|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Five candidates filed papers to run for the Mountain View City Council by the Aug. 12 deadline, according to the city clerk’s office.
Incumbents Lucas Ramirez, Ellen Kamei and Alison Hicks all filed their nomination documents and are qualified for the ballot. The three candidates each accepted the voluntary expenditure limit of $28,744 which aims to limit the amount of money influencing the election.
Two new contenders have also officially thrown their hats in the ring: Justin Cohen and Li Zhang. The two both accepted the voluntary expenditure limit as well.
So far, incumbent Mayor Ramirez leads the pack in campaign contributions with about $12,000 raised during the most recent filing period from Jan. 1 to June 30, 2022, according to FPPC filings posted to the city’s website. Kamei gathered the second highest number of donations in the last filing period, and Hicks is third.
Our votes don’t matter under the current leadership.
RV issue passed with 57%
Yet, here we are, years later, not implemented
Under prior administration, they were going to seek dismissal against lawsuit.
Under this administration, completely opposite. How does it flip so drastically?
I speculate the current administration is not interested in implementing what the voters voted for. And doing everything they can to kick the can down the street.
In the private sector, you disagree and commit. In the political arena, they are just doing everything they can to avoid implementing what the voters voted for.
Here is what they will never address directly:
1. Why is only MV being sued, and not the surrounding cities being sued for their RV policies?
2. Why do they never recognize Safe Parking benefits:
– Safe, organized to stay
– Get them into permanent housing
– Sewage/garbage/water support
– Social services for mental health, medical, housing
3. Other things they never mention
– How is it OK to have RVs parked without sewage/garbage support?
– Where does this all go?
– Is the Sewage being disposed of properly?
– So why is it ok to allow camping without property sanitation requirements
whereas all the home owners have to comply?
4. Another things they never talk about:
– Why is it ok to coach the RVs dwellers not to talk to city employees?
– Context: Figure out what kind of help the RV dwellers need. Population will
likely consist of a mix of families and individuals in need of employment and
housing help, mentally ill, drug addicted, some people taking advantage of
rent free street living, and others.
– Factually understanding the problem is Management 101
This is Silicon Valley, the way we manage” If you can’t measure it, you
can’t manage it”
– This lack of characterization gets in the way of practical solutions.
BTW, I am liar & making all this up. Just doing Randy’s job.
I do not like the direction the city is going. I want to maintain neighborhoods with parks and open space and I’m certainly not in favor of 7 story humungous apartment buildings. If I wanted to live in a big city like San Francisco, I would have moved there. But I don’t — I want a nice green suburban neighborhood — that’s why I moved here in the first place.
In short, I will vote for anyone but the incumbents who seem bent on destroying Mountain View as we once knew it.
Destroying Mountain View as we once knew it? A place where non-rich people could afford to live? A place that welcomed newcomers whose salaries weren’t paid by venture capital?
You didn’t choose to live in a big city. That’s nice. Have you talked to the thousands of people who commute here from from places like Tracy? Do you think they chose to live in a place where you can fry an egg on the hood of your car in the summer, and drive 2 hours each way to work?
You bought a house in Mountain View. You didn’t buy Mountain View.
Mountain View only exists because a bunch of farm families in the 1950s sold their land to developers. They didn’t try to freeze the town in amber. Why should we?
“You bought a house in Mountain View. You didn’t buy Mountain View.” That’s right, ordinary residents did not buy MV. Google did. Democracy is rapidly dying here. Whatever Google wants, Google gets. Newsom wants to be president, he’ll give Big Tech whatever they want in order to get their campaign contributions. Complaints will not be tolerated, object and you will be shamed as a NIMBY. This is the kind of future that the Democratic Party wants to give us all. They are the “good” party, object and you must be evil. Corruption in government runs deep, state politicians are not governing in the best interests of “we the people”, they are governing to please rich and powerful donors like Google. Make no mistake, MV is experiencing a hostile takeover. Schools will be defunded, open space will be eliminated, traffic nightmares will rule the day. Enabling a company that is already richer than God to make even MORE money, that’s the important thing to Newsom and state Democrats. Google wants to hire more workers at the Googlepex, Newsom is doing everything he can to help them. What will the council do?
JustAWorkingStiff, I think you’re mistaken about at least some of the facts. I took a look at your first claim, and the city did file their motion to dismiss, it was denied by the judge in the case. The Voice reported on this. If you look at what happened in Pacifica, the city really isn’t in a good spot here. Basically, a handful of busybodies more concerned with removing the symptoms of the housing crisis rather than fixing the causes have ended up costing the city a ton of money on a case they’re likely to lose. The same people that pushed for Measure C also oppose rent control, adding more homes, even Project Homekey projects.
Oh, I just got to the bottom of your post where you say you were just making it all up? That’s a very strange post, hopefully the Voice will remove it for intentionally spreading misinformation.
what a light-weight article. Would have been nice to hear something about Cohen and Zhang. The rest was copied from a previous article.
As for the state of the city and its council, the incumbents should be put under some pressure to solve, or at the very least, improve the RV problem. I look forward to candidates’ forums to see how they respond to this issue.
It WOULD be nice to hear some (independent) reporting about Cohen and Zhang! Dig deep.
“Never” say ‘never’? (JustAWorkingStiff). Maybe this was a setup piece, ’cause there is a bunch of the stuff that the city obviously Never/never did (double negative). Take all the short lists, put them in a separate piece (for research and thought) and I don’t think that is such a bad format for thinking about this particular (overblown RVs) problem.
YIMBY (Questa Park Annex) single family home owner living on a former farmer’s subdivided land {Bubb farm / frm 1st Presbyterian Church corner to Ranch 99 corner}.