SHEsaysWITHaSMILE.blogspot.com

of the government, by the government, for the government notices (me!) ~topps

 my mental mailbox is full.  in order to make room, i must:

      -so, i noticed, in a self-assess/good listener kind of way, that when i have longer conversations with, not just my husband, but friends/family..   if you were to create a check mark for each time these words were used

republican

liberal

democrat

everyone else i talk to uses those words in their discussions much more frequently than i do.   i can make entire points, share opinions, share observations, share experiences without using those labels.

in the past months, when i was reading about 'removal of political party identifiers' on ballots, for example..   i am only 100% for that.   like, i think we all need to be much more issue based and value-loyal,  vs. party affiliated.

but as i am currently in receipt of my ballot for upcoming elections,  -i am always aware of how much reading/research any given person would need to do in order to make a truly informed decision

and the amount of reading/research is quite unrealistic for the average working person and/or student; plus you often have intentionally manipulated paragraphs; you have more than one issue, (which you might support) mixed with two others (you oppose), but which requires one circle to be filled out; yes to all, or no to any.

so, i am issue based; and!  i believe all issues should be presented in a singular format; itemized for the voter.  no more some of this and a little of that..    adding on to the enormous amount of research/reading; the mandatory way this current system forces the voter to either ignore an important issue or falsely support a different issue because a mixture of values has been presented for one yes or no.

   -anyway, the point i almost forgot to make is this:  i am issue/value based; not party affiliated, but as i was reading my 3 page, front and back, ballot, with the accompanying books which are proposed to serve as more detailed guides

for the sake of time and energy and efficiency, it hit me (i am a late bloomer in every sense of the term); oh! now it makes sense..   vote for the party that is the best match for your values/beliefs..   this really does speed things up!   -so i understand it now...     

****

but! if i were queen, (which is not even a government style i support, but love the royalty reference);

we would move entirely away from our current party system and become singularly issue, value based.

the other thing i would dictate be done:   a standardized website template for all candidates running for anything.

i learned how helpful this would be during the recall of newsom.  -and i was among those who want him ousted; i am not a fan, 

but the point here is that..  40 something candidates were potential replacements..   and each candidate has their points/values/positions ideas    -somewhere....       

within their 10 or 50 page websites..

and how awesome it would be, if you clicked on this candidate, and there was a bullet point style 

issue/stance; click to read more

issue/stance; click to read more

all in the same order on each candidates page, so you could quickly easily compare and contrast..

it is ease we are all after, it is efficiency; it is factoring in time/energy; it is all about CONVENIENCE!

which is pretty much the exclusive reason for political parties to exist.

but how convenient would that be!?   

and so, based on that experience, and based on my direct experience with open forums at San Jose City Council..

with everything i've learned the pragmatic/practical way from being pulled into the political arena because of an underhanded 8-2 vote by city council to build tiny homes on a park! across from an elementary, daycare, library..  in our awesome neighborhood..

the upshot, is that over and over i realize,   currently, the way our system works is very much, 

of the government, by the government, for the government

but that is not what our founding fathers intended

what's on my heart, is investing time/energy getting us back to  of the people, by the people, for the people

and i have it in my heart/mind to work toward a set, predictable, accessible; consistent! time for open forums;  -removing the guess work (will it be in 2 hours? 6?)  -alleviating the numerous stresses and burdens currently on the people, who are sacrificing/volunteering their irreplaceable time to be seen and heard on issues that matter most to them.

  open forum as it is today is very much, of, by & for the government; we need it that fixed to

of, by & for the people!

now, i ask you:   how tall of an order is that?   on a challenge scale;  -how difficult is this:

open forums 

every 1st and 3rd tuesdays at 3pm.  1 1/2 hours alloted; first come, first serve; 2 minutes each.

every 2nd and 4th tuesdays at 7pm.  1 1/2 hours alloted; first come, first serve; 2 minutes each.

if there are no people who show up for an open forum; city council just continues on with their meeting.   if there are less people, than the 1 1/2 hour dedicated time slot; the city council just continues on with their meeting.   but if there are any people!  if there is just 1 person; if there are 10..

the meeting itself stops at 3pm, or 7pm, gives itself over to open forum,  -all council members present and respectfully pretending to listen.   

this just does not seem like a huge, awful, complex, crazy challenging thing to implement.  It seems very easy to implement and  -the people-   certainly deserve this opportunity and respect of their time and voices.

it would help guide us back toward a democracy vs. dictatorship.     -and if heard correctly among numerous conversations last night,  currently open forums are at the whim of the current council?

hideous.

open forums should be consistent regardless of who the council members are..   as the members come and go,  -open forums times/policies/procedures should remain consistent.

****

and so,  i was really smiling internally and externally, to see the group of people who attended the special meeting hosted last night by BCAC, giving us neighbors an opportunity to listen to our two mayor candidates (chavez/mahan) field questions which were submitted via email prior to the meeting, 12 to 15 questions chosen among who knows how many

and being a great listener; i regard this as one of my highest skill sets; my greatest strengths

and i could listen for an hour and a half, but my knees wont let me -sit- for an hour and a half, so..

after about an hour, i left the room to walk, stretch my legs, etc.

   -lots of script answers,  -to be expected.  and God bless them, because they do these Q&A sessions in who knows how many different neighborhoods; over and over...

each time, i imagine, improving their answers..  

in any case..

   -we were supporting mahan before the meeting; and we are still supporting mahan.   it is my guess, that is the case with 99.9% of the attendees.   -whoever you supported going in; you supported after the meeting too

i appreciate mahan wanting to employ the unemployed/homeless to help clean up San Jose.

          i ache to see San Jose cleaned up!       it was chavez that tossed out the statistic; just having a clean neighborhood reduces crime by 35%    (no fact checking; but we know the point is true...)

i am big fat favor of spending some money, time and resources in getting San Jose cleaned up!  -and as a very high priority!  it's its own problem solver on many fronts.

i also like mahan's discussion regarding the distribution of funds in the school system.  currently, very top heavy; administration getting the lion share..  no trickle down to the end user.    i would LOVE to see a transparent, bullet point, easy to read/easy to access; school by school, position by position; financial report..   the other thing i would LOVE to see, is the archive of ballots, measures, propositions, etc. which all ask for more money for our schools..   see the collection of funds received over the past 2 decades, and itemized results.

   -there is an agreement/consensus among 'the people'   -same with homeless, as with schools:

   -having the ongoing problem; the crisis, this becomes very lucrative..

solving the problem, or managing the problem, clogs the cash flow.     -if you look at all the 'one time' giant funding/grants for any given crisis.. you can clearly see the incentive/disincentives at work; and see how having a problem/crisis to solve is so financially rewarding that..     then you start to see people  -creating- problems and crises..

but i!    i imagine (because sometimes that is all you can do; imagine...) i imagine what San Jose would look like if we incentivized problem solving in a financial way..

    /these are the take aways...  voters want convenience ; open forum of/by/for the people; financially incentivize problem solving!   financially support and reward prevention!

***

the thing that makes me the most crazy, so to speak..   the City of San Jose; the candidates for mayor; the council members..

one track minds! when it comes to tiny homes.     IT IS RESEARCHABLEY FAILING.. but all we get to hear is tiny homes as a solution;   the cost and location might change, but.

no one is offering any kind of alternative.   way short-sighted and very narrow close minded when it comes to tiny homes

and i still use my imagination (because, i do have a very healthy and active imagination!) ; always visualizing a larger problem solving panel!     -this idea has to date, fallen on nothing but deaf ears..

another reason i love my blog..

like, did any of the questions i submitted for mayor candidates get asked?

well, 

here they are:  

 "Thank You!" BCAC for hosting this event!

 

Tiny Homes are a researchably failing trend. Costly. Dangerous. And do nothing to address homeless encampments.  Do you agree we need to create a new and larger problem solving panel, with more voices and a variety of disciplines contributing to a comprehensive solution?  And do you agree we need to start by employing a more specific vocabulary which addresses the different categories of homeless [healthy homeless/economic only; drug addicted; mentally ill; prematurely released inmates; freeloaders; etc.]

 

Do you agree San Jose should never build these densely populated caged tiny home sites near ANY schools, libraries, daycares, parks, nature reserves?

 

Tiny homes were falsely promoted as temporary 'bridge' housing with tenants moving into permanent subsidized housing within months.  Where is all this subsidized housing?  Why can't we fast track healthy homeless directly into permanent subsidized housing?

 

If raising rent 5% can place up to 2000 people on the streets, why don't we revisit and reestablish rent restrictions to a broader population? Do you agree smaller rent increases with more notice could be a way to proactively address our homelessness crisis? Why are we forcing them out, scrambling for what to do, spending millions on failing tiny homes, only to put them back in subsidized housing? 

 

What is your plan for when your plan attracts even more homeless?

 

Do you agree we can redirect funds currently slated for dangerous, non-productive tiny home sites, and put that money toward a hospital for the mentally ill?   -toward rehab centers for the drug addicted?

 

During the pandemic San Jose prematurely released countless inmates.  It is no surprise crime and homelessness increased.  What is your plan to combat this tragic pattern?

 

We have a severe police staffing crisis. San Jose is unable to retain and/or recruit qualified, upstanding law enforcement officers.  What is your plan to turn this tragic pattern around? 

 

Currently, working parents, individuals, students, have to go to great lengths, sacrificing their time, scheduling child care, scheduling elderly parent care, postpoing meals, leaving work early..  guessing whether or not and how long it might take to speak at open forums:  it could be 2 hours, 4 hours, 6 hours.. citizens are forced to guess how long it will be before they get to speak for just 60 seconds.  -Do you agree San Jose City Council Open Forums should be at a set, predictable, dedicated time? -alternating weeks, to provide both evening and day time accessibility?   Tues at 3pm, Tues 7pm, alternating.  A dedicated 1 1/2 hour set time slot.  If no one is there, council continues on..

 

We have heard about a graffiti hot line, but see graffiti in the same locations for months and years.  We see it escalating.  Do the people who respond to calls for graffiti removal do anything proactively?  Do they only respond to calls?  Do you agree it would be a great idea to proactively assign people to remove graffiti from entire neighborhoods? To (please!) take action without needing to be called.  It is everywhere!  Why should we even have to call?  Pick a street, pick a park...   

 

What is your greatest idea for elevating our city's status and improving the quality of life for people who call San Jose home, and how do you plan to implement it?

 

Do you agree we can employ our currently homeless/unemployed to help clean up the city?  -that providing a wage, a job,  and merit based subsidized housing can be a win/win?

 

What do you see as the number one reason someone should visit, live or work in San Jose? 

 

 *****

everyone visited outside after the meeting for a while..    talked politics, and just talked..

   -cant discuss homeless without discussing crime, cant discuss crime without discussing jail..

another thing making my mental mailbox full...

the painful truth of this:

               let's say you do the crime..   and you serve your time..    i have often described our current jail system as setting criminals up to fail again..     any criminal who walks out the jail door without a place to live, without a job, without a cent..    that is in fact a set up for failure.

so, people will discuss 'programs' to help inmates into civilian life..

well,   might i mention the other painful truth here:   the former inmate, (robert's nephew) who graduated from more than one anger management course, was released, and went on to violently murder his own mother.

having programs,  -which we have had and do currently..   it is not a new concept or idea at all

having program availability does not directly correlate with successful transitions from jail to civilian life.

so, the ability to assess inmate candidates who would benefit from, vs. the inmates who should in fact, just remain in jail for the safety of all   -the safety of all, being the highest priority

the ability to assess and discern this distinction..    much more important than the programs themselves.

   -but again...   the problem..  this need for programs.. (as if they have never and currently do not exist),   -a couple 'mascot' stories of success stories..   the problem itself becomes lucrative as a proposed solution..   without having to deliver results. 

******

boy does San Jose need some audits!   some public audits!    what is going on with all the current homeless services which were funded to 'solve'    -results?      are we continuing failing programs?  are we paying for all the services that currently exist PLUS paying to build failing tiny homes?

****

it is visually noticeable to me, how over the decades we moved away from self accountability and merit based culture, to a blame someone/something else, highly enabling culture 

the results are in.   and based on those results, we need to return, fast as we possibly can, to a 

personal responsibility; self accountability; merit based culture.  the return of values, work ethics, cleanliness, safety; respect; crime with consequences; integrity with reward. 

 ****

it worked!   mental mailbox; less full..

*****

i am aware 'researchabley' is not currently in the dictionary; but it should be.   where do i submit?

****

In Jesus name,   hallelujah & amen. 

 

 

posted by SANDRA HARRISON KAY @ 11:32 AM