|
The questions were prepared by the League of Women Voters of San Jose/Santa Clara in partnership with the San Jose Mercury News and asked of all candidates for this office.
See below for questions on
Growth,
Mayor vs. Manager,
Public Safety,
City Finances
Click on a name for candidate information. See also more information about this contest.
|
1. There are proposals to add 30,000 houses and more office space in North San Jose, thousands more homes in Evergreen and to build a new community in the Coyote Valley. There has been no in-depth study of how these plans will affect one another or services throughout the city. Should San Jose complete a thorough, public review of its general plan for growth before approving any more major development plans? Silicon Valley needs more housing, but San Jose needs more jobs to strengthen its tax base. How would you balance those conflicting pressures?
|
Answer from Jim Foran:
Yes, San Jose should complete a thorough, public review of its general plan before approving any of these developments. Other cities need to do their part to provided housing for their workers. San Jose needs more jobs for its residents. We should provide more incentives for job creating businesses and fewer for housing. We must also address the long term structural deficit caused by excessive use of Redevelopment Areas.
Answer from Kansen Chu:
Yes. San Jose should complete a thorough, public review of its general plan for growth before approving any more major development plans.
North San Jose Vision 2030 is going to be front and center on the minds of the residents and business community of District 4. We have a great opportunity to plan a model community including everything from infrastructure to transportation to where to put parks and schools. If executed properly, with full community input, Vision 2030 will benefit San Jose and District Four by providing jobs, housing, and community benefits that will move our city forward.
However, we cannot overlook the quality of life issues facing the new development and the surrounding communities. I will work to manage the growth of North San Jose to balance jobs, housing, and the impact of traffic and school districts.
|
2. San Jose has a council/manager form of government. Over the past few years the balance of power has shifted toward the mayor and there are some elected officials who support this stronger role for the mayor. Should San Jose move to a strong-mayor form of government or have a strong professional administrator? What kind of city manager will you look for?
|
Answer from Jim Foran:
We should have a strong City Manager who is a professional of the highest stature with a reputation for being responsive to the needs of the city's residents.
Answer from Kansen Chu:
The role of the council and Mayor is to set policy. The City Manager implements that policy, and his or her role in city government is no less important. We need a strong individual in the City Manager's position to make sure the work gets done in the best, most efficient way possible and in a way that is responsive to and respectful of the needs of the people of San Jose.
|
3. Safety often includes services such as homework centers and code enforcement for neighborhoods, but the city budget now being prepared could cut much needed services. If there is no other source of funds to maintain safety-related centers and gang prevention, would you consider reducing the funds going to support the police and fire departments? Can the growing costs of police and for pensions be covered without depleting funds for other community service in the future?
|
Answer from Jacqueline Bates:
Public Safety is a necessity, and as a Council Member I will do do my best not to reduce funding for the police and fire departparts; but rather look for other funding to support our neighborhood services and safety.
Answer from Jim Foran:
We have a $40 million structural deficit caused by the manner in which we have used Redevelopment Areas. This is particularly true with Redeveloment Areas which were previously undevelopped, vacant land with no substantial tax base. Until we remedy that situation, through legislative action if necessary, we will not be able to fully fund any of our basic services. It is not a matter of pitting one necessary sevice against another. Too much property tax revenue is locked up funding redevelopment.
Answer from Kansen Chu:
Public safety must remain a top priority. I also know we need to pay attention to the basics. Potholes, crossing guards, and after school programs are at the top of the list. The city budget needs to be looked at as a whole, and not simply as a value judgment of one service over another. The services singled out in this question are all important. The first thing we should look at is what we can do differently. Are there programs we can streamline? Is there duplication between departments that can be eliminated? At some point, you may have to resolve yourself to make painful cuts to important programs and services. However, I would be very reluctant to cut funding for police and fire departments.
The staggering cost of pensions for public employees, including police and fire, is a very serious issue that we need to address. I would support proactive, comprehensive measures to address this looming issue before it depletes funds for essential services.
|
4. Money to maintain and operate the city’s public facilities such as parks and libraries is in shorter and shorter supply. So while new or expanded community centers have been proposed previously, the city is looking at closing or privatizing up to 30 existing centers it cannot afford to operate. Should the city re-examine its plans to add parks and other public facilities? Are there services the city could cut to find money for these highly valued ones?
|
Answer from Kansen Chu:
The city should explore cost sharing and efficiency methods.
Partnering with nonprofits is an important way to make sure our community continues to receive valuable services from community centers right in their neighborhoods. This can also help promote cost sharing.
The city should also consider partnerships with school districts to maintain and operate our parks and recreation services. For new parks, the city should ask the developers to maintain new parks for at least 5 or 10 years.
We need to look at the budget as a whole, and the services that we can and should provide to our residents to preserve and enhance our quality of life. Any family knows you must live within your means. As a city, we must do the same.
Answer from Jim Foran:
Our City needs more public facilities, not less. We do need to be efficient in service deliery and take advantage of private industry and nonprofit oeganizational services where appropriate. In exchange for restoring funding departments should be tasked to achieve measurable efficiency gains as part of a continuous improvement program.
Answer from Jacqueline Bates:
The city should re-examine its plans to add parks and other public facilities. As a Council Representative, I will examine all of the services, and evaluate their usage, and determine if the service can be cut to part-time or cut for non-usage.
Responses to questions asked of each candidate
are reproduced as submitted to the League.
Candidates' responses are not edited or corrected by the League.
The order of the candidates is random and changes daily. Candidates who did not respond are not listed on this page.
| 
League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
