You are currently browsing the tag archive for the 'Kevin Moore' tag.
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
It’s interesting to read the article at Santa Clara The Mission City blog and here there perspective on Karen Hardy. I’ve never met the women but I’m fascinated that someone would take on the challenge of running for a seat without actually being on the formal ballot. She has requested to be on it as a ‘write in’ candidate. So what that means she and her followers are asking voters to write her name on the ballot against the unopposed Kevin Moore. I’m not sure how many people will do this – it is certainly a gutsy campaign and an interesting one. I’m not even sure why I understand someone would do this, but they have. I guess it’s a formal protest against the incumbent Mr Moore (seat 4). So I guess if you don’t like him or you feel he doesn’t represent you – here is your chance to do something different – you write Karen Hardy in the space provided. Perhaps this is how the dog from Sunol got voted in – but it does require some paperwork and nominations. Who in their right mind nominated a dog? and did the dog sign the required nominating forms - or rather did he leave his paw print?
I think Karen at least has a chance of leaving her mark! All good politicians, such as Mr Moore need to have a little wind put into their campaigns and Karen is doing that.
Though I highly suspect Ms Hardy is not a popular vote between the powers that be that seem to hold the balance of power in Santa Clara – I say good luck to her for taking on this somewhat odd way of running for council. She clearly has a more idealistic view of the world than most politicians and in reading what is out there on the web she is not one to be scared of a challenge. It’s a shame she didn’t run out right on the ballot but I’m sure she has her reasons for doing what she is doing.
©Letters From Silicon Valley 2008
Don’t you just love streaming on the Internet – now you can watch the Santa Clara City Council via the web – awesome idea. Very Cool – saves having to go to city hall!
Seems like the city council heard the citizens last night and their concern about the issues that surrounded the proposed building on the old Wheels and Deals site. Congratulations to all the city council, it seemed that none of them in one way or an other were inspired to support the proposed development. The city council recommended that the developer go back to planning and reconsider the plan – especially the back where it shaded the homes behind the complex and the related creek.
The cynical side of me just can’t help but question some of the reasons behind the decision but for the purpose of this exercise I will refrain from making comments.
It does occur to me that why the city didn’t send back the Marina Playa project when there were questions regarding how the traffic would enter and exit that site. I guess it was nothing compared to the big picture of having Marina Playa there on Lawrence Express Way.
Now that the city has set a precident let’s see if they can be consistent. Let’s hope that they continue to listen to neighbors and hear there concerns about high density. Maybe they are starting to think twice about the plannin departments dream to fill the empty space with high rise condos. (By the way – I love Mr Riley talkin about the four story complex on Wheels and Deals – and then the architect admiting it’s actually 5 story) How is that? Such discrepencies should not exsist in planning – might forget to build a floor! oops
Anyway victory to the residents around Wheels and Deals - and Victory to the City Council for taking a stand against developers who don’t consider residents, but don’t feel that because a developer doesn’t sit down with you for an hour that they took the residents concerns into consideration. Or because a developer offers to run a bike path or a creek conversion beside the new complex it doesn’t mean it’s truly something the community wants. I couldn’t think of anything worse – I’d rather a complex that offers a descent cuppa coffee and a newspaper or some WIFI so I can watch our fine council members finally taking a stand against developers who stomp on residents - hope it lasts at least till the Fairfield Residential discussion.
The sad part out of all of this was that here was a great chance to clean up El Camino – something Mr Moore pointed out. Oh well hopefully Mr Moore will do something about this as he continues to be in office after the next election. Good maybe there is hope …. I just hope it’s not more big time developers vs little guys who haven’t got the right PR system behind them. Tip to the Wheels and Deals developer – employee a PR person – they will help you in smoothing the way – and never read a magazine while sitting in Council Chambers – not a good idea. (Good pick up Mrs Mahan)
©Letters From Silicon Valley 2008
