You are currently browsing the tag archive for the 'Patricia Mahan' tag.
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
Wow imagine El Camino being considered a Grand Boulevard ? There is an initiative to have 19 cities come together and plan out the Road of the Kings! Even I’m impressed – maybe the House of Pain will have to move to Santana Row?
When I hear the words “Grand Boulevard” I think of Paris or Madrid but not El Camino. If you have been to Paris or Madrid or Berlin you know what a Grand Boulevard looks like. Gorgeous trees, parks as medium strips in the middle of the Boulevard. Fountains running day and night. Statues of Generals on Horses. Change of colors in the flower pots with different seasons. Oh and Traffic …. traffic and more traffic.
I remember when McDonalds came to the Champs Ellesse, Parisians were outraged they refused to go in there. It was some what of an insult to a city that has brought the world Haute Courtier. Anyway I should not be so snobby I think this is a great initiative and probably one that is needed. It’s worth noting that Santa Clara City Council to date has not become involved – perhaps there is just too much work to do in our section of El Camino that they feel they can’t do it yet – they have to fix potholes first.
Anyway take a look at this grand plan and be impressed and then perhaps ask Patricia Mahan why our city is not involved in this initiative. This is an idea to bring people together and work as a team – imagine that Team Work? Working together creating something for the benefit of all people not just a chosen few! I love it! Great Job to the Joint Venture guys!
©Letters From Silicon Valley 2008
When is a lie a lie? When is hiding something a lie? When is not telling everything a lie? Whose on first?
So many questions, so little time it seems. I’m amazed at the fact that the city council refuses to listen to the fact that the residents of Santa Clara may know something more than them. Wow, Mayor Mahan shut down the discussion, oops I should say refused to second a proposal put forward by Jamie McLeod that the city look at the CHP’s traffic concerns on Lawrence and El Camino. When I used to run meetings in the ‘old days’ – yep I’m old now! It was common practice for the chair to second an amendment or a proposal if it couldn’t get a seconder. That’s what you do if you are a ‘nice’ chairperson. It’s called ‘common courtesy’ but it’s not Robert’s rules – it’s just courtesy. Plus it makes common sense!
What do you mean by common sense? You may ask? Well it means that you second it to get it on the books and effectively off the books. It’s common practice to ensure proper debate and discussion. You therefore put up a proposal just to have it now dismissed and recorded that it was not accepted. So in affect, what you are doing, though you may not agree with a proposal, you are allowing for discussion. Now the topic doesn’t really have to be addressed again – it’s on the books as something that was not past – though of course you can effectively bring it up over and over – that’s what democracy is about. It’s like dating – you go out, you see if you like it i.e. you listen to the arguments or discussion and then you decide it’s not for you and only after you have had some time to think about it or discuss the idea do you say Yeh or Neh. Pretty simple way of holding a meeting.
Come on Patricia Mahan, be fair, run the city council like most democracies and have a fair debate – even if you get no debate putting it to a vote is better than saying ‘oh you didn’t get a seconder’. Do you get where I am coming from? Or are we all just prone to being ignorant by not getting all the facts? Because when one shuts down debate that’s what you are doing. In some countries it’s called a ‘dictatorship’ – something us American’s have been known to get upset about.
Oh and by the way as a Chair it’s not Kosher to have your own opinions on how matters go – that’s the reason you get appointed as chair – you are seen to be fair and knowledgeable. sigh….
©Letters From Silicon Valley 2008
Wow last night I attended the City of Santa Clara council meeting. This was a first for me. As some of you may or may not know my background in Australia was politics. I was involved in politics at a student level and later at a State and Federal level and still call some members of parliament close friends. In fact one of the senior party members has visited the U.S. and spent time with our family. In leaving Australia I really was happy to leave behind my political involvement and any political desires I might have had or been requested to pursue. Love it or hate it, I was happy to leave it!
These past weeks I inadvertedly got involved in discussions with a number of residents over the planned building of a site on the old Kaiser hospital on Kaiser Drive. I learnt that the property had been sold to a developer – fine that’s groovy – until you discover the plan and the ‘accommodations’ the city planners are making to allow such a development.
This project is called the Fairfield Project and this was not why I went to city council last night but it was a catalyst for me attending. I went to here about the Marina Playa project. Boy politically was this an eye opener. Here are some of the things I witnessed.
I saw Dominic Caserta acknowledge openly one of the head developers for the Marina Playa project. I also witnessed him looking completely bored, half asleep, walk out of the room more than five times (yes I counted), one time returning munching on food. Clearly Mr Caserta had voted in his mind on the proposals that were to be put forward that evening. His vote had been caste before he was asked to vote. I heard a Doctor point out that Mr Caserta should ‘excuse’ himself from voting on the Marina Playa project because he had legally accepted donation money from the builder of this project to fund his political aspirations. I heard that Mr Caserta did not take the decision to ‘abstain’ in fact he voted in favor of the project. Suprise Suprise. The Santa Clara weekly calls him young – I suspect he’s more foolish than young. I’m sure Shakespeare had something to say about that when he wrote the stages of man.
I saw Mayor Patricia Mahan look away with embarrasment when one of the local residents pointed out that her father would be ashamed of her associations with the planning projects that were currently on the table. Mayor Mahan clearly was ‘uncomfortable’ with the statement that this elderly Santa Clara resident had to say about her lack of support for city as a whole. I heard Mayor Mahan be defensive with another resident when he challenged her over where these projects were being built in relation to her own property in Santa Clara. The Mayor felt it was unfair to be personal yet she herself had made comments that these projects were no-where near where she lives.
Pat Kolstad had nothing to say all night except press forward the proposal to pass the Environmental report that allows the planning department to allow the builder to build Marina Playa. Wow perhaps he did this because he wanted to go home – it was getting close to midnight when this matter on the agenda was being discussed by council. Perhaps the meeting was getting past his bed time? just a thought given it seems he’s been on the council a few too many years. Fortunately his term is up – time for some fresh blood – perhaps someone who knows how to ask questions of importance and listen to residents. After all more than a dozen residents talked against Marina Playa, noteably most about the traffic issues and the discrepencies between what the CHP and the city contractor had to say. Mr Kolstad is a former cop – you think he of all people might have some thoughts on the fact that the yards of these proposed townhomes are going to be 10×12 feet. This size yard reminds me of a prison yard – hmmm food for thought.
Jamie McLeod had a lot to say regarding the traffic reports in fact she suggested that the city take more action and reviews in this area but ALAS Jamie was knocked down and eventually voted in favor of Marina Playa. Though I did observe that even Jamie was not comfortable with the size of the yards of these units and how the traffic around this project, along with the other to be submitted projects in the same area, will in turn affect the Lawrence/El Camino cross street. Jamie was alone in a crowd of wolves! Sorry Jamie I heard your cry but your ‘buddies’ took you down. My only question is: why did you vote in favor of it?
Kevin Moore – hmm can’t say he had much to say though. I guess Kevin feels that the 10×12 yard is sufficient for any good person given his concentration is parks and recs and he did well because the builder gave parks and recs $200,000 to sweeten the deal. Ahh I see – he swims with sharks.
Joe Kordner attempted to align himself with Jamie and ride in on her amendment to have the planning department review the traffic conditions in that area. But sometimes yah just gotta do what the boss says Missum! You know how it goes ….and after-all given he’s on the financing authority of the city you know that the money the builder is going to give to fix the sewer line has to be his sweetener.
Bottom line I smell a rats – rats that finked out their residents. To learn more about how you can help and what’s going on in the city according to residents versus according to the city planners and the city council visit http://liveforeverodt.com/santaclara/ - through this website I started to realize that what was going on was not all kosher at the Santa Clara City Hall.
In talking to an old time Santa Clara resident I discovered today that a lot of this has been going on for years. This accounts for why we don’t have a proper downtown, why our public schools are some of the worst in the area, why once you enter our part of El Camino there is nothing more than brothels, $49 motels, tattoo stores, and sleazy seedy sex shops! Yep something to proud of Mayor Mahan! You have served your city well – may you and your crowd move on to better cause. May Mr Caserta find his place in the Assembly and be brought to more scrutiny.
You gotta love a day in the life of Santa Clara Politics! I’m so proud that I can vote this year because as it stands I’m not going to vote for one of these guys or one that they wish to endorse – their records speak for themselves after what I witnessed last night. In 1975 Gough Whitlam was voted out of Australian politics – and in the words of the Liberal Campaign I have three words for most of the Santa Clara city council:
SHAME, SHAME, SHAME
©Letters From Silicon Valley 2008
