Posted by tiredofitall, a resident of the Palo Verde neighborhood, on May 11, 2012 at 11:23 am
I like both Simitian and Kniss, but I must say that when I saw that termed-out Simitian was running for the Board of Supervisors, I had a negative reaction, somewhat along the lines of: "Isn't it time to get out (of elected jobs, and get a real job)?"
I am a little surprised and disappointed by my reaction. There are certainly elected officials who are really public servants - they work diligently to solve public policy and govenance issues. Many of those have significent skills in that area. But I am saddened that I have become poisoned by "politicians' for whom I have increasing disgust. Biased, adgendized, self-serving, closed-minded, polarizing, (I could go on). It is for getting rid of them that I favored term limits. But somehow they and their ilk just won't go away. Sigh ...
Posted by experience matters, a resident of the Adobe-Meadows neighborhood, on May 11, 2012 at 12:26 pm
Silicon Valley is a diverse and complex region to govern. I would rather have experienced and successful leaders than amateurs. I like the work that Mr. Simitian has done in the past and I will vote for him again.
Posted by Henry, a resident of another community, on May 12, 2012 at 9:49 am
In the supervisors race, vote NO on Joe.
Last Fall there was much lamentation in the media when Gov. Brown vetoed Simitian's SB 29, a bill Joe was claiming would reform red light cameras.
In many of those articles Joe said that the bill would have prohibited “Snitch Tickets.” (If you're not 100% sure of what that they are, Google the term.)
But it wasn't so. The bill DID NOT contain a ban on Snitch Tickets. (The reporters were copying from an erroneous press release sent out by Joe.) SB 29 would have done the opposite of a ban, legitimizing the fake tickets. From the bill:
"(c) This section and Section 40520 do not preclude the issuing agency or the manufacturer or supplier of the automated traffic enforcement system from mailing a courtesy notice or any other notice other than a notice to appear to the registered owner of the vehicle or the alleged violator prior to issuing a notice to appear."
Worse, the phrase "prior to issuing a notice to appear" seems to give the issuing agency more time, limited only by the one-year statute of limitations, to issue a real ticket (a Notice to Appear). The present deadline to issue a real ticket is 15 days.
Many articles said that the bill: "Required adequate signage to notify drivers when red light cameras are in use."
Again, not so. The bill would have DECREASED the number of warning signs at camera enforced intersections, from four per intersection to one or two. (The reporters were copying from Joe's press release, again.)
So why is this important, considering that the bill has been vetoed? Partly, because the bill is back, in 2012, as SB 1303. But more importantly, because it offers us a peek into Joe's mind. Clearly he thinks that he can pull the wool over our eyes - legislate to make it worse for us, but tell us that he is helping us (to appease our anger about the ticket mills on the Peninsula) - and that's it's OK to deceive us in this fashion.
I think that this mind set comes from Joe being in politics too long. Simitian can't change his stripes, so needs to go.
Posted by Neighbor Next Door, a resident of another community, on May 25, 2012 at 12:39 am
The advantage of being a California state senator is not limited to getting so many political contributions from both unions and business establishments, but also cushy paychecks from the state, including tax-free per diem of $145 per day over the Memorial Day weekend by moving meeting schedules around. The state legislators add $64K on their day-off to the California deficit.