You are currently browsing the tag archive for the 'Jamie McLeod' tag.
Boy would I hate to be the city council tonight – here we go again having to show our true colors to the residents that vote for them. Hopefully, they will know that we are not small children who need to be ‘guided’ and ‘convinced’ that what they are doing is a good thing for us – but they will hear the words of the residents that go something like this regarding the proposed project at 900 Kiely, Gallery on Central, fairfield residential project in Santa Clara;
The current project is;
Too Dense – too many units proposed for this site – as it currently stands 806 units amounts to 2% of the local Santa Clara population
Traffic concerns – some of the local intersections have been deemed as failures by the vTA and this project will add more traffic to these interesection ans the surrounding streets
Trees – most of the trees at the current site will be cut down being replaced by saplings – how sad when those current trees add to the current feel of the area and blend in with what is already there. why cut down mature trees when we already know so much about global warming? Odd idea
Schools – do we have right numbers – it seems that we have conflicting reports on numbers – this is alarming. how can we get the right figures? is there some way to have this clarified.
Swim center – apparently there is mail out there from the developer attempting to have the local swim center swamp (excuse the pun) the meeting with supporters for the project. But unfortunately for the developer he does not realize that some of those swim center emails went out residents who are not in favor of the project as it now stands. Oxy Moron stuff don’t you think?
Also the developer has been talking to the chamber of commerce and local businesses attempting to have them speak in favor of the project because businesses need economic assistances and they are touting the idea that more residents will increase their business. Yes maybe some truth to that but perhaps many of these business need to reassess what it is their business does and what their service is like. Just a thought – rather than look to the potential new residents as ’saving grace’?
oh dear the list goes on and I pity the city council tonight – because I am sure like me in their heart of hearts they know that the project as it now stands is not ideal but we do need something there but not this. This developer has only talked to people who seem to benefit from the project such as the swim pool center and the local stores, they have continously refused to listen to local residents who share streets with this new developer. They have refused to be a part of the community but rather are waging a war of ‘hate’ behind the scenese by attempting to create a ‘us’ and ‘them’ attitude. We are the old wiser parent who has done this many times before and we know what we are doing – but do they?
They are attempting to turn small Santa Clara with heart into a concrete jungle – just as was mentioned in the mission city lantern blog. Hopefully the council will stand up to this giant corporate America and say ‘Yes we hear our residents’ and ‘come back with something that is more in keeping with the area and have your project blend in’.
This developer has turned this project into a political debate – how sad – had they worked with the locals and heard their requests for less density, more parking, more open space, fewer units, more amenities for the general public, it might have been an enjoyable working relationship. However as it now stands we have disgruntled residents who look to their elected leaders for resolution.
Internal Affairs in the San Jose Mercury News picked up a piece about Caserta. It relates to him not stepping down around a tax break he sought on his home in down town Santa Clara. Under the Williamson act a number of homes in the down town area have applied for tax concessions to maintain their homes. The idea is that the money saved on taxes can be put back into maintaining their homes given they are older homes and need to be maintained in the spirit of the original house – no pun intended.
It has been alleged that Caserta took money from various developers and in the case of Barec he took the money after he promised to support those who were against the project. There are other projects and other developers that have allegedly given Caserta monies and it would be interesting to see if he excused himself from those votes as well? I wonder if the Fair Political Practices Commission is looking into other projects Caserta voted on?
In any case it begs the question – how is it that Dominic Caserta and Kevin Moore who both have real estate licenses vote on a number of building issues when they are realtors? Not that I’m against realtorsbeing on council, for I am sure they are valued members of society but it’s a fine line for them voting on anything that involves real estate and I would think their consciouses would draw the same conclusion as mine – far better to abstain than to vote on an issue related to any type of real estate deal especially if you work in the industry.
Jamie McLeod has been criticized for continuously dismissing herself for not voting on certain agenda items because her partner has ties to certain projects and communities. I hope that others see the value of stepping down when voting on an issue that they are too close to.
I guess this is an example of why I am so apposed to endorsements. Endorsements and financial funding come with ties it seems.
Congratulations to Mr Obama on a fabulous victory. His speech was a most gracious and exhilarating speech. Though I have memories of Kennedy, I felt Obama spoke far more eloquently and touched the hearts of all voters not just Democrats but he reached out to Republicans as well. A true moment in history, right before our eyes. May his tenure be one of grandeur and success and may the country restore it’s dignity in the world.
Jamie McLeod, Jamie Mathews, Will Kennedy all won their seats. Congratulations to them all. To view the final results you can go to this link. Here you will find how much they won by. Mr Moore’s results are there too - it would be interesting to learn how many peole wrote in Karen Hardy – just out of pure interest.
I had been waiting on publishing this blog because I was waiting to get email from various candidates and view their blog/websites but it seems that only one candidate has updated their website with the result and that is Jamie McLeod. I nearly feel like adding and of course there because it seems that Jamie is more on the beat than most. Anyway congratulations to the winners may their judgements be honest ones and not tainted by endorsement or associations.
Dr Shanks asks us how do we act when we are at our best? We are service orientated, ethical and he believes that in the city of Santa Clara we are better than most places but he admits it is a work in progress. Phew because as I listen to him via the streaming system the city had it makes me wonder if the people running for Santa Clara city council all went to the workshops he talks about candidates went to at the start of the campaign.
We all know that politics is dirty but here in Santa Clara this year it appears it’s dirtier than normal. Clearly the 49ers issue was at stake and as such who gets to sit on our council for the next few years. Dr Shanks clearly wanted to limit the discussion and to address the ‘hit pieces’ and to focus on how the candidates ran their campaigns.
The campaign between, Bouza, Kennedy and Emerson was very amicable and the candidates all spoke well of each other, same goes for Mathews and Lowery. Brian Lowery commended Mr Mathews for pointing out that there are rules that did not allow for his suit to be a deduction. He quickly addressed the fact and he reimbursed his campaign. Mr Lowery used his own money to fully fund his campaign – not one dollar came from an outside organization or individuals. He unlike Mr Mathews did not have money from other groups buying big postcards, making phone calls etc. I commend him for doing a grassroots campaign vs mega bucks. That to me is a person who clearly has our city at heart not the interest of other cities or other large groups. Touche to him – I hope he does well tomorrow. And how fair of Mr Mathews in pointing out this issue – I hope he wasn’t the one that leaked the story to Internal Affairs in the SJ Merc? That would be sad.
Dr Shanks reminds as that this event tonight is to clarify and set the record straight – so here are some questions still:
What is the story on the hit pieces Mr Blair’s supporters had put out on Jamie – Mr Blair said that they were not his hit pieces they were hit pieces by other interested parties and his supporters and went out without his knowledge or agreement. That those hit pieces were not authorized by him. He actknowledges that at his website but he says he would have done them differently. So even though he didn’t authorize them he admits he would have done them but in a different way. Good for him for being honest about how he would have done them had authorized them. However, remember the ethics program says that if there is inaccuracies or anything misleading the candidates need to correct that – he does not refute them even though Dr Shanks indicated that there were mistruths made regarding Ms McLeod’s voting record. After some prodding Mr Blair says he should Apologize – you got to watch the streaming and this little snippet it’s like seeing someone caught and trying to get out of a trap. Bottom line is the pieces were sent out – they were not sent with Mr Blairs approval and they are not factual. They were dirty hit pieces – will they harm Jamie – probably – boy I hate dirty politics.
The other issue is that there were automated telephone calls made by Mayor Patricia Mahan and Don Van Raesfeld. The city did not pay for the calls – but the calls did go out without saying who paid for those calls. So I can understand that people felt that they were misleading and it sounds like they are being investigated. There was obviously some issue regarding the phone calls being made out of State because when they are made out of State they are not regulated. What does that mean? The main issue is that they did not clarify who paid for the calls – so today as the school bell goes off, so to speak, they made a third call clarifying who made the first two calls supporting those three candidates. Wow what would have happened had they not have made that call? Apparently these three candidates were concerned that there would be a hit piece put out on them, according to what Mr Mathews says on line. Which makes me wonder what were they worried could be said against them? Hmmm very interesting. That the three of them amount to a full deck on city council? that the three of them all have connections to one major city family? That should Mr Blair and Moore get elected that with Mr Caserta sitting on council that Santa Clara would now have three employees of one Real Estate office on council? Wow I don’t know what could be said that is not already known by a lot of local residents.
Dr Shanks thinks this process is a work in progress – well I think a work in progress is a city council that is hell bent on stacking the numbers that is ‘a work in progress’ and I hope that the residents tomorrow when they go to vote remember it’s time for Change here as well as in the country.
©Letters From Silicon Valley 2008
Scott Herhold of the San Jose Mercury News each year gives awards for campaign ads. He dishes out trash cans for political hit pieces, and bouquets for well done pieces.
He awards three (3) Garbage Cans to the hit piece that took the side of challenger Chuck Blair, by the Santa Clara Police Officer’s Association against councilwoman Jamie McLeod. Personally I think it should have got four but he gave four to a Vietnamese-American group associated with the LIttle Saigon movement that did a hit piece on Councilman Dave Cortese who is running against Sunnyvale Councilman Otto Lee. I trust Herhold if he says that, that ad deserves 4 garbage cans I’m sure it does.
Clearly the hit piece done on these two candidates warranted the attention of the greater community otherwise Mr Herhold would not have written about it. Local city politics here is definatley more intense and there seems to be more at stake if you win the race. Which begs the question Why? What is it that have people so hell bent on being on a city council? What do they get out of it? A gravy train? Junkets? I don’t know what the answer is? Perhaps is it civic duty? Civic pride? a Vision for something ….
and if it is a vision then let us hope that those that get elected in Santa clara this time can earn some bouquets from the residents and that they look at issues like
Cleaning El Camino in Santa Clara,
Planting trees along El Camino
decrease the number of high rise buildings planned
Give us a proper downtown area
and start to listen to what residents want
Once again I say support Jamie because she appears to be one of the few current council people who has listened to residents and asked questions. She is a thinking person, and I believe that there are others out there running in this election that representing thinking people, such as Brian Lowery and Mary Emerson.
©Letters From Silicon Valley 2008
So last night was Halloween and though I was home late from work I missed many of the early trick or treaters, though I think the weather kep peole at bay. I hope the weather will not stop people voting on Tuesday or the unwillingness to take an hour out of their day to vote. I saw that Google is endorsing a plan for their employees to remember to vote. They will be sending mail out to their staff to remind them on Tuesday.
So as we go into the final days of this election it’s worth reflecting on the race and what I have observed:
The candidates that have dropped by personally and door knocked are: Mary Emerson, Brian Lowery and Jamie McLeod.
I have seen two mud slinging postcards against Jamie Mcleod which totally turned me off. The language on those cards were particularly disgusting.
I’ve not had a visit from: Bouza, Kennedy, Blair, O’donnell, Moore or Matthews – I guess they have been too busy elsewhere
I’ve had voicemail from the Mayor and someone else at city hall endorsing some candidates
I’ve seen ‘paid’ for endorsement from Blair and O’donnell
I’ve caught: Bouza, Blair and McLeod on comcast TV.
I’ve saw the San Jose Mercury News endorse Jamie McLeod, do an expose on the who called whom regarding the Bouza and Moore, and a article about Mr Lowery’s suit expense.
I’ve not heard from Moore but I have spoken to the Write in Candidate Karen Hardy that is running against Mr Moore.
I walked the gauntlet at the Wine and Art Festival: O’donnel, McLeod, Kennedy, Bouza, Lowery, Emerson – and saw them talking to locals.
I’ve seen the issues be: 49ers stadium and the more and more proposed high rise buildings. Though the Santa Clara weekly feels that the tight run closed ranks city council is not an issue the San Jose Mercury News did pick up that it is an issue and a concern that one family has for a number of years managed to control the Santa Clara City council. I too am alarmed that this has been the case and the fact that it is always pooh poohed as a non issue, which again then makes it an issue.
I noted that Kennedy was not endorsed by the Mayor – which surprises me but she didn’t endorse McLeod either. Why is that?
So if you have any questions outstanding and feel you haven’t touched base with a candidate and need to learn a little more about them before you vote remember Monday Night City Hall all the candidates will be gathered. You can hear them for the final say and if you have a concern about ethics you can have your say as well.
©Letters From Silicon Valley 2008
Oh dear oh dear, here we go the mud is getting thicker in the campaign races for Santa Clara city council. Most of the mud flinging seems to be at Ms Jamie McLeod for her supposed record on city council. Wow freedom of speech really can take a twist at election time. I think we could call it freedom of verbal abuse. If some of the written ’shouting’ were to be done in the streets of Santa Clara we could expect residence to call the police and complain about it. But here in this fine country we can only be told it’s our first amendment right to freedom of speech.
Never mind, it will all end soon and we can get back to ‘normality’. But before we do that I have to write about the latest laugh I saw. One of my neighbors shared the republicans voters guide as per the California Voter guide printed in Torrance. It gives the following notice to voters:
“This document was prepared by California Voter guide, not an official political party organization. APPEARANCE in this mail does not necessarily imply endorsement of other candidates or ballot measures in this mailer. Appearance is a PAID FOR and AUTHORIZED by EACH CANDIDATE and ballot measure which is designated by an * (astrix).”
So guess who paid to be on this guide? Mr Chuck Blair – paid for and supported by the firefighters & police officers. This means that firefighters paid for it – I thought Mr Blair was a registered Democrat – what will his party think of this – oh maybe it doesn’t matter after all it’s non-partisan running for local government. Or is it????
In any case this flier certainly a little nicer than the ‘hate’ campaign that has been going on out their against Jamie. Mr Blair has sent a few fliers criticizing Jamie but still we don’t really know what his qualifications are for being our Representative on council are? All we know is that he “hates” her more than he cares to tell us about why he would make a good council person? Oh and we know that he is pro the stadium because it would be a good thing for Santa Clara but not why it would be a good thing. Attacking and misconstruing someones record is not the nicest thing to do.
I love the piece that the San Jose Mercury News did yesterday “ignore sleazy hit pieces, vote for Independent McLeod” page 14a. Even the editorial piece says that normally they don’t come out and speak on how to vote on local candidates – they felt that there was a need to say something about Jamie McLeod and the fact that she is not part of the Santa Clara political in crowd.
©Letters From Silicon Valley 2008
So in reading the Santa Clara, the Mission City blog I caught up on the lies being spread on Jamie McLeod. Please read these stories being spread by one of Jamie’s opponents. It’s a shame because if its true that person seems like such a nice guy, I think he probably has a heart of gold. I bet he’d be the first to help out a family member in strife or be willing to pitch in at a school event.
On his free 5 minute comcast interview he said he had no endorsements from large organizations but only local people. What that means is he didn’t go to the parties to ask for endorsements like Jamie McLeod or Mary Emerson did. Why not? Well as I understand it having talked to Mary Emerson about how this works, you have a questionnaire you fill in that the party sends you and they ask for your feed back on how you stand on issues. I’m wondering if that person couldn’t align himself with a party because he just didn’t want to be held more accountable? Food for thought, or perhaps he’s just not a very politically minded person and doesn’t quite understand the whole depth of what’s really going on here.
Though I’m not one for endorsements and I’m certainly not swayed by them – I couldn’t give a rats tail if Mayor Mahan called me up and told me to vote for him. Which she actually did. It made me think why isn’t Ms Mahan more hands off when it comes to endorsing?? I’ve learnt that in politics and in any committee you run it’s always good to have some opposition. You might actually gain a new perspective to what it is you are trying to accomplish. It’s kind of boring have a committee of completely like minded people. I think that there is a name for that. It’s called stacking the odds. Sure the odds are in your favor, but what if your favor is biased. It certainly seems at times that the city council in Santa Clara is biased to one point of view on certain issues. They certainly haven’t heard the residents when it comes to high density, traffic concerns, clean up El Camino.
It’s time for a change, as I’ve said before and Jamie has been the forerunner in Santa Clara politics who emulates change. Let’s have Jamie McLeod, Mary Emerson, Brian Lowery and write in Candidate Karen Hardy on our ballots and in local government this year. Bring in the Change that Santa Clara city council needs.
So the word is out the 49ers issue is causing concern for some voters. Finally some people are starting to ask questions about why and how this affects them. They are asking candidates and wondering how the dollars and “sense” of having a stadium in our city works. What’s interesting as the campaign gets closer to election day the knives come out. Well isn’t that to be expected? Aren’t we seeing the same type of dirty tactics in the National news?
Haven’t you been reading the news about the Obama / McCleain election. That campaign is also starting to sling mud. I figured once they started flinging mud, it too, would start at a city level. So apparentlythe heavy hitters are out to sling mud at Jamie McLeod and her stand on ‘let’s know the numbers’ before we decide if it is financially a good idea for our city to have a stadium. My parents always told me ‘don’t spend more than you have’. So the question still remains: do we have the money to even build this stadium? And what do we as a city get out of it? Nothing probably, not that I expect anything from it but I do expect responsible decisions.
If there are sweet heart deals to be had out of this from developers could they please spend some money on cleaning up our part of El Camino – after our part looks like it got stuck in time – the 50’s, maybe the 60’s. Or perhaps we could get the developers to put into funding some of the elementary schools – after all we are gong to start bursting at the seams here. Or perhaps we could get a downtown that resembles a downtown and not a hotsh potch of something slapped together at the last moment. Maybe we could have an arts program for Grafitti artists? Maybe we could have a current 24/7 study of our traffic issues, needs and wants – especially on El Camino, Kiely & Lawrence. Maybe we could have a halt on all new development till we take stock of current developments and where they are in relation to filling the supposed need this city has for housing. Maybe we should reconsider how many people can live in a ‘confined’ space? Maybe we could stop trying to fix it – when we need to actually need to stop and assess ‘it’. Maybe we could consider that there is something not right with the current ‘majority’ run city council.
Make your vote count and think about the real issues: the stadium, the plan for more high density, the lack of a real downtown, the unwillingness of planning to hear residents issues about more housing in this area, the traffic concerns on Lawrence and El Camino. I’d love to tell you how to vote for but I won’t. I’ll suggest you think twice before casting a ballot for the ‘old regime’ and start thinking outside the box and consider voting for people that have been willing to be outside the favored officials. So if you feel you are willing to have a change consider anyone that has either spoken out against the majority stack holders of Santa Clara or is not affiliated with them. There are quite a few of them: Jamie McLeod, Mario Bouza, Mary Emerson, Brian Lowery, Cirian McDonnel, write in candidate Karen Hardy, – each of these candidates are not part of the anointed party. They all have their own twist on their different issues and some are perhaps not as strong as others but at the very least they are running against the ‘family and friends ticket’. It’s about time Santa Clara City Council looked like a real city council and had more Jamie McLeod’s sitting ‘up on stage’ listening to your average Plumber Joe.
©Letters From Silicon Valley 2008
So as a country looks towards change is it not fair to say that cities should look towards change.
CNN (constant negative news) has done a survey of some of the States that were leaning toward the Republicans before the Wall Street Turmoil and found that those voters are now favoring Democrats.
There are certainly enough candidates in this Santa Clara election to give you reason to look towards change – unfortunately some candidates are either more of the same or been here done that type candidates and don’t necessarily give you the Change that you might be looking for.
Without endorsing any of them I would recommend asking them what is the change they see is needed in Santa Clara? Is it in housing, is it in having the 49ers, is it in cleaning up El Camino …
whatever the change does it warrant them representing you? I may not agree with Jamie McLeod on some of her view points but I rather a person like her that asks questions and thinks than someone who blindly votes as the ‘caucus’ recommends. There are other candidates like Jamie McLeod running who I feel will also ask questions, inquire, disagree and think for themselves rather than be the party ‘hack’.
And remember one vote can make a difference.
©Letters From Silicon Valley 2008
