Index for Save Simi Valley
More Lack of Common Sense
I would strongly suggest that you listen to the VSV Canditate Chat - The
The direct link to download the mp3 files is:
There are some issues talked about which are quite interesting and show,
what appears to me, to be a lack of common sense.
The first issue is appointments.
Both candidates were asked about this issue.
Foster said that she needs to do more research to determine where she stands on
she got appointed and that is clearly how she got re-elected.
I am confused as why she would not have an opinion on the matter.
Does she have to ask someone else?
Does she not want to admit that she is for the appointments?
Becerra said that he did not see any reason to have a special election.
I can tell him a reason for having a special election,
which is to allow the PEOPLE TO VOTE on who is running THEIR city.
it is expensive,
but if they cut the budget of the Shop Simi Valley First in half,
then they would have the money.
I am curious as to where all that money, $100k, is going to for the Shop
It is clear that the incumbents want Sojka to be elected mayor and Foster
and Becerra re-elected so that they,
can decide who the next person will be on the Council.
What do you think that the odds are that the person that
they want to appoint is not one who bothered to try to get elected by
Who has not participated in the election process to let people know where
they stand on the issues?
Do you think that this is the American way?
My personal opinion on appointments is that appointments can be a short term
but ONLY if it is done in a fair manner.
What I mean by that is that those on the City Council do not determine who is
going to be appointed.
I have heard that it has already been talked about, and perhaps decided,
on who to appoint if Sojka gets elected as the Mayor.
This is just plain wrong.
The Neighborhood Councils and a Town Hall meeting would be a good idea to
since the person would be appointed and incumbents have an clear advantage on
the person should also be prevented from having their name on the ballot the
If the people really want them to continue,
then they can write the person's name on the ballot.
The main thing is to prevent the current City Council from stacking the deck
and getting someone in that they want,
instead of what the public wants.
Council Compensation was another interesting topic and one in which it seems
that actions (or lack thereof) speak louder than words.
Becerra said that if the people did not want them to have full-time benefits
for a part-time job (not his actual words) that they would get rid of the
The real problem with this is that how are the people going to tell the
Council their feelings?
The Council could put this on the ballot so that people could let their
feelings be know.
They could also put this on the Council Agenda,
which is not as good since it is more limited in the feedback.
But so far I have not seen a thing being done to make it easy for the Council
to find out what people think.
I suspect that this because if they do nothing,
then the Council can say that people have not said that they want the benefits
this is not ethical nor honest.
Since they know it is an issue,
they should have an open and fair hearing into the matter and let the public
speak their minds about it.
The funny thing to me is that people say that if the benefits were reduced,
then the quality of the people running would be reduced.
the people on the Council are saying that they are not doing it for the money.
Are they doing it for the benefits?
Based on some of the statements,
such as the reasons for banning the food vendors,
it is clear that they are not doing what is in the best interest of the
Index for Save Simi Valley
If you want to submit your own article,
please read the
and send email