Posted by Jan Wilson, a resident of the Whisman Station neighborhood, on Nov 3, 2010 at 9:52 am
Dan Waylonis came on top of the 3 challengers and not too far from Siegel. I would say that's a pretty good result for a $500 campaign
Dan, please don't give up, you'll get them next time, your message resonates with the voters, we need fiscal sanity in MV and someone to control the unions before the average police officer / fire fighter clears the $300,000/ year mark and bankrupt the city which is likely to happen within 5 years with a guaranteed 5% a year raise
Posted by resident, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Nov 3, 2010 at 11:12 am
The challengers might want to try putting in some time serving their community in other ways, thereby building a track record. All three incumbents spent time serving on boards and commissions, learning about city governance, before making runs at council. In this way they demonstrated what they stand for, and build a record of accomplishment before asking the voters to elect them to council. Nonprofit service is another way they can build records of achievement and show their commitment and concern for the community.
Posted by Hardin, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on Nov 3, 2010 at 1:55 pm
"Thanks to Greg, Daniel and Aaron for opening the eyes of our council a little wider. "
You're kidding, right? The issues "raised" by the challengers were issues already in existence before they began their campaigns. This very forum played host to many of these issues before these 3 became candidates.
Its easy to poke a stick at an existing organization when you have no skin in the game, nor an appreciation for all sides of an issue that need to be considered when you have the responsibility of a City Council member. Yelling from the side lines that we need change doesn't make one visionary.
That said, I hope to see some of the challengers back in the political scene, once they gain some experience in dealing with City issues.
Posted by Pleased, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Nov 3, 2010 at 3:57 pm
I am glad to see that the voters across the city as a whole paid little attention to the complaints of a few loud Old Mountain View residents over the Council votes on the Minton's project. The fact that the order of votes for the 3 incumbents this year was the same as in 2006, with Jac Siegel lowest of the 3, is an indication that the Old Mountain View neighbors' complaints were little more than a tempest in a teapot.
Posted by Next time, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on Nov 3, 2010 at 4:49 pm
I agree with the comments from "Resident" above saying that "The challengers might want to try putting in some time serving their community in other ways, thereby building a track record."
In addition, I think they should take a look at what endorsements really are in a town like Mountain View. These are not people "in the pocket" of the Council members. These are people that the Council members have talked to, listened to, and gotten to know. That is old-fashioned friendly, professional behavior. It is not political back dealing.
Add a few years of life experience, some community work in our town, and some community building, and I think you may get it....
Posted by GC, a resident of the Sylvan Park neighborhood, on Nov 3, 2010 at 7:16 pm
Anyone who wanted to avoid 3/4 of the population deserves to lose. A nice experiment, but it shows how arrogant the young really are. Next election maybe? remember we had electronic ballot fail after one attempt, that was a poor experiment also but then 1/4 of the population were not voting back then to recall that.
Posted by Political Insider, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Nov 4, 2010 at 7:20 am
As expected. Except for the compensation issue, the challengers never bothered to learn about city issues. I attended 3 forums and it was obvious. It's tough but not impossible to knock off incumbents. Takes hard work and none of these three were willing to put in the effort.