The 2006 Mayor’s race is shaping up as a strong assault on the current administration of Ron Gonzales by Chuck Reed and the other announced candidate, Dave Cortese. In stark contrast to most of the recent elections for Mayor, it is clear that this race will be a referendum on the Gonzales style and substance, and few punches will be pulled by Reed or Cortese.
I enjoyed reading the guest blog by Reed currently featured on this site. It sets out a thoughtful and reasoned position that emphasizes the triple pillars of honesty, fiscal integrity and open government. Reed has built a strong record on all three – although some would say he erred by joining Ron Gonzales in the premature termination of the Cisco investigation. Nevertheless, he has made a reputation for being diligent and forthright.
The third candidate expected to join the race is Councilmember Cindy Chavez, who will most likely be the only candidate that is a supporter, though perhaps tepid, of the current Mayor. It is not usually this way in San Jose. The elections of the last three Mayors involved campaigns in which the challengers were all supporters (in general) of the outgoing Mayors. Any differences were minor and muted.
So, get ready for 2006! It is going to be a free-for-all on the record of Ron Gonzales—quite an inviting target. The race for Mayor may not go to the swiftest this time, but it will certainly not go to the most timid. You can count on that and take it to the bank – or Mayor’s office.
The race for Mayor will indeed be a good fight but we need good candidates who will do more than just critique Ron.
We need a Mayor with VISION for the City and the ability to make tough decisions, stand by them, and not change their mind in hindsight.
Reed will be fair & firm, but does he have the charisma to win the people over? Does Cindy have the policy acumen and ability to bridge consensus beyond the South Bay Labor Council? And, Dave…will he continue to change his mind and switch sides on issues on a whim?
What about Dando? Yes, she took the job in Sacto, but she has been quiet on her plans…hopefully she’ll decide to run. A Dando-Chavez run-off would provide for great debates and a chance to see 2 tough campaigners in action.
Of the 4, Dando is probably the best qualified, has a great deal of charisma, and can build consensus among diverse groups.
It’s too bad the last election wasn’t a “referendum on the Gonzales style and substance.” I guess better late than never. A vote for Cindy will be a vote for more of the same.
You are right that many were left a bit dumbfounded by Chuck’s vote to pull the plug on the Cisco investigation, leaving many unanswered questions and letting many people who should be held accountable walk away unscathed. He will have to answer and give a better explanation than he has as to why he voted the way he did.
Dave needs a better understanding of the role of a councilmember. Directing city staff without the consent of the full council is unprofessional and violates city policy. We’ve had more than a enough of a mayor who thinks he can bully staff (and we’ve had more than enough of a Council who has allowed this to happen.) We need a mayor who has the best interests of the enitre city—not one who responds only to labor or any special interest group. We need a mayor who does not rule by vendetta. Very simply we need a mayor who truly cares about San Jose and its citizens. We have not had that in many years.
Dando had her chance but gave it away the past few years as she morphed into Gonzo II. She became so closely aligned with him that she has lost her integrity now. Plus she has a lot of luggage from her RDA days.
Are you kidding? Dando “has a great deal of charisma” ??? Right—just what this town needs—a dour matronly type with all the charisma of a potted plant. Does she even have the anatomical ability to crack a smile? I’ve never seen her with one. The fact that our scheming and self-serving governator hand-picked her for her latest post has ensured she won’t get my vote anyway, but even without her connection to Arnold I’d vote for my cat before I’d vote for her.
We need candidates that are going to get people fired up—locally and beyond—and there isn’t one potential candidate out there who has the ability to do that.
Tom, they’re all a bunch of timid and tepid wet noodles that don’t have what it takes to generate a decent turnout at the polls. Given the current field, the next mayor of this town will be voted in by well under 50% of the electorate because the majority of us will have been put to sleep by all of them by election day.
Tom,
With all the talking and writing about open government and disclosure I am still waiting for someone to explain how San Jose residents can easily access the newly disclosed information. If you look at our city’s web site of today versus three years ago, there is no new information despite all the new rules regarding disclosure. Even San Francisco has managed to put campaign finance information on their city’s web site. Why can’t the capital of Silicon Valley do the same? All the talk about disclosure is meaningless until the information is available on city’s web site in a easy to access, searchable format.
The big dog in this race is Pat Dando, should she choose to enter. She has been quite supportive of Gonzales and served as his Vice-Mayor. But I would not confuse the two, each has a different agenda and style.
Likewise, Cindy Chavez will be interesting to watch. She has broken with Gonzales on several high-profile issues. Moreover, Chavez provides the best contrast to Dando. Cortese and Reed—who I believe are hoping Pat does not run—are trying to stake territory that would naturally be Pat’s.
Cindy takes a beating on this board because of her alleged ties to labor. But even there she does not have a 100% voting record.
Her leadership on the Healthy Children’s Program. which was opposed by Gonzales gives her a popular issue to boost her chances.
Still it is Pat’s to lose should she decide to go.
Rick,
I don’t get this “process” argument. Staff is the problem not the solution. We wouldn’t have lobbyists today if the bureaucrats would do the job they are supposed to do.
Most people who hire lobbyists are just trying to get through the bureaucracy which has grown 10 fold over the years. Why do we have 9 assistant City Managers?
I applaud a Councilmember who inserts themselves into the process to get things done. Otherwise the CYA bureaucrat will not move for fear of making a decision.
I’ll admit, at times the process has been abused, but I’d rather deal with an elected who has an interest is accomplishment, than a bureaucrat who is worried the wrong decision will jeopardize their pension.
Reform is needed throughout the system, not just at the Mayor/Council level.
Just for the record, I may disagree with Joe Guerra, but he seems to be able to move things through that bureaucratic nightmare we have created at City Hall.
If it were not for the fact that he has alienated everyone in the process, he would have made a great lobbyist.
Rich –
Spoken like a true lobbyist. I am sure you don’t mean each Councilmember should be running loose and directing city staff, do you?
Staff is NOT the problem in most cases. The problem is that under this administration staff has been “encouraged” not to give their best professional judgement if it might differ from the Mayor. Many staff decisions and responses would have been different if a free and open discussion process were part of the current City Hall culture.
I can’t believe you think we would be better off with loose-cannon councilmembers, each acting as their own mayor, and a city manager who sits on the sidelines and lets it occur.
As for Guerra, come on. He moves things along? Like the $11 million gift to the unions? Like the surprise $45 million for furniture, etc. at CH? At least you acknowledge his greatest success— alienating everyone in the process. He should never have been placed in the Mayor’s office. This mayor was warned by previous councilmembers not to put him in the office, but as usual RG ignored the input. In any other professional business in the country, Guerra would have been long gone—no responsible manager would have put up with his abuse towards other staff—both above and below his “rank.”
Perhaps you used up all your venom on Trippi and so only had puffery left for this piece.
I enjoy your input though.
Potential elected officials talk about “ Vision “ which is necessary and worthwhile early in the campaign but many never get to the hard work – the specific details of how to implement their vision – “ the devil is in the details “ and if we allow candidates in the future to not discuss the “ how “ details we will continue get mixed results when we need outstaning leadership and results
Candiates need to clearly dicsuss San Jose city government’s past history, what we can learn from it, future challenges , the job’s built in conflicts of interests and most importantly what specifically they will do to balance the competing interests. This will help the voters select the best candidate for Mayor or City Council offices
An example of a conflict of interest for an elected official is they are elected by the resident voters but their campaigns are paid for by special interests that many times expect payback which sometines not in the best interests of San Jose‘s residents.
The lack of frequent clear open public discussions involves all residents and special interests about ALL major policy issues prior to decisions being made and voted on by City Council results in the preception if not the reality that the “ deal is done “ before the brief ” 2 minute limited ” city council public discussion
Career politians have pluses in that they know the process and people but also minuses since they can frequently exclude members of the community and it is preceived they are frequently paying back their campaign supporters. It is their frequent justification that “ we ( elected officials ) know better than the public and that is why we are voting for it over the objections of the public” when we can clearly see the favortism and political payback. This method of political operations is becoming less acceptable as a way to do San Jose city government for most residnents.
So a question that needs to be asked of all candidates is “ How specifically are you going to address the conflict of interest between what the residents that elected you and the special interests than paid for your campaign ? “ An unacceptale answer is “ There is no conflict. “
The Mayor as the city’s political leader frequently indicates what he / she ideally believes in in the best interests of all residents not the 1 or 2 groups that expects political favoritism for campaign support in the past or future and “ Pay for Play “ politics.
Career politicians who move to where open offices are rather than have a long record of commitment to the community, understanding local issues, community involvement and accomplishments are more difficult to evaluate and if elected frequently have poor performance. Remember the California Politician’s Prayer – ( “ I hope I am out of here, before the bills from all the overspending and bonds we have issued comes due, so someone else will get blamed “ )
Vision is necessay but community involvement, actual specific future actions / plans, clear past accomplishments that implement the best policies / practices especially for those decisins that are suspitable to resident / campaign supporter conflicts of interest need to be evaluated when selecting the best next Mayor or City Council members.
Any candidates running for mayor of SJ must make downtown a priority before anything else. Downtown needs alot of attention; it needs alot of work before we can move to other tasks. The candidates must explain to the people of San Jose what will be done to the downtown area because it only half finished. The voters need to be given what was promised to them. We, as a taxpayer, invested so much of our money on incompleted downtown, and downtown needs to be finished once in for all! Businesses are closing left and right, forinstance, Pete Escovedo and Georges Jewelry. Downtown San Jose is the smallest and least vibrant of its size. It has the least highrises in the downtown than of any major city, including oakland. The pop. of San Jose is 928,000 which is the 10 largest city in the U.S. whose downtown is the size of Topeka, Kansas. Recommedations: highrise buildings of all types on any underutilized parcel of lands such as the ample surface parking lot throughout downtown and run down buildings, continual flow of uninterrupted retail space on main thoroughfare, and built on existing downtown compact core, not outer boundaries. We must not allow market dictate or bully us into smallville, meaning not building highrises when there’s no demand. The candidates must make sure downtown is packed to the max. regardless of market and financial conditions; in other words, keep building as much you can with further subsidies and incentives or built it right out. We would, at last, have downtown worthy of size, if not bigger. We would be proud and get tremendous respect. The candidates must reinterate that!
Change is good.
I think it is we all coalesce around the best candidate: Triumph the Insult Dog. He’s charasmatic, has high name ID and may even know that San Jose is in California and not in Costa Rica.
Yes, Dando will be the spoiler in this race.
She may work for Arnold, she may have aligned with Ron on some issues…BUT her leadership style is totally different from Ron or Cindy. AND, she has VISION.
Pat listens, Pat cares, Pat knows how to fight a tough fight. AND, believes in the promise of our downtown. She will work to build it up as a destination and a vibrant place of nightlife, entertainment, and residences.
And, dont doubt that Pat has charisma. She can fire up a crowd and when talking to you one on one or as a member of an audience, she is sincere.
Dear Moderator:
Can you install a online poll on this homepage?
If so, will you?
>>It has the least highrises in the downtown than of any major city, including oakland.
That would be because:
– of the flightpath directly over SJ downtown.
– of the high tech office park culture
2 things that will never change, no matter how much money is thrown at downtown.
SJ citizens yearning for respect and demanding that downtown be fixed and giving our next visionary leader the green light to start spending buckets of money on downtown (again)…
Such lunacy will be rewarded with more waste, more corruption, and more waste. And how shocked and outraged we will all be!
t’s about good schools and a nice place to raise a family. If your kid is getting a lousy education at a crappy, run down school, but you have a nice downtown… What’s more important to you?
All I ask of the next mayor that s/he budget much money for auditorium sized Dr Phil sessions to help our citizenry can come to grips with the chronic “little sister” complex.
Rick,
Yes I was referring to Joe’s efforts in those matters. He got things done—not good things—but something. He knows how to bust through the bureaucracy.
Second, everybody blames Joe. Has anyone figured out that’s his job. He is Ron’s lightening rod, he is just doing his job—the way Ron wants him to do the job.
In all fairness, Jude used to have that role when Ron was on the board. I used to hear people complainabout the over-bearing, arrogant, rude Jude Barry? But Jude was smart enough to realize it was not a good position from which to be effective longterm. Besides he is just a good guy trying to do the right thing—hard for me to believe he was ever rude. Again, for the record he’s always been a gentleman in my presence.
Also, I am no lobbyist, I’m not even registered. I provide community relations, do my political clients know where I stand on an issue? Probably, but if my clients ever need a lobbyist I’ll send them to Jerry or Ash. I’m just not willing to do the paperwork.
Last, your defense of the bureaucrats is wholly unjustified. If they have no input, while are they still working? If the Mayor’s office is to blame for everything why do we have a city staff at all?
Anyone who has tried to get a permit, a zoning change, a license, etc. knows it is difficult, nay, impossible to navigate through that bureaucratic mire in a timely manner.
Not all developers/permit seekers/constituents are bad people.
Many folks have huge carrying costs, or investment capital tied up in their projects, so while their site and floor plans are redesigned at the planning department and the planning commission decides they ought to change the direction of their roof-lines so as not to cast a shadow on a widget factory and reduce their units from 100 to 50, they eat the cost.
Bureaucrats don’t care, they are paid every two weeks, whether their work is done or not. If a “greedy” developer loses their shirt, it’s just the cost of doing business.
Sophisticated people know that without a lobbyist their project would never see the light of day. Without help from a Councilmember or the Mayor’s Office they might as well throw their plans in a dumpster.
The efficacy of city government is a joke.
Don’t get me wrong, there are some at the bottom of the food chain, clerks, planners etc. who really do good work. But get the project to middle management or above and paranoia sets in. . .
Just think about the Cisco deal, how many bureaucrats now refuse to use email, just in case?
It’s a crazy world. We need someone who recognizes the problems and will shake it up.
Last, I never voted for a City Manager in my life. He owes me nothing. However, I do expect my elected representatives to respond and act when a problem is given to them.
That’s just the way representative democracy is supposed to work.
P.S. My comments in reference to Trippi were kind, you should hear me on a good day.
We actually agree on some points, but I think you are missing the big picture. The mayor’s office sees a need for city staff so they have someone to blame for fiascos like Cisco, and the garbage deal, etc.
As for your point about never having voted for a City Manager, you have voted with your wallet to pay his salary and his housing arrangment (that’s right, Joe got that done, too.)
I guess I don’t understand your defense of Joe. You seem to be saying since he gets things done it doesn’t matter what he gets done or how he does it as long as he gets it done. That philosophy is what has gotten the city into many of the problems it is facing today (the new city hall is a prime example.)
I guess we agree on the problems, just not on how the problems got there and how to fix them.
Rick,
I think we agree. Don’t take my comments as a defense of Joe.
But if someone is to be blamed, it is Ron. He is the boss. Joe is an employee. If Ron did not approve of Joe’s actions he would be gone. Ron likes having people blame Joe, instead of him.
It is Ron who has power, Joe is a Cog, he has no real power of his own. To the degree he implements his employer’s will—he has done a good job, as Ron has let him use his power.
Darth Vader did a good job for his boss, too—at least until the end.
Politically, it’s a good strategy to have a lightening rod to take the heat off the boss.
That’s my only real point.
Tom,
I think it’s ok to ask for help and advice when going through the City process. Fundraising isn’t a bad thing either, campaigns cost money.
It’s the quid pro quo that people believe exists that makes the system seem dirty. You can’t buy good politicians, not for a dime, not for a million dollars. No one has ever bought you off, though I’m sure they tried.
People tend to give to politicians who share their views and whose help, when needed, has been there for them. Most institutional donors give to campaigns because they perceive the person they are giving to is going to win and want the perceived influence their check buys them. At $500 a pop—it truly is not much.
But a good politician knows how to say no. If a project or issue is not going to fly, it is better the person advocating it know up front.
The problem seems to be that some politicians don’t know how to say no! That’s what they need to learn.
As for “getting my hands dirty”, your crusade to end lobbyists has a lot more to do with my self-imposed decision not to lobby. I don’t like the paperwork, it takes too much time, and I’m simply not willing to do it.
I don’t mind full disclosure as long as it is easy. Ask me anything, just don’t make me file the forms, don’t create more bureaucracy that is designed to foster a perception that “good government” exists.
You were there when Al Garza was accepting little white envelopes. If people are going to violate the law they are not going to record it on their regulatory forms.
Poor Ash, he sweats over the stuff. If I did lobby, I’d hire him to do the paperwork—cause God knows, I’d get it wrong.
The ability to regulate is the ability to destroy. You and your allies have the “lobbyists” on the run. Now try taking on the real problem, which is an over-sized, ineffective bureaucracy.
Last, I think all these regulatory laws violate the first amendment—as they limit a person’s speech and their right to redress grievences against their government. But, alas, I don’t want to be the test case.
Happy St. Pats Day.
There is no quid pro quo? You gotta be kidding. Just look at how LA’s mayor is being dogged by the US Attorneys Office and the DA.
People pay lobbyist—Jerry, Tony A., Ash—for the access they have to elected officials. Those same lobbyist raise money for the electeds so that they can have more and enduring access. The electeds do the lobbyist favors by granting them favors or granting their friends/clients contracts. It’s the simple and it is unfortuante.
Ted,
That’s politics and it is not always bad.
Here’s a few hypos:
Company A hires Ash to help them with a project that will benefit downtown. Ash explains the benefit to elected officials, it seems reasonable.
The Councilmember makes a phone call to “get the ball rolling”.
Company A goes through the City process. A myriad of conditions, fees, delays, hearings etc. all of which are monitored by Ash.
If the process becomes too slow or breaks down Ash makes a phone call, then a Councilmember makes a phone call—the project gets unstuck at the staff level.
Ultimately, the project comes before the council and is supported unanimously. Something positive is done for the community.
The Company is so impressed with the work of the lobbyist and Councilmember they are glad to donate money to a reelection campaign.
Scenerio 2
Company A has a project that will benefit downtown. They go to through the process without Ash.
The staff goes on vacation, their hearings are pushed off, somebody loses the paperwork and makes them reapply, nobody can figure out what the real tangible benefits are at the staff level, the project gets mired in the bureaucracy and never sees the light of day.
So, they complain on a local blog about how the City is corrupt.
Scenerio 3
Company A has bad idea for downtown. hires Ash who presents idea to Councilmembers. Elected Official does not support.
Ash goes back to client, “can’t do”.
Client is not happy, but doesn’t waste time going through a silly process that will end in defeat.
Scenerio 4
Company A has bad idea.
They go to through the city process without Ash.
The staff goes on vacation, their hearings are pushed off, somebody loses the paperwork and makes them reapply, nobody can figure out what the real tangible benefits are at the staff level, the project gets mired in the bureaucracy
—but they somehow navigate the process.
Upon learning of the “project” at the last minute opposition arises (downtown association) and protests to the Council. Low and behold the project is voted down for lack of support
Client is upset, writes on local blog that city is corrupt and Council caters to “special interests”.
I could go through a hundred different scenerios. The price of a lobbyist is worth it.
Finally, like in any business, public or otherwise, it is about relationships and who you can trust. You may not like Ash, Jerry and Tony—but they have positive relationships with the people who make decisions.
If they did not, they would be ineffective.
Scenario 5.
Developer hires Ash for a high density housing “bad idea” project right next to single family residential neighborhood.
Neighborhood protests vociferously, hires a lawyer, gets a favorable ruling from the commission, but the neighborhood is trumped by the councilmember (that we elected) because she has a “positive relationship” with Ash and sides with developer.
Lobbyists are nothing but a corrupting influence and should be limited to 2 minutes of contact with city officials just like the rest of us.
Next election, I’m writing in Crackers the Corporate Crime Fighting Chicken as Mayor to rid city hall of these bottom feeders so that citizens actually have a chance to influence how *their* city is run.
Gonzales cheaped the overall look and outside design on the new City Hall by tinkering with Meier’s original design. The outside materials look cheap and the color dingy. Also, it seems that to cheapen the outside was to save money to furnish the inside. Look at the west view of the main building: inspiring or cheap?
This should be a topic for discussion.
Well at least the Downtown Homeless will have a nice place to sleep and urinate. Maybe more of them will live downtown. Ugly attracts ugly.
looks like a huge garbage can.
seems to turn to GARBAGE.
It quite a shame that when someone needs to get a “fair” hearing for a project in San Jose they have to call Rich who will not dirty his hands but will tell them to call Jerry or Ash – just like Madonna or Prince, these hired guns/fund raiser-bag men are the new elite and only need one name. Let’s hope the next Mayor returns the lobbyists clique to the garbage dump they richly deserve. There major skill is fund raising, their knowledge of our City minute: quite sad. San Jose should have a lot better than this sorry spectacle. TMcE
Seems to me the lobbists are defending the lobbists. It all sounds bad but what do you expect when you have a mayor like you have. The whole place stinks. Al Garza would probably still in politics if it weren’t for a few good people at that time. Even then people were afraid to challenge him because he was hispanic. Political correctness raises it’s ugly head again. People are basicly just afraid to comfort ignorance and illegal activities if it comes from someone of color. Look how hard it was to get rid of Gregory who was outragous in his illegal activities. He just ask for bribes and people were defending him. Unbelievable!
Mr. Robinson,
Problem with your scenarios is that Ash is not that bright. I’ve met him and he doesn’t know much law.
AO
Stan,
Thanks.
In Scenario 5, the company would call us in to help educate the local neighbors on the benefits of the project, we would help build support in the neighborhood for the project, advise on community relations and how to make the project better a fit for the neighborhood etc.
To the degree there is any opposition left after our efforts, we would try to minimize their impact by reasonably countering their unreasonable, unjustified terror of something new.
Unabashed NIMBYISM is the single biggest threat to progress and the influence of Ash pales in comparison to a loud group of uniniformed, scared constituients howling loudly about the doom and gloom that will come if those people live in their neighborhood.
We help alleviate that fear.
Now that’s what we do.
Thanks for the educational posts Rich.
You’re providing us with great insights into the mindset of ethics challenged, slimebag lobbyists and the absolute disdain they hold for average citizenry.
BTW, *those people* will have to afford 700-900k+ so don’t try and paint me with a racist brush, Rich. But that’s the first page in the left playbook, no? Next you’ll compare me to Hitler.
Unfettered access to local officials by slimebag lobbyists and their ilk is the real threat to good government.
Thanks.
What about law firms, technology firms and others who use a lobbyist to get a contract from the City? I have seen numerous cities hire attorneys or others through an RFP process that is a total and complete sham. Many of these items are put on a consent calendar so no one pays any attention.
Or better yet, what about the law firm that low balls its hourly rate to the city only to bill the heck out of the matter?
Stan and Ted,
Now it’s getting interesting. No offense Stan, but you are no Hitler.
I was just referring to your “high density” project scenario. If Bart does come to San Jose, have you looked at the number of units downtown will have to build? High Denisity is coming and it is not all bad—lots of folks to shop and maybe we’ll get a restaraunt to stay open past 10 pm on a weekday downtown.
Ted’s point regarding the RFP is even more cogent. The process is a joke and simply costs taxpayers more, delays decisions so the “persception” of the process looks fair.
Any Referral For Proposal (RFP) costs those bidding a small fortune in time, money and materials just to compete for the contract.
The contract therefore must 1) be lucrative ie. overpriced and 2) the company must believe it has a reasonable chance of attaining the contract ie. they must have a relationship with the decision makers.
All of it works as a perfect dance for the bureaucracy, bidders and lobbyists. Normally, one can tell ahead of time who is getting the contract based on the size of the company, and the team they put together.
It doesn’t take a genius to figure it out.
Moreover, all the bidders will hire different lobbyists. Despite the tone of this board, lobbyists sometimes lose. But they will always get paid.
You may pay to play, but it doesn’t insure a win.
In the old days, politicians had the spoils system, where they gave contracts to individuals they trusted. This was seen as corrupt.
So we instituted a system whereby we give the public an “open” process and the winning bidder is, you guessed it, a trusted friend.
Nobody has ever found a way to take the politics out of politics. I may be cynical, but I believe it is a good thing because sometimes you get what you pay for. . .and at least you know who to blame when things go wrong.
Last, Ted is right. The legal system is created to take time, because lawyers must bill by the hour. I saw Stan Berliner once sit through a six hour Santa Clara City Council meeting. He had a couple of other lawyers with him—that was an expensive night for someone.
It’s just another way that government costs a person or business money—this time just by talking too much.
Here is my idea. Streamline government, get rid of the RFP and RFQ—give qualified people in government the ability to choose vendors and then negotiate a fair contract.
I’ve said it once, I’ll say it again. It is the layers of government that cost us the most.
Will no one rid us of these terrible, numerous, over-reaching rules, regulations and laws?
I don’t think giving contract authority to the burro-crats will improve the situation.
And, there is a way to limit contributions: The Oaks Initiative that passed in many California cities that was put forth by the Foundation for Taxpayers and Consumer Rights.
The imperor has no clothes.
>> Will no one rid us of these terrible, numerous, over-reaching rules, regulations and laws?
When you say *us* are you referring to:
the “alleviators of fear” (also known as lobbyists)
or
“the loud group of uniniformed, scared constituients howling loudly about the doom and gloom that are the single biggest threat to progress”. (also known as citizens)
Stan,
Are lobbyists not citizens?
Are nimby’s not lobbyists?
I oppose the regulation of speech on any class of human being—that includes even, (in reference to your earlier post) nazis.
Don’t you love free speech?
Lobbyists? Free speech? You’re starting to sound like a right winger!
Somehow I think lobbyists are more equal than citizens and neighborhoods. But I’m an “uniniformed, scared constituient howling loudly about the doom and gloom, and a threat to progress”.
Lobbyist and their clients work 24x7x365 and have much financial clout with which to influence city hall.
Citizens have jobs, families, etc. And no money to get our own lobbyist – but why should we? We put our officials in office and we pay their salaries.
All we have is a vote once every 4 years, and somehow we have as much influence as lobbyists and developers? Gimme a break.
At the very least we need transparency and documentation of lobbyist contact with city officials. (If that’s available somewhere please post a link)
By the way I love your use of “progress”. If I open up my lobbyist dictionary – under progress it reads “Anything that helps the lobbyist get paid faster”.
Stan,
If you want tranparency talk to your elected official—it is their calander.
When you go to the doctor, do you ask the room full of people in the waiting room for a diagnosis?
Do you think a lobbyist who works 24x7x365 on an issue might have a little more insight and expertise than than the “uniformed masses”?
It’s not that the masses are ignorant, it is that they are uniformed—education takes time.
P.S. You need a new lobbyist dictionary.
Mr. Robinson is completely missing the point about the Mayor’s race. This race is Chuck Reed’s to lose, with Cortese a close second.
A) Reed has amassed a large warchest from all sorts of sectors of San Jose. Methinks he has developed, a great many contacts among developers.
B) Reed has attempted, along with Cortese, to develop a large insider chat room on the ethics issue. I remember another candidate for mayor of another city that talked about ethics, ethics and more ethics with RR urging.
C) Cortese and Reed seem to the two on the council that take chances and articulate big positions.
D) Cindy is a close second to this duo. Currently Ms. Chavez, my favorite candidate is addressing the stadium issues for both minor league baseball and san jose state football (two real, here in the city concerns, Ron, and not what issues that Ignacio will be addressing sound enough in Oakland).
As for Pat Dando, explaining to cities why they cannot have any more money is not a DANDY idea.
OK, post # 39 has exceeded my tolerance for arrogance.
Lobbyists are paid out of some seriously deep pockets compared to that of your average constituent. They’re paid to push through projects that will make money for a corporate entity or developer but quite often at the expense of the citizenry, whether takes the form of an ugly building, traffic congestion or reduced property values.
How much education does it take for your average citizen/homeowner to know that, for example, plopping a Walmart down in their neighborhood will increase noise, traffic and litter?
This arrogant attitude makes me angry. City Hall needs a serious de-sliming NOW!
While we’re on the subject of specific posts…
Tom,
Can you start a “Hall of Fame” page for classic posts? Post #29 is just too good on too many levels.
Thanks.
San Jose’s current leaders have shown themselves to be incompetent.
are there people that lobby the county, but work for countt elected offixials???
Mark T,
First, you’d never catch me supporting a Walmart.
Second, some lobbyists are bad, some are good. Some doctors are bad, some are good.
Some politicians are bad, some are good.
If I am arrogant, at least I have not pandered to your Nimby self-interest for a vote. Yes, traffic and quality of life issues exist.
But when has anybodies property decreased in San Jose because of a “project”? I am sure somebody will find something, but it has not occurred on a regular basis.
The Arena was opposed because it would bring traffic, the convention center was opposed because it would bring traffic, every housing project, commercial development and new zoning is opposed because it will bring traffic.
Traffic is here to stay and it isn’t going to get better—even in you get BART.
It will take SMART Growth and a vision. Pandering to the “citizens” is what is hurting our government.
Face it, the voters act like spoiled brats. They want more services and less taxes. Their politicians are afraid to say no to them. Their anger manifestests itself into intiatives, mostly unconstituional, which they pass and then complain about because they are thrown out in the courts.
Everyone wants democracy, unless it’s a tax then it must be a “super-majority”. Everybody is for affordable housing in someone else’s neighborhood. We more roads—over there.
Highway 85 has only one exit in Saratoga—because the neighborhood would be impacted if it were—now those people complain that they don’t have easy access to 85.
It’s time the voters got a good whacking. Under the Bush Adminstration they are getting it.
I may be arrogant, but I will not pander.
>> Pandering to the “citizens” is what is hurting our government.
Another classic for the “Hall of Fame” Tom.
Boy if it weren’t for those pesky citizens, we’d have a pretty good city.
Now you are gettting it, Stan. Hang in there and you will make a great politician, maybe you can save us from the repetition of history.
See quote below:
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist
until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess of the public treasury.
From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most
benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses
over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship….The average age of the
world’s greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed
through this sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great
courage; from great courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to
selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy
to dependence; from dependency back again to bondage.—Sir Alex Fraser Tyler
you spend alot of time on this blog. Are you billing customers for this?
It doesn’t take much time and it’s been a lot of fun.
I enjoy the banter. . .
You cannot Stand Up anymore. Witgh regards to public treasuries and what Richard says about moving from bondage to truth, again,.look at the sad situation of the San Jose State campus. The campus where activism became an effective means of communication has witnessed what Richard so eloquently talks about, citizens being bound by government control. Everyone knows how important the symbol of the raised fist is to the solidarity of minority communities. Without Ron Gonzales’ leadership, San Jose would be a less diverse community, and his greatest achievement was turning the raised fist to the open palm.
Well guess what?
Student body funds are being used by the SJSU AS President to discourage a progressive student organization from using the raised fist symbol. Isn’t it a shame that students cannot be progressive anymore. Please contact University President Kassing at [email protected], and ask him, why is progressivism under attack at San Jose State, in the heart of San Jose, where actvisim became, under Gonzales, the path to leadership?