.

Speak up: What Questions Do You Have For Candidates?

Pose important questions for the candidates for Pajaro Valley Unified School District Board of Trustee, Watsonville City Council and the state Assembly seat.

With Election Day less than two months away—and sooner for you early voters—it's becoming increasingly important to know more about these candidates and their plans.

Although the races for Watsonville City Council are uncontested, there are choices to be made  be winners and losers in the two Pajaro Valley Unified School District Board of Trustee races and the state Assembly race.

In order to make your decision at the polls just a little easier, we'll be reaching out to all candidates to have them answer your questions. So ask away!

Post questions in the comments and tell us what race (school board, city council or state Assembly) it's directed to. Make sure all candidates in a race can answer the questions. After we've racked up enough questions, we will relay them to the candidates in an interview

Also, state Assembly candidates Luis Alejo and Rob Bernosky will square off in Friday afternoon at the Watsonville Women's Center.

David H. Perez September 14, 2012 at 03:56 PM
To City Council Candidates: The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996 requires local governments to cooperate with Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The City of Watsonville has elected to defy Federal law and adopt "sanctuary city" status, thereby harboring illegal aliens and allowing them to benefit from already scarce taxpayer-funded government services and programs. Further, inviting illegal aliens to reside here has contributed to gang activity and other crime. While the concept of "sanctuary city" is more symbolic than anything else, many Watsonville residents like myself would like to see the "sanctuary city" status repealed. Where do you stand on this issue?
David H. Perez September 14, 2012 at 05:09 PM
To City Council Candidates: Watsonville does not need any more high-density low-income housing. We already have a serious problem with overpopulation, heavy traffic, crime and a general infrastructure that cannot support any more significant increases to our population. Additionally, Watsonville's image as a "poor community" makes it nearly impossible to get any decent shopping to move into town. The proposed "Atkinson Lane" project would just exacerbate these problems. What is your position on the Atkinson Lane Project?
Eye B. Tender September 15, 2012 at 05:15 AM
OK, David, Dave's not here anymore. You're right on both of these local issues. The problem with doing business in Watsonville is the local government. They've got their nose in everything and they're absolutely full of it. The only possible solution will come from a popularly elected strong mayor. But, the Public themselves are going to have to shove that down the throats of the insider crony clown council. Good luck on that one Watsonville.
David H. Perez September 15, 2012 at 05:08 PM
To City Council Candidates: In the late 1980’s, the residents of the City of Watsonville lost their right to vote for an at-large mayor when the district court found that “racially polarized voting exists in Watsonville.” Now, more than a couple of decades later, the racially polarized voting and racially divisive politics are still alive and well, albeit the group of present day cronies have a different demographic than before. Cronyism on our city council has kept Watsonville from choosing the leadership we need to move business, and the town in general, forward. Cronyism on the city council should also be illegal. In November, it looks like we will end up with a city council majority who were each either originally appointed, or who ran uncontested. Shall we expect that, as usual the mayor appointee will either be a “cronie” or one of their silent partners? When the new players on the city council are in place, a large number of Watsonville residents, including myself, will be demanding the right to be able to vote for a properly qualified mayor. Please share your thoughts about this.
Eye B. Tender September 15, 2012 at 09:49 PM
Yep. I may be mistaken, but as I recall, the Court only ordered District Elections. But, local politicians (Mrs. Murphy? and pals) then tossed out the popularly elected Mayor. At any rate, I can't see the Crony Clown Council ever voting themselves out of their current absolute power. But, California Residents retain the right to circulate and submit petitions. So, if Watsonville's collective overall Electorate ever wants it's Votes to count, they're going to have to take this matter into their own hands. But, good luck. Because as long as the Dirty Demos are allowed to continue appointing issue FIXED Judges, we're going to have more and more of these politically FIXED Court Decisions. Voters should consider that when judging candidates on their laundry list of favorite issues. The problem is, once a Judge is FIXED on "just that one special" issue, they are in fact completely corrupt about all issues.
Cathy P. November 07, 2012 at 03:34 PM
@The Patch: were these questions ever asked of any of the candidates who were running unopped? I don't remember seeing anything or any follow up. Just wondering.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something