Dog Park: Orrin Mahoney, Dolly Sandoval and Mark Santoro
Last night, well into early morning of 2am, Cupertino City Council worked on the contentious action item regarding establishing dog parks in Cuperitno, particularly, Linda Vista Park, Jollyman Park and/or Memorial Park.
Many angry park neighbors, especially those in Linda Vista Park, as one specific item calls for fenced-in dog park trial here, showed up to voice concerns on why none of them was ever informed about the action item that will be affecting their lives. The Park and Recreation commissioner and the Citizen Group working on supporting the dog park proposal, told everyone on camera that they had mailed out postcards to neighbors, to which people angrily shouted out: "Show us the proof." Needless to say, we are witnessing another dirty-politics by the civil servants and the interest group again in Cupertino.
Why is this still happening dumbfounded me after the Toll-brother-condo-building-yet-public-defeating-the-council-in-a-66%-to-33%-citywide-vote in Nov. 2006 (see the previous posts on this blog). Councilpersons Kris Wang and Gilbert Wong proposed to consider alternative sites away from existing parks and particularly neighborhood parks, which look to be the most accepted public approach. However, three councilpersons: Orrin Mahoney, Dolly Sandoval and Mark Santoro, in their decision explanations to the public, never went for this consideration away from existing neighborhood parks. Mark Santoro at the end motioned to go for trials after 50%-neighbor-user-support in a survey to be conducted soon, which was voted by all five councilpersons to all yes'es at the end.
During this process, the tape recording of which, BTW, can be obtained in the 21st-July-2009 city council meeting, Mark Santoro, Dolly Sandoval and Orrin Mahoney, despite hearing all the opposition, all from concerned citizens of Cupertino, most of whom stayed well past midnight on a work day, went for allowing the unfenced trial unequivocally if there are majority neighbor support. Kris Wang proposed to amend the survey radius from Mark's 1000-ft to 2000-ft (households to survey within the radius from the park). Orrin Mahoney, the current mayor, amazingly told the public on camera and went into an argument with Kris: "Why survey that many [Cupertino citizens] about the trials?"
Orrin Mahoney, who are you representing and who voted you into the office? Are you representing and caring for Cupertino citizens or your own small special interest group? After the fiasco three years ago, did you not repent for the action you did then? Why can publicly elected office act in spite of public opinions and just cater to special interest group time and again? Do you really want to get citizens to get signatures to impeach you (or even for that matter, Dolly and Mark) on this matter?
If Cupertino has extra fund and time, not to mention in this economy, why are the elected officers and council not trying to improve the living humans' quality of life and instead spending money to tend to pets? Did you even ask the city citizens on whether they would approve your unilateral decision to spend our tax money to improve non-human lives? Do you think majority of citizens in Cupertino are living their lives and knowing their neighbors so well that the only thing left to improve is the dogs' well-being? Why not use the extra money to host free neighborhood block BBQ party to help neighbors interact and know one another better, as one resident suggested, or host more city-wide festivals meant to bring more people together?! And Mark, and Dolly, despite your tamer explanation and thin-veil on your position, why did none of you even consider Gilbert's suggestion to look into an alternative, unused land now for this purpose, away from neighborhood parks? Mark, what's your point about Stevens Creek County Park's being too far? If dog owners care enough about letting dogs run freely, shouldn't, wouldn't they care enough to do this in an area away from existing, small residential neighborhood parks? Why are you acting in your own and interest group's interest; because you also live close to Linda Vista Park? Orrin, Mark and Dolly, do you need the public to vote to impeach you and set in City's democratic procedure to always ask city citizens about allocating money for non-human use in the future?
I love dogs and have nothing against dog owners. I understand fully why dog-owners would like to have their dogs be able to run freely. But do this without affecting existing, small, residential neighborhood parks. I know this is a good, compromised solution that all can accept, easily judging from the two groups' (both for and against) reactions. No one wants to further divide the city, the living human citizens and neighbors. So why are you coucilpeople acting to do this? Don't believe this? Let's put into city-wide vote! And for that matter, since you councilpeople are forcing the public to do this on your incompetent behalf (just so to let you know how out-of-line and out-of-touch you are), let's ask Orrin, Mark and Dolly to resign if the public vote against them, since they never even wanted to consider an approach that clearly would be accepted by the majority; instead decided to unilaterally act on their own and such a small-interest-group's behalf.
Shame on you to waste taxpayers money and time without consulting with taxpayer majority. We will continue to monitor what dirty deeds you still can do, compromising integrity of democracy in secrecy. At the same time Cupertino citizens let's contemplate legal measures to prevent such unconscientious democracy-sabotaging from happening in Cupertino City Council and prevent special-interest-representing officials from ruining this beloved city in the future.
Many angry park neighbors, especially those in Linda Vista Park, as one specific item calls for fenced-in dog park trial here, showed up to voice concerns on why none of them was ever informed about the action item that will be affecting their lives. The Park and Recreation commissioner and the Citizen Group working on supporting the dog park proposal, told everyone on camera that they had mailed out postcards to neighbors, to which people angrily shouted out: "Show us the proof." Needless to say, we are witnessing another dirty-politics by the civil servants and the interest group again in Cupertino.
Why is this still happening dumbfounded me after the Toll-brother-condo-building-yet-public-defeating-the-council-in-a-66%-to-33%-citywide-vote in Nov. 2006 (see the previous posts on this blog). Councilpersons Kris Wang and Gilbert Wong proposed to consider alternative sites away from existing parks and particularly neighborhood parks, which look to be the most accepted public approach. However, three councilpersons: Orrin Mahoney, Dolly Sandoval and Mark Santoro, in their decision explanations to the public, never went for this consideration away from existing neighborhood parks. Mark Santoro at the end motioned to go for trials after 50%-neighbor-user-support in a survey to be conducted soon, which was voted by all five councilpersons to all yes'es at the end.
During this process, the tape recording of which, BTW, can be obtained in the 21st-July-2009 city council meeting, Mark Santoro, Dolly Sandoval and Orrin Mahoney, despite hearing all the opposition, all from concerned citizens of Cupertino, most of whom stayed well past midnight on a work day, went for allowing the unfenced trial unequivocally if there are majority neighbor support. Kris Wang proposed to amend the survey radius from Mark's 1000-ft to 2000-ft (households to survey within the radius from the park). Orrin Mahoney, the current mayor, amazingly told the public on camera and went into an argument with Kris: "Why survey that many [Cupertino citizens] about the trials?"
Orrin Mahoney, who are you representing and who voted you into the office? Are you representing and caring for Cupertino citizens or your own small special interest group? After the fiasco three years ago, did you not repent for the action you did then? Why can publicly elected office act in spite of public opinions and just cater to special interest group time and again? Do you really want to get citizens to get signatures to impeach you (or even for that matter, Dolly and Mark) on this matter?
If Cupertino has extra fund and time, not to mention in this economy, why are the elected officers and council not trying to improve the living humans' quality of life and instead spending money to tend to pets? Did you even ask the city citizens on whether they would approve your unilateral decision to spend our tax money to improve non-human lives? Do you think majority of citizens in Cupertino are living their lives and knowing their neighbors so well that the only thing left to improve is the dogs' well-being? Why not use the extra money to host free neighborhood block BBQ party to help neighbors interact and know one another better, as one resident suggested, or host more city-wide festivals meant to bring more people together?! And Mark, and Dolly, despite your tamer explanation and thin-veil on your position, why did none of you even consider Gilbert's suggestion to look into an alternative, unused land now for this purpose, away from neighborhood parks? Mark, what's your point about Stevens Creek County Park's being too far? If dog owners care enough about letting dogs run freely, shouldn't, wouldn't they care enough to do this in an area away from existing, small residential neighborhood parks? Why are you acting in your own and interest group's interest; because you also live close to Linda Vista Park? Orrin, Mark and Dolly, do you need the public to vote to impeach you and set in City's democratic procedure to always ask city citizens about allocating money for non-human use in the future?
I love dogs and have nothing against dog owners. I understand fully why dog-owners would like to have their dogs be able to run freely. But do this without affecting existing, small, residential neighborhood parks. I know this is a good, compromised solution that all can accept, easily judging from the two groups' (both for and against) reactions. No one wants to further divide the city, the living human citizens and neighbors. So why are you coucilpeople acting to do this? Don't believe this? Let's put into city-wide vote! And for that matter, since you councilpeople are forcing the public to do this on your incompetent behalf (just so to let you know how out-of-line and out-of-touch you are), let's ask Orrin, Mark and Dolly to resign if the public vote against them, since they never even wanted to consider an approach that clearly would be accepted by the majority; instead decided to unilaterally act on their own and such a small-interest-group's behalf.
Shame on you to waste taxpayers money and time without consulting with taxpayer majority. We will continue to monitor what dirty deeds you still can do, compromising integrity of democracy in secrecy. At the same time Cupertino citizens let's contemplate legal measures to prevent such unconscientious democracy-sabotaging from happening in Cupertino City Council and prevent special-interest-representing officials from ruining this beloved city in the future.
posted by Concerned Resident at 12:14 PM
2 Comments:
Your fear of dogs is a self fulfilling prophecy. When was the last time a dog didn't come up to you wagging it's tail. You should walk around SF or NYC. Dogs off leash are a common occurrence. It will take training of the owners and dogs but they will learn. Some dogs might fight but they and their owners will learn.
Jim, nowhere in this article does it mention fear of dogs. The position taken in this article is for a dedicated dog park that doesn't take away space from the existing, small neighborhood parks, and reporting on the general democracy-sabotaging practices and procedures happening in Cupertino City Council.
Post a Comment
<< Home