Oct. 22, 2014 @ 2:36 p.m.
Unfortunately I have commitments on Thursday. I hope the turnout is good. Can anyone supply a review of the Area/Seat 3 candidates and their platforms? A lot of things too little time before the election.
Oct. 4, 2014 @ 7:12 a.m.
Welcome to San Diego Politics, where the under/over the table donations buy down your public debt. This is just politicians and Rich folk playing with our monies. Instead of $600,000 in fines etc that could (I use "Could" very loosely) benefit the public in Parks, Maintenance and Infrastructure, it ends up in Falconer's and others "Campaign Funds" as Pennies on the Dollar.
When is enough, enough for theses politicians and rich folks in this community?
Sept. 26, 2014 @ 10:54 a.m.
Erupting, first off the voting districts are more or less even by population, thus giving the goofy borders, they do not reflect any real differentiation with Mello Roos or any other "Special Districts". The confusing part is the Map on the District website defines the districts as A - E and we all seem to refer them as Seats 1-5, purposeful deception?
By the District map I live in district "C", Eastlake, Otay Ranch and further east, I think this is the same as "3" or seat 3. I will be out on Olympic Parkway at 805 with Anti Cartmill and Anti McCann posters, both as said political self important hacks, kind of like the Paris Hylton of the South Bay.
The only reason I can think of for Mr. Cartmill to run again has to be ego and the need for a few more months "Service" to achieve full vesting in the Calif. Education Health benefits, important for someone who is "Self-Employed"
As for John McCann where else can he get a job with his illustrious back-ground?
BBQ, CAVE or is that "nattering nabob" Jim, if you even bothered to read the paperwork given to you by the Adminstration staff you would have seen the holes in the reports, if you'd have been a "Trustee" you would have questioned them before rubber stamping them (Obvious Oxymoron)
Sept. 23, 2014 @ 11:35 a.m.
It's here the political season, I am just waiting for all the signs to go up on every unincorporated fence and traffic island in town.
I have already started to recieve pollster calls and I realize that I may know the names in the South Bay Races, but I do not know squat about what these individuals stand for. If I listen to the proponents of each candidate they are better than sliced bread, if from the opponents of the candidates they are satin's spawn.
So, other than the few I have had personal contact with, or the professional politicians, or the overly connected, most of which I wouldn't vote into dog catcher, who do I vote for?
What do these people stand for, where and what experience do they have that may make me think they will correct the past and guide us to a healthy future?
I'm mad as hell and do not want to be a misinformed voter anymore! I want representation, not some smug politician protecting his cronies and slopping from the public trough. I expect there are a number of you that feel the same!
Candidates "WHERE'S THE BEEF?" in your campaigns?
Aug. 26, 2014 @ 10:33 a.m.
Back to the Future,
"Political First Cousins", it's amazing that Politics is the chosen "Family Business" of many of our Community leaders, both "Governmental and Social Services".
Aug. 25, 2014 @ 11:15 a.m.
A History and Vocabulary lesson about the Kakistocracy that is South Bay Government and Politics, weather it is Sweetwater, Chula Vista or the other elected officialdoms of the area.
The Lincoln Club and other political movers and shakers of the region (Political Elite - PE) all believe that their ideas and representation is what is best for us the Plebeian Citizenery-PC.
Where they, the PE seem to have fallen out of touch is that they all think they are leaders and intellectuals, deserving our attention and a reward for being. This is derived from the “Me” Generation of Yuppies and Yuppie wannabes who currently see themselves as the Governmental Elite in our region.
The PE have convinced themselves through their political inbreeding that the PC have lost the ability to choose wisely and monitor their doings and undoings of our governance. In some circumstances, they may be correct, however that does not give the PE the right to:
Enough is enough, too much nepotism and cronyism within the South Bay as well as the region, state and federal Governments.
We, the PC need to decide who and what type of officialdom/government we want, and not just follow the sound bites from the Kakistocracy!!!
Oh, Kakistocracy means “Government under control of the worst or least-qualified citizens”
Aug. 8, 2014 @ 10:24 a.m.
Funny, Mayor Cox's name has come up more in the last two Months than in most of her tenure as Mayor. It seems she has opinions on everything, Sweetwater, election processes, taxation.... it's funny what happens when your about to be on the street so to speak...
The last Month the only names I have heard more often than Mayor Cox are McCann, Cartmill, Lopez and Brand, not the best name recognition group to be associated with!!!
Let's see what happens with runoff elections before throwing the baby out with the bath water...
Aug. 1, 2014 @ 6:37 a.m.
Ed and Ms. Russo out-smarted themselves on this one.... They backed themselves (and Us, the taxpayer) right into the corner with the Balloon payment due on "L" St and the desire to have the Ed Brand Executive Adminstration Campus of Sweetwater at Eastlake, (New Admin Campus).
They were in such a hurry to cover their Butts in 2011 (When the board brought Ed back) that they would have agreed to anything to keep the shellgame quiet!!!! Now however we all know about the real estate shellgame and how much it has cost the district, not only in money and prestige, but also distraction from the business of education, so no more hiding.
They proably thought there was little chance of "Profit" depending on how you account for it with the "L" St deal $15 Million in the red, the future accounting of this if it continues will be very interesting.
As they say hindsight is usually 20/20, the recent and current Board Members did not and do not have a clue as to what their roles are and were in the fiasco. Where were/are the Lawyers who should have approved any contract like this, where is/was the open accountability and public review, where is/was the facility review that we have been paying $2.4 million for over the last three years? I suspect all of those things were behind closed Doors in Ed's Office or more likely at a Steak Lunch in a Dark Resturant we paid for...
It's time to review the past, control the present and plan the future, keep watching closely and vet your candidates for the Nov. election.
July 18, 2014 @ 4 p.m.
anniej, I value your work and opinion, however you said it in your comment
" ...Cartmill and Brand had the total control, the power relinquished by the other 4...."
It is the "relinquishing of the power" that most disturbs me..
As I have tried to state there is much to celebrate in what Ms. Lopez did but no matter the reasons, she was not an effective Trustee.
Having anyone from the old board come in as an incumbant with "Experience from the most recent Board" is experience we do not need.
No offense but having any holdovers from the confused and weak previous board will only make the new board weaker!!!
Sorry Ms. Lopez I understand what you did and tried to do, but I do not think it is enough to back you or encourage anyone to vote for you. You should back someone without the baggage of the previous Board and Superintendent, to develop the future, without the stigma of the past.
With Respect, BBQ
July 18, 2014 @ 9:52 a.m.
As I only know Jim Cartmill as a member of the SUHSD Board of Trustees, I am sure he has friends and loved ones that do not deserve to be dragged into the issue of weather he was or will be a good member of the new Board, I feel the same of Bertha Lopez.
The real question is who, what and where were these individuals as the two terms of Ed Brand and one of Jesus Gandara were going on? Yes, I know it maybe unfair to lump the two together but neither handled the situations very well.
Jim has been involved with the district since the beginning of the "Property Speculation", it appears that his eyes were bigger than his ability to judge the Real Estate Market... His undieing link and faith in the Superintendents was at least sickening and at most negligent of his feduciary responsibilities to manage the district. His desire to rejoin the district seems to be more about vanity, personal gain (He needs three months to be vested in the State Health Care Plan) and not about fixing the district!!! He's had plenty of time to complete that. As Dr Phil Says "The best prediction of future behavior is past behavior..."
As for Bertha, even though she objected to and often was the only desenting vote to a "Brandian" topic or issue, she was still an ineffective Trustee, she should have demanded topics be removed from the agendas if she had not been given the proper background information, she should have expanded her group of advisors and been more inclusive of the public and been more prepared on all of the issues.
Again I could say the same of the other three former Board members, but I ask not only Jim and Bertha but all of the voters in the SUHSD isn't it a time to make a clean break from the past, good ol'boy network, elect five New members of the board, continue community forums and develope a new stratigic plan for the future of the district?
Even though I can only vote in my district I will be picking the five best candidates to work with, for the future of the SUHSD and the region.
© 2014 San Diego Reader