You Know What's Not Fun?

Pneumonia. Especially in June.

My apologies for being away, dear readers. I will be back this week (though maybe not tomorrow) with your regular dose of thinly veiled hostility and revelations of hypocrisy.

In the mean time, cough, cough.

How To Vote Less

Tomorrow at the MLK Library there will be a discussion of a proposed change to how we elect the Council and Mayor:  instant runoff voting.

Instant runoff voting (IRV) is a system intended to prevent the need for runoff elections by having them occur, well, instantly.  On Election Day, a voter chooses not only the candidate they select for the position, but who their number two choice is.  And (in some systems) their third, fourth, fifth and Andy Diaz.  Once the votes are in, every voter's first choice is counted.  If no candidate has 50% of the vote, the lowest vote-getter is eliminated - and everyone who voted for that candidate as their first choice now has their number two choice move up to the top slot, and the votes are counted again.  And so on, until someone creeps past 50%.

My first thought was to determine how this might have impacted past elections - but it's impossible to tell.  After all, all of the primaries would now be eliminated, and the election would occur entirely on the day of a general election.  Which, of course, means that the electorate is totally different.  For example, I thought Nancy Pyle was a perfect example of a candidate that wouldn't be on the Council if IRV was in place.  But her victory was, in large part, due to increased Democratic turn-out in the 2004 general election, which would have prevented Rich de la Rosa from having the huge lead he had coming out of the primary.

One thing is for certain:  a less conservative electorate would be deciding our elected leaders should IRV be in place.  To which I am amenable.  

This change is not likely to happen.  First of all, the powers that be are likely to not support the proposal, in part for the very reason I cite in the preceding example.  Second, the decision will need to move through the City's Elections Commission - in whom I have recently lost faith.

If you have time tomorrow at noon, may be worth joining Councilmembers Kalra and Liccardo as well as other advocates of the system for the discussion at the library.  Or check out InstantRunoff.com, which can answer additional questions.

A final word of warning - this system was recently put into place by San Francisco.  Don't let that unfortunate fact bias you against what could be an interesting concept.

Pickles' Dopey Survey

Let us consider, for a moment, Signore Oliverio's enthusiastic attempt to convey legitimacy on his slash-and-burn mentality. 

Last week, Il Douche (pronounced with a hard e) proffered for his willing audience a survey offering up any and all city services, down to individual positions, for referendum.  The results (viewable here) were unsurprising given his target audience: kill 'em all and let Reed sort 'em out.

But are they representative?  Savvy?  Useful?  No.  No.  And, big surprise, no. Let's dive in.

The survey, which was linked on the Metro's blog at San Jose Inside and made available to District 6 residents, reflects that constituency remarkably.  Interestingly,  appeals to his constituents resulted in far more response, with 85% of respondents hailing from the District.

The homogeneity doesn't end there. Respondents are overwhelmingly aged 41-65 (65%), majority male (54%) and 43% have lived in San Jose over 30 years.  43%!  Hardly representative of your average San Josean.  Compare these data to the census. 

(This is the point at which it is proper to express skepticism about the uniqueness of all of the responses and the surprising similarity to the poll's sponsor. Go ahead. I'll wait.)

The results reflect that same consistency, with nearly every offered service or position receiving a majority of votes in favor of cuts. The exceptions: senior centers, lifeguards (barely), police and fire. Big shock. 

Amusingly, respondents are massive nose-cutter-offers, to coin an awkward appellation.  They want to save the police mounted unit, but cut the police performance analysis group.  Put cops at the top of the must protect list, and code enforcement at the bottom. They're keen on slicing $100,000 for projects they don't understand, and preserving millions for those with emotional appeal.

Most worth reading from this exercise in echo chamber development: the free-form comments at the very bottom. Let me summarize them by quoting the first one in its entirety:

Thank you for not sugar coating the questions or trying to be politically correct. Bulldoze old city hall and please vote no against adding fluoride to our water.

Yike.

Why Oliverio did this is obvious. He wants to position himself as the cost-cuttinest, worker-hatinest guy east of the Guadalupe.  He will, rest assured, start citing these survey results from the dias, as a straw man supporting his arguments. 

Well, Olives, a survey I did shows that 82% of residents think you should resign, with numbers spiking among male bloggers in District 3.  I hope you'll take these numbers to heart.   

Next Week's Agenda

An aside: what do you think Councilmembers do during the summer? Is it like schoolkids? Do they go to camp? I can picture Pete Constant, a too-small Camp Pocotonka t-shirt stretched above his belly button, his chin smeared with popsicle juice that's already left purple stains above the camp logo. Liccardo, trying to get Oliverio to play beach volleyball with him close to the girls' side, but Oliverio refuses put down his Star Trek novel. Besides, as he reminds everyone, his mom says he can't take off his t-shirt on the beach because he burns easily. And for some reason I picture Kalra and Herrera stealing small swigs of JD out behind the mess hall, both trying not to cough and passing a cigarette back and forth.

Reed, of course, is lying on his back in a canoe (on land) wearing a fishing hat and homemade jean shorts, baked out of his skull and listening to Deep Purple.

Anyhow. Go read the Council agenda. It ain't summer yet.

Ceremonial Items

Current ceremonial items ranking
since August 5, 2008
Reed, 29.8
Chu, 10.8
Pyle, 10.6
Liccardo, 9.64
Campos, 9.47
Constant, 8.36
Chirco, 7.11
Nguyen, 6.86
Kalra, 3.93
Oliverio, 3.36
Herrera, 0.52

We've got four more Council meetings, and playoff fever is in the air.

At the top of the ceremonial items rankings (which, for those just joining us, counts the number of times Councilmembers have bestowed weightless accolades this Council session) we have a new leader: Kansen Chu. For the purposes of entertainment, you'll remember, we exclude Reed from contention because a) he's way, way ahead and b) he has to sign on to any old crap his staff puts in front of him.

Not only has Chu moved into the top slot, he's done so by just about the slimmest of margins. The issue, so worthy of recognition, that vaulted him over long-time front-runner Nancy Pyle? Recognition of Filipino Independence Day, next Friday. Lumpias for all!

Campos, who for a long time was in second, has seen her lead slip of late, so she launched a counter-attack commending student-athletes, which is great because high school athletes deserve as much attention as they can get.

But if she thought that one little commendation would be enough to regain third, she doesn't know Sam Liccardo. With a commendation to the San Jose Women's Club's centennial, Sam both stays in third and checks another box on his 'Diverse Groups to Recognize' checklist.

With only a handful of weeks left, almost half the Council is within shooting distance of the top spot. I think an award is in order for the winner. Ideas?

Consent
Some interesting items on consent this week. For example, a wildfire protection plan for the East Foothils. This seems like a good thing to have in place. Anyone from Oakland agree?

Also, the City is about to ink a deal pulling in about $38,000 a month in rent for space in this lovely building on N. Fourth, at $1.85 a square foot. (No offense, Smith Family Trust, but I think you're getting hustled.)

And we'd be remiss if we didn't note the $1.5 million project to reseal 88 miles of city roads. Wondering if your street is on the block to be redone? Check the full list, starting on page 6 of this PDF.

The Good Stuff
A special edition of 'The Good Stuff' this week, because there are really only two things on the agenda: Union contract changes and North San Jose development. And, so:

Union contract changes
A hypothetical. Your boss comes to you, sits you down, and shows you the company budget. She* says to you, "Jack,** we need you to give up 10% of your salary, because we're in deep ca-ca." When you ask if every other alternative has been exhausted, your boss replies, "Sorry, I didn't catch that. Anyway, how about that 10%?"

To their credit, city workers are willing to say yes to a similar question. Am I convinced that a moment necessitating such action has been reached? I am not. Do they know more than I do? Let's assume.

But in the hypothetical above, what would you say?

North San Jose development
The City, as you may know, is hoping to adjust what is allowed in North San Jose to accommodate far more hotel space and an increase in housing. Read all about it here.

You know what's missing from this proposal? The Cisco logo. Maybe they thought that was too much.

I must say though: I support this effort so much it makes my heart hurt. I want this to pass 11-0 and then for there to be fireworks and an ice cream festival afterward. Why?

Because this proposal gives Tom McEnery conniptions. And that makes it, according to the laws of karma, a good thing.

McEnery hates it, you see, because it indicates that the City isn't doing everything in its power to pen consumers into San Pedro Square, surrounded by ATMs and electric fences topped with razor wire. The idea that San Jose would do anything to suggest that people might want to spend money outside of areas he owns, or maybe stay in a hotel that's actually close to the place where they have meetings, gives him seizures.

In a piece in the ever-dopey Metro, McEnery rants and raves and leaves a veneer of dried spittle all over his desk made from elephant tusks and human skin. The Metro, of course, obliges its business partner by not mentioning McEnery's obvious conflict on the issue.

So I say to you Council: go forth. Encourage everyone possible to spend money anywhere that McEnery is cut out of the action. In so doing, you will truly be doing the work of the Lord. (Genesis 16:12)


See you Monday, folks.

* See how PC I am?
** That freak you out, Jack?

Welcome To Late 1944

Great news, Mercury News fans! The paper just appointed a new Managing Editor, who happens to be the guy who was the acting Managing Editor, a position he has held since November. In November, the second Managing Editor in as many days years departed the paper, presumably in a life boat.

There is certainly a feeling that Bert Robinson, he of the enviable new position, will be a full-time deck chair rearranger. But I think there's a better analogy than the over-used Titanic one. The Mercury News is experiencing the same death rattle as the Third Reich.

Think about it. Frequent high-level turnover. An increasingly demoralized rank and file. Defeat after defeat after defeat. A general awareness, besides within the organization itself, that the end is nigh. A wild-eyed dictator at the helm, oblivious to reality.

Earlier this week, the employees of the paper voted to slash their own salaries by almost 10% over the next 24 months. I've also heard management is recruiting teens and the elderly for a march to Leningrad.

It must be heart-breaking for those who believe strongly in the cause to see the future looking so grim. And, unlike in my overblown World War Two reference, the cause here really is just: ensuring an informed populace. That this cause has been so twisted by the leadership of the organization only serves to reinforce my analogy.

Not that the leadership has been doing a good job with their cause: maintaining a profit margin. A tipster raised a point to this end following my Tuesday post bashing the Merc for being scooped on the Campos announcement. Namely, that even if the Merc knew about Campos last week, they had no vehicle, beyond Internal Affairs on Sunday, to get the word out. Speculation is still not printed as news, which is a good thing. But it vastly reduces the ability of the paper to stay current and lead on local issues.

Why hasn't this been rectified? The Merc has far more resources than have I, a lonely 18 year-old sitting in my parents' basement, solitary lightbulb flickering wanly over my dirt-encrusted Toshiba laptop.* Yet it's still easier for me to get out information to a wide audience than it is for them? And to get scoops on news, when this isn't even my full-time job? How can they have missed the boat so badly?

Because, like the Nazis, the Mercury News refused to acknowledge legitimate threats to its forward progress. It fell victim to a hubris that would stagger Odysseus. And now, as always, it's their workers who are taking the hardest hit.

Oh, and quality reporting. But then, that's not news.


* Dramatization. It's a Dell.

The Phony YouTube Controversy

CBS 5 bit.

San Jose Council Responds To Officers' Video.

A controversial video aimed at a community activist is raising some eyebrows at San Jose's City Hall....

The Video shows Raj Jayadev, a vocal critic of the San Jose Police Department, speaking at a City Council meeting. However, there are pop-up messages in the video, mocking the speaker for his delivery and use of English.

Should the Police Officers' Association have paid a public relations firm to produce the video?

Mission accomplished, POA. Attention acquired.

In fact, this whole phony issue is an attention whore's dream - a TV station eager to gin up controversy, the Police Officers' Association looking to bully opposition, and, of course, Jayadev, whose shabby apartment has walls lined with mirror after mirror.

Let's start with the video itself.



Yep. That's it. Did it blow your mind?

Frankly, I'm not entirely sure what the POA was hoping to achieve, besides to ding Jayadev. The public doesn't know him from Adam, much less care about his frequent whines enabled by the Metro. The video itself isn't funny or clever, and your guess about the target audience is as good as mine. And insinuating that Jayadev's trying to start a riot (or whatever they're insinuating) is worthy of eye rolls to the point of dizziness.

I mean, Jayadev can't even get people to read his extremely poorly produced De-Bug - how's he going to get people to take to the streets with pitchforks? Now, I am a very liberal guy (Guns, boo. Gays, yay.) but "activists" like Jayadev make me want to vote Cheney. Jayadev reflexively opposes the police because that's how he earns his living. He tries to be at the front of whatever the issue of the moment for the wacky fringe happens to be, acting as a human megaphone for whoever can turn his head. His partnership with the Metro is indicative: he's willing to sell out his purported independence for a slightly larger audience. Making fun of his extremism? Good. Doing it like this? Perplexing.

The video smacks of the strong seeking to oppress the weak, which, given the POA's PR problems, is about the last thing they should be going for. It's not uncommon; every time I write anything even remotely critical of the cops, the first response is messages threatening me. But in a moment when the Council is nearly unanimously forcing them to change tactics, they could and should have simply appropriated Jayadev's desire for attention by working with him. Not like he will have (or ever has had) any real impact.

I have a theory on what happened here. The POA has a consultant who is now and always has been an attention whore: Jude Barry. Barry, not the most clever guy in the world, just heard about this new YOUTUBES and double-clicked on Windows Movie Maker to grab some "viral" attention from the "'Net". I hear he originally asked Sandra Bullock to cameo, but she didn't return his calls. So on he pressed, billing the POA for $5,000 a conversation, and converting the POA's anger into a poorly thought-out video clip.

In a happy circumstance for all of us, the POA promises, in their YouTube description, that this is the first of many. Lucky us. And, in fact, San Jose Revealed has acquired a preview still from their next video.



Can't we all just get along?

Boringest Week Ever

There you go. I've said it, which makes it the case.

For the the first time, I didn't post yesterday because there was nothing to talk about. Nora Campos running for Assembly? No kidding - covered that last week. The Council agenda? Did that, too.

I thought briefly about noting the continuing decline of the Mercury News. I mean, come on - 40% of yesterday's front page being occupied by an opinion piece by Scott Herhold, with accompanying massive photo? A remarkable abdication of the concept of "news", even by standards at Ridder Drive.

Worth noting, by the way, how much Herhold's workload has grown in recent months, dipping a toe into IA, more columns and pieces, and now this front pager. If, during cutbacks, this is who they keep, I'd hate to see who's already walked out the door. Now, mind you, I'm familiar with having limited writing resources and then having to make do with what you've got (ahem) - but I think their budget, even now, is a bit more robust than mine.

Speaking of IA, a clever bit of language in their big "reveal" of Campos' Assembly bid, writing:

When Monday's big announcement comes, remember you already heard it here

That formulation usually goes something like, "you heard it here first," as you may be familiar. At least they're honest enough to admit people didn't hear it from them first - and to admit that the Merc and this site share the exact same readership. To a person.

Oh, one last thought on this point. I mentioned the Merc's budget, which certainly isn't what it was a few years ago. But is it really so bad that a tipster needed to receive this in his Inbox?

Note that I said "his" - the Merc is in such dire straits that they're sending out awful ads to the wrong demographic.

Also, I'm not sure that lady in the back wants to stand so close.

I don't usually do this, but desperate times, and all that. So I offer the Merc a funding suggestion. Create a sliding scale of cost for letters submitted to the editor. Lowest price or free for topical responses by experts or the impacted to pieces that ran previously. Mid-range for items unrelated to the paper but of general public interest. $45,000 a pop for people spouting idiotic political rhetoric they're adapting from O'Reilly, Hannity, Olberman or Maddow. While it will only slightly impact the number of submissions of the latter, each one will keep the Merc operational for another 15 minutes. (By my estimates.)

Anyway, as I said, I thought about going after the Merc, but decided not to. Seemed like low-hanging fruit, really. Then, when I got up today and saw what we had on tap, I lazily wandered to the orchard and started picking. This would be like the Metro being so lazy as to put an article about porn on their front page.

Oh. Wait.