How do you determine who should be elected or reelected?
If it is a choice between a veteran incumbent and a newcomer, you most likely look at what the incumbent has done.
If the incumbent has been positive, fiscally responsible, made balanced common-sense decisions, why not retain them?
On the other hand, if they have been wasteful with your money, increased deficits and debt, failed to deliver public services, been restrictive to business why keep them?
The current amount of money being spent in Santa Clara reflects two seriously opposing views.
Mayor Gillmor has rallied her anti-Stadium coalition and attacked her Council candidates’ challengers with vigor! She has once again made the 49ers and owner Jed York the boogie man of the election.
Chances of the Stadium leaving is about the same as moving the Statue of Liberty to Moscow.
Interesting that not one of the independent candidates voted against the stadium and yet Mayor Gillmor has publicly accused them of being in York’s pocket.
York looks at it a little differently. He sees the Mayor as a formidable stone wall. He views the independent candidates as a gate that can at least be opened to dialog.
Cooperation, opportunity, and objectivity are a healthier environment than harassment and provocation.
While the 49ers racked up an incredible record last season and went to the Super Bowl, this Council didn’t even send York or the 49ers a thank you, a congrats or even a bouquet of dandelions.
Nothing succeeds like successful results. While the 49ers go to the Super Bowl, the Santa Clara council goes in the tank, showing a projected deficit this year of $33 million.
Gillmor spent thousands of your City dollars doing an independent Stadium audit during the 2016 election that was to rip the cover off all the money laundering, misdealing, and corruption at the stadium and the 49er management.
Results? Nothing. It was only another election ploy.
Now the Mayor is paranoid. After running rampant over the City budget, buying a high priced City Manager and useless audits, and relentlessly trying to overturn the ruling of a CVRA lawsuit, she is in danger of losing her uncontrolled agenda.
The anti-stadium folks may not like the stadium or the 49ers. However, they do like common sense and good results.
Face it, friends. Santa Clara residents have been hoodwinked. You only have to check out the results.
Results reveal the radical rampage of uncontrolled power.
Loss of just two seats in this hotly debated contest would curtail the Mayor’s runaway agenda and curtail her outrageous spending.
Your vote is for Santa Clara.
Wishing you, and all of us, great results.
The San Jose Mercury News after interviewing all available candidates, made the following recommendations:
District 1: Harbir Bhatia
District 4: Kevin Park
District 5: Suds Jain
District 6: Anthony Becker
I haven’t trusted the Murky News for ages. Who reads that anymore?
The Mercury News is the second largest daily newspaper in California, behind the Los Angeles Times. It has a daily circulation of over 500,000.
I must disagree with one of Jed York’s Favored sons….
Suds Jain, as a son of immigrants, certainly has been blessed by this great country. Most of us children of immigrants are gracious and express gratitude for our good fortune. Suds Jain was fortunate to earn a slot at MIT, one of the best technical schools in this country. Yet, contrary to his views today, he did not step aside and allow less fortunate students, like an African-American or a Hispanic student, to have a better life. Sad! So, Suds Jain received his elite education, and, as he admits, he designed semiconductor integrated circuits for a quarter of a century (i.e., 25 years!). During the later years of his career, the semiconductor industry in which he worked shamelessly dumped toxic waste throughout our beloved Santa Clara, thereby poisoning our ground water. The US Government (i.e., the EPA) identify a number of “SUPERFUND” (danger!!!) sites in Santa Clara, which include toxic waste. Santa Clara city’s district 6 has a toxic plume extending from neighboring Cupertino via Santa Clara into Calabazas Creek, which flows through our city. The plume originates from the old Intersil/Siemens Superfund Site and the plume includes volatile organic compounds (“VOCs”) in soil on- and off-site. The primary contaminant is trichloroethene (“TCE”). Santa Clara city’s districts 1 and 2 have other toxic plumes.
Suds is not directly responsible for the poisonous discharge of the semiconductor industry that provided him his wealth, which, unlike most Santa Clarans, gifted him an early retirement at 50 years old with a $2.5 million house.
Yet Suds said recently: “In the old days, a plastics factory could set up and dump all their toxic waste into your river. And the justification was its bringing jobs and money to our community so we have to let them do this,” Jain said. “Then we had the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act say ‘This isn’t acceptable.’ I see traffic as a form of pollution.” See sanjosespotlight.com
Sounds like Suds is OK with his semiconductor industry dumping toxic waste into our environment in Santa Clara, just not a plastics factory. Sigh. Transition from engineer to politician is a heart-breaking journey.
But what crusade would a smart, rich, retired MIT engineer do in “retirement?” Would he expend his skills to help, in any way he can, to help clean up the toxic waste originating in an industry that made him rich? No, he is too smart. So… as a “politician,” he went for the “easy” fixes… he is against climate change and plastic bags. Why? Because he believes that Santa Clarans are dumb enough to agree that his position on climate change and plastic bags are worthy of a vote. He “talks” about fixing climate change, without proposing solutions, just like at his rich, wealthy, Kona Kai Country Club member: http://konakaiclub.com/uploads/1/2/5/3/125312307/2-november_2019_-_newsletter.pdf
Question: will Suds, if elected, set a PROVABLE goal measuring a change that improves climate change during his term? I doubt it. But if he is bold enough to commit a provable and measurable improvement to climate change that HE ALONE implements, I will WHOLE-HEARTEDLY endorse him in second term. My guess is I’d be holding my breath….. for an abnormal length of time.
Suds live in District 5, which, coincidentally does not have a Superfund Site! hmmmm….. what does he know that we don’t? In view of the foregoing, I ask Santa Clarans to now and forever REJECT Suds—allow him to enjoy retirement without meddling in our lives!!!
Here are some quotes from the Mercury News: “Few people in Santa Clara are as well-informed and as engaged in Santa Clara politics as Jain. He has attended every goal-setting session the city has had and his five years on the Planning Commission would make him an invaluable addition to the council on housing and land use issues. His knowledge of the council’s financial and housing challenges dwarfs that of his challenger, Bob O’Keefe, a state highway patrolman, who is backed by Gilllmor.” Please vote accordingly and kindly just ignore the long-winded ramblings of Sam Yodle. As for myself, I am a resident in District 6. My vote goes to Anthony Becker. His opponent is a carpetbagger and a puppet of Gillmor.