public/families spend their little free time with family, putting food on the table and raising their children. They don’t have time to speak their mind on issues only to be patronized by government officials. Even those who volunteer for a task forces rarely see their efforts come to life.
I am wondering if you (or other candidates) have a philosophy which addresses this situation.
Thanks and good luck,
Shelly
Lots of wonderful comments on the blog. I’ve asked for public funding for years of all elections. Pandori is right there are many important issues other than ethics. People of San Jose must see that labor and developers have run this city since Tom McEnery left office. It’s time to stop. Vote against any labor funded and or endorsed by labor. they are breaking our city and developers are ruining it.
Let’s see: we have three lawyers on the city council, plus the city attorney, and not one of them raised the Gonzo/VTA issue in advance?!
Two of them want to be mayor and one wants to switch to county supe. We’re doomed, if these are our “leaders”.
If a private lawyer had drafted an agreement with that large an oversight, he’d be sued out of existnce.
FinFan #15: Was that “reign in our local govt.” a Freudian slip typo, or intentional?
Don #26: If I read your post correctly, it took THREE YEARS!! of “process” to develop this “outreach policy”! That’s what’s wrong with govt.—too many slow thinkers taking forever to get a job done—meeting after meeting, “outreach” to “community-based groups”. Pathetic. We need leaders who lead. That’s supposedly what a representative type of government is all about.
A camel is a horse built by a committee.
JMO (#34),
The “g” was unintentional, but given Gonzo’s recent refusal to relinquish even the smallest throne, and the fact that I have never mistakenly typed “reigndeer,” your suspicion of Freudian influences might have some merit.
David –
Can anyone stop the development in North San Jose or is that train already down the tracks? What would you do for the airport – expand or move?
I guess I could go to the Mayoral Debate on Thursday and find out….
Looking at Cindy Chavez’s website for mayor, you would never know there was a debate this Thursday. If she is not going to tell us about her campaign events, should we start worrying about her commitment to a San Jose sunshine law?
See http://cindychavez4mayor.com/
Is there a connection between developers and corruption at city hall?
Who contributes most to city council and mayoral campaigns?
Who are screaming for more housing in Coyote Valley? residents or developers?
David is proposing what was promised years ago: a sensible plan, one that protects the environment and ensures the least amount of traffic congestion.
I applaud him for standing up to special interests in his opposition to continued sprawl.
Paul Boehm
Shelly Wolfe asked what I would do to show (rather than tell) people I’m working on their behalf.
You’ll never need a lobbyist in order to meet with me, and you won’t need an attorney to figure out what’s going on at city hall.
I plan to pursue four priorities: (1) restore common sense planning in the city, where San Jose grows up, not out; (2) instead of borrowing money from the future, I’ve proposed to put the city on a 25 year savings plan to create an endowment for San Jose’s next generation; (3) connect the city’s creeks and park trails and work in a partnership with the county to create a major new park at the Fairgrounds; and (4) form a joint powers agency between the city, school districts, the county, and law enforcement to stop gangs from growing.
Dave:40: Very ambitious. Got any clue you’d like to share with us about how you are going to do all that?
Your # 4 proposal—oh great, another task force like Don Gagliardi’s “outreach policy” bullsh*t that took three years to figure out how to notify people about stuff that would impact them. More process, no action.
You sound like you never left government. But then, you didn’t, did you? You just changed branches for a while.
I think the fact that David is conversing on this blog with the “common” folk shows how things would be different if he was back in City Hall then the current admin.
Like he said, you won’t need a lobbyist to get access to the mayor and hell, he might even answer questions addressed to him instead of always doing it through his spokesperson. I mean, what a joke that has been!
David, the more I hear, the more I like. Would love to hear more about your plans for action. I will be at the debate on Thursday night and hope that you will speak more about those.
Thanks David – I appreciate your reply.
(re: #6 and #8) I don’t get it folks! I mean all of the support for Council member Chavez and until recently she was a “yes man” for Mayor Gonzales and his lack of ethics. If she really disagreed with him on his approach and issues, then she should have distanced herself earlier. Now, because she is running for mayor it becomes convenient to leave his side. Wow, society today has such a short memory.
Question for Mr. Pandori, you were on the City Council around the time (early 90’s) that The Ranch development (in Evergreen) was signed-off on. Did you have any say on this and if so what was your position (in favor or against)?
Still waiting for your answer (#45) Mr. Pandori…
oneinamill – Try Pandori on the blog on his own website: http://www.bettersanjose.com and click the big “blog” button. You might get a qucker response there.
The second Noah’s Ark
In the year 2005, the Lord came unto Noah, who was now living in the United State s, and said, “Once again, the earth has become wicked and over-populated and I see the end of all flesh before me. Build another Ark and save two of every living thing along with a few good humans.”
He gave Noah the blueprints, saying, “You have six months to build the Ark before I will start the unending rain for 40 days and 40 nights”.
Six months later, the Lord looked down and saw Noah weeping in his yard …. but no ark.
“Noah”, He roared, “I’m about to start the rain! Where is the Ark?”
“Forgive me, Lord,” begged Noah. “But things have changed. I needed a building permit. I’ve been arguing with the inspector about the need for a sprinkler system. My neighbors claim that I’ve violated the neighborhood zoning laws by building the Ark in my yard and exceeding the height limitations. We had to go to the Development Appeal Board for a decision.
Then the Department of Transportation demanded a bond be posted for the future costs of moving power lines and other overhead obstructions, to clear the passage for the Ark’s move to the sea. I argued that the sea would be coming to us, but they would hear nothing of it.
Getting the wood was another problem. There’s a ban on cutting local trees in order to save the spotted owl. I tried to convince the environmentalists that I needed the wood to save the owls. But no go!
When I started gathering the animals, I got sued by an animal rights group. They insisted that I was confining wild animals against their will. As well, they argued the accommodation was too restrictive and it was cruel and inhumane to put so many animals in a confined space.
Then the EPA ruled that I couldn’t build the Ark until they’d conducted an environmental impact study on your proposed flood.
I’m still trying to resolve a complaint with the Human Rights Commission on how many minorities I’m supposed to hire for my building crew.
Also, the trades unions say I can’t use my sons. They insist I have to hire only Union workers with Ark building experience.
To make matters worse, the IRS seized all my assets, claiming I’m trying to leave the country illegally with a cargo of endangered species.
So, forgive me, Lord, but it would take at least ten years for me to finish this Ark.”
Suddenly the skies cleared, the sun began to shine, and a rainbow stretched across the sky.
Noah looked up in wonder and asked, “You mean, You’re not going to destroy the world?”
“No,” said the Lord. “The government beat me to it
ACCORDING TO PANDORI “In the 1960’s and 1970’s the city made a lot of bad development and transportation decisions. While other cities were capturing a mix of jobs and housing, San Jose became the bedroom community for Silicon Valley. Our city grew more congested and poorer as a result of it. Without capturing jobs, the city’s tax base suffered. By building thousands of houses at the south end of the city, far away from the jobs to the north, today’s traffic problems took root. “
Now, it seems that the current city council wants to make those same bad decisions again. I plan on letting the voters hear about these decisions, but I want to do more than that. We need to talk about how this city ought to grow.”
-Where do you learn this, Mr Pandori? Please take some time to read the history of San Jose before trying to support your issues and blame the situation of the city with lies.
EMERGENCE OF AN INDUSTRIAl CITY
Like other Sunbelt cities, San Jose offered a good climate, low taxes, plenty of land for low-rise, low-cost buildings, and an absence of unions. It was also near San Francisco, a financial center. But the key to the industrial development of San Jose and the Santa Clara Valley was the electronics industry, the roots of which can be traced to Stanford University. Encouraged by Professor Frederick Terman, young Stanford engineers began to establish their own companies in the area. In 1938, William Hewlett and David Packard took Terman’s advice and formed Hewlett-Packard, now a major local employer. In 1946, financial, industrial, and university leaders to the north of San Jose established the Stanford Research Institute (SRI), which did industrial and defense research and later became an essential component of the industrial growth of the Santa Clara Valley. The federal government had already established similar facilities nearby at a naval air base and at the Ames Research Center.
Three stimulants to growth were already in place in the valley: friendly local government, plentiful land, and technological skill. Now the federal government added a fourth, money, through massive injections of defense and aerospace spending. The effects on the fledgling electronics industry were rapid. IBM and FMC expanded. New companies that soon would be household names, like Lockheed, Hewlett-Packard, Philco, General Electric, Sylvania, Fairchild, Memorex, National Semiconductor, and dozens of others, located in or near San Jose and expanded through the 1960s and 1970s. By 1979, two hundred thousand residents of the county were directly or indirectly employed in the electronics industry; twenty of the largest manufacturing firms in the county were either defense -, aerospace -, or electronics-related; only five were not. And Santa Clara County was the recipient of $2 billion annually in federal defense contracts, 3 percent of the national total.
The jobs were there, then, for a nation eager to migrate to California, a movement that began in the 1930s and accelerated after the war.
The job boom stimulated another growth sector. With thousands of new workers on their way, housing was needed. Local government gleefully provided the zoning, but federal policy also played an important part. Veterans Administration (VA) and Federal Housing Administration (FHA) mortgage insurance made it possible for the average American to fulfill the dream in the suburban housing tracts that began to characterize San Jose and other Sunbelt cities. The tax benefits of real estate ownership were an added stimulant: it was economically irrational not to own a home.
Federal and state aid also was essential for supplying the growing city and its industries with water and for subsidizing the construction of sewage treatment facilities and an airport. But the biggest direct assistance of both the federal and state government came in the form of highway construction. Three major freeways were built, running through and encircling San Jose and connecting it to San Francisco, Oakland, the Pacific Coast, and Southern California, as well as opening up new areas of Santa Clara County for development.
These external forces – federal defense spending, the location of industry, the migration of people, federal housing policy, and highway construction – contributed greatly to the growth of San Jose. The local supporters of growth, well aware of this, did all they could not only to promote San Jose but to support those state and federal programs that were useful to them and to make sure San Jose got its share. State and federal legislators from the Santa Clara Valley became cheerleaders for these programs, assisted by local economic and political leaders.
I am an undecided voter who, like many other voters, are alternately bored, annoyed, and disgusted
by local politics and local election campaigns.
If I hear a candidate talk one more time about “new ideas” or “bringing about real change” I am
going to throw up!
I am disgusted by candidates and campaigns who hire big money consultants to talk up issues that
pander to voter groups just as zoo keepers wave bananas in front of monkeys.
There are issues that voters care about, and that I care about, and we are going to vote on OUR
issues and not the “boob bait for Bubbas” that consultants serve up.
Following is a short list of issues that I know have energized voters. These are issue which I
intend to use to guide my choice of candidates for public office.
If you, as a candidate, sincerely wish to engage with voters and give them a clear and well
articulated basis for deciding that a vote for you aligns with the vision and policies that they
want to see advanced, then I would like to offer you the chance to indicate your position on the
following issues:
Issue 1: Do you support or oppose public financing of election campaigns?
Issue 2: Do you support or oppose strong policies and actions at all levels of government to
restrict the uncontrolled entry of immigrants and vistitors to the United States?
Issue 3: Do you support or oppose San Jose’s “sanctuary policies” which prohibit the city’s
cooperation with the federal government to identify persons who have entered the United States
without proper documentation or who have otherwise avoided legally established procedures for
entering the United States?
Issue 4: Do you support or oppose San Jose’s Neighborbood Automated Speed Compliance Program
(NASCOP) which uses automated surveillance systems, including radar detectors and cameras, to issue
speeding tickets to drivers on San Jose streets?
I, and the voters of San Jose, will be grateful for your clear articulation of you policies on these
issues.
The parking Nazis have found a new way to make downtown less friendly. Today, several people working out at the San Jose Athletic Club on N Third Street before 5:00 a.m. received parking tickets. One guy was still sitting in his car, an was cited anyway! Seems there’s No parking during the night in some places in San Ohaze. Incredible!
Does anyone have Abi the Parking Czar’s email address?.
Just got my new garbage bill—another rate increase. Thanks Gonzo.
I fill up my garbage can about two times per year—recycle everything. Am I the only person who resents paying more for something I barely use?
JohnMicheal,
I feel your pain. The parking nazis come out at 1:45 am most nights of the week. They are there to feed on poeple leaving bars, restaurants or nightclubs.
Basically businesses are given use permits to operate until 2am. But their customers have to run to thier cars after closing or risk a parking ticket.
Makes it so easy to get good people to come back!
By the way, you have got to love the business / customer friendly message!
Bar Owner
Who read the Merc today? Another backroom deal!!! I’m guessing Ms Chavez will propose not invetigating to save the city some money.
What a joke our government has become. Ms Chavez’s greatest public service would be to resign.
SJ leaders have failed us. It never ceases to amazes me all the financial mistakes that we the taxpayers will be responsible for. You know the list. Coyote Valley is the last straw for me. I am tired of them and disappointed.
Rich Robinson’s insight on #9 is on the mark.
I believe if the residences of SJ started adding up all the cost overruns and backroom deals, people are going to want an alternative. Not s shoe in for Cindy. Though I like her as a person I think she would be better suited for County Supervisor. I agree, David is the wild card. David Pandori has the urban planning background. I do not want to live in a sprawl like LA. I am tired of SJ being the bedroom community for other cities that have better quality city services, and parks for our children.
Mr. Southside Voter touch on a topic worthy of explanation – illegal immigration.
What do the candidates plan on doing? Will the San Jose City police start enforcing federal laws about illegals or at least colloborating with the feds? Will the City still recognize Mexican Consulate IDs?
I for one do NOT want my city to become a sanctuary city or to otherwise contribute to the problem of illegal immigration.
Did anyone catch the fact that Gonzales took the fifth before the Grand Jury? Metro had it on its front page. The Mercury News hasn’t been able to get the story, and the DA is running around like crazy trying to figure out who leaked it. Now it looks like we can look forward to the Gonzales resignation
Scandal at City Hall, cost over runs, cisco contracts…anyone that has built even a shed in the back yard knows how many times you have to go to the hardware store for necessary unexpected items. NO ONE can actually predict a remodeling project cost, new home constructions, even car repairs. We either wanted a new city hall or not. Yes we voted on a set cost, but give it a rest. AND concerning Cisco, at least they are a bay area employer and with all the publicity a bad installation would have caused don’t you think they would have taken care of it? Think about where the cash went for the communications system….I don’t remember the new supplier being a bay area employer.
58 – With your attitude you could have worked for the mayor. As for me, I prefer professionals with integrity. Sure there are unexpected costs, but when you hide information from the people and in some cases the Council, you get what you deserve. That is what Gonzales is getting now.