Poor Carlos Bustamante. He has done it again. This time he wrote in his candidate’s statement for Ward 3 that he believes “a candidate should be judged on results pure and simple,” according to the O.C. Register.
So what exactly has Bustamante “achieved” in the past four years? Let’s take a look:
- He backed raising our property taxes at a time that Santa Ana is leading the County of Orange in foreclosures, when he endorsed Measure G this year. Measure G was so fraudulent that even progressive SAUSD Trustee John Palacio said that we did not need it.
- Bustamante voted to raise our water rates twice in the past year – we now pay more for our water than residents of most other Orange Count cities, even though we have a water table most of them are lacking. And the sad fact is that Santa Ana pays more then ten percent more on administration of its water budget than other similar sized water districts do. But of course Bustamante doesn’t question that.
- Bustamante has been silent as violent crime has skyrocketed in the past year. Doug Irving stated, in the O.C. Register that “While auto thefts, petty thefts and aggravated assaults are down sharply this year, for example, burglaries and rapes have increased. Fifteen people were killed in homicides between January and July; last year at this time, there had been only 11.”
- And Bustamante voted to boot popular City Commissioner Thomas Gordon off the EPIC/Gang Commission – even though EVERYONE else on the EPIC Commission wanted Gordon to stay on it.
- Bustamante did NOTHING to support quieting the trains that roar through Ward 3 all day and night. Even after the O.C.T.A. offered to pay for 80% of the cost of silencing the trains with Quiet Zones, Bustamante was silent. He let his constituents down.
- And Bustamante is supported by developer Robert Bisno, the guy who is trying to use eminent domain to wipe out the City of Baldwin Park’s downtown businesses. Bisno also wants to build a gigantic luxury condo tower in north Santa Ana, even though such towers are going bankrupt everywhere else. Does north Santa Ana need two thousand more cars on Main St.? If Bisno somehow were to fill up his tower, that is the number of cars he would unleash on the already crowded streets in Ward 3!
So Bustamante wants to be judged on results? I think we ought to judge him on his complete lack of results! And his infamous “waterbra” comments about Sheriff Sandra Hutchens speak for themselves.
The ultimate irony will be if former OUSD Trustee Steve Rocco siphons off enough votes from Bustamante to put me in office! Rocco and Busty certainly deserve each other…
The O.C. Register also included snippets of the candidate’s statements for the rest of the Santa Ana City Council and Mayoral candidates. But the Register did not make the complete statements available.
Here is my complete candidate’s statement – which you can read on my campaign website but you won’t find it anywhere else at the moment:
Arturo “Art” Pedroza, Teacher/Safety Director
The City of Santa Ana has so much to offer, but we are currently being held back by the plagues of gang violence and graffiti, crumbling streets, and insufficient parks and libraries. We lead Orange County in foreclosures, yet our water rates have increased twice in the past year.
I have witnessed our city’s problems firsthand both on the Housing & Redevelopment Commission and the Public Library Board, and currently as a member of the Community Emergency Response Team. I am a Safety Director for a local business and have been teaching at Cerritos College since 2003.
I promise to fight higher fees and taxes and reign in wasteful spending. We need to put the people first, not the bureaucrats, special interests and developers.
Do we really need more luxury townhomes that most of our residents can’t afford? What we need is a smarter development plan – including better housing for families and more family-oriented businesses.
It is time for a new day in the City of Santa Ana – it is time to put the people first at City Hall!
Contact me at (714) 606-7622 and get involved at www.artpedroza.com.
Visit www.orangejuiceblog.com for more news about my campaign and the City of Santa Ana.
Bustamante does not support a City government which is open to all residents. He refused to support televising all City Council meetings.
He sat mute in the face of ridiculous arguments such as, “we can’t afford it” – “our council is to young and nervous to speak on camera” – “we can’t figure out the technology.”
go to http://www.articles.latimes.com/2007/dec/24/local for the complete story.
I saw this too. What a boneheaded claim… and right on his ballot statement no less.
Most of the incumbents on the Council have taken similar positions on their ballot statements, probably at the behest of the people behind Miguel Pulido. I guess they want to stand by their record. Fine. I’m not going to look a gift horse in the mouth.
My only issue is with the other supposed ‘change agents’ running to replace this Council. Why aren’t they aligning themselves with your message and our online forum of centralized descent?
Are you listening Michele and Lisann? Michele needs to break away from Pulido and Lisann doesn’t even have a ballot statement… or designation!
SMS
Don’t forget about http://www.smartvoter.org — it’s sponsored by the League of Women Voters and strives to post information about candidates running for every national, state and local office. It’s free to candidates.
#2…I thought Michele had broken away from the mayor by running against him. Have I missed something? Are you saying she is still under his influence? Are you also suggesting she align herself with Pedroza after all the nasty things he has said about her on this blog? Or perhaps, you are simply putting words on paper without information or support or verification of the facts. It looks to me as though Michele is running on her own merits, her own thoughts, and her own vision. Are these in the best interests for the city and it’s residents? Not for my vote.
Glen,
Please don’t make the mistake of assigning what my readers have said about Martinez to me. That is a common mistake. What my readers write is their thoughts, not necessarily mine.
My recent post about what Team Pulido is saying about Martinez simply relayed the rumors that Team Pulido has been saying about her – and we did this with the express reason of debunking the rumors.
Where I have disagreed with Martinez specifically has been on policy issues, such as Measure G, the water rate increases, etc. But Pulido went along with all of that too.
I am not sure why you are supporting Pulido Glen when you have the option of voting for George Collins. Why go with Pulido when his awful record is painfully self-evident?
Even Martinez would be preferable to Pulido at this point. Change is change and a homeless guy would be better than Pulido at this point.
carlos has a record of fathering children and then denying it happened. according to birth certificate records, to be released soon, carlos fathered a daughter out of wedlock, more than a dozen years ago. now he claims that the child is not his. carlos has a problem with accepting responsibility for his own actions.
carlos also has been involved with several women, while married to his lovely young and faithful wife. instead of being home with her and his children, he can often be seen drinking, flirting and acting in a manner unbecoming a married man.
Glen –
You’ve had plenty of nasty things to say about Miguel, but you still step & fetch for him. So stop your whining.
6) Is evidence available for this information?
#5 Mr. Pedroza,
Look, if I knew that there are rumors which are not true I would not publish them. You have!… Not readers!
However, I do believe in higher moral principles!
Yeah, thats a good idea. Get the blog mired in verifying the truth of all comments.
Hows your blog working out by the way?
#5…I believe #9 has correctly responded to your concern that I have incorrectly assigned your thoughts to blog comments.
#7…you are correct. I have complained about Miguel and will continue to complain about many of his decisions. However, I do not “step and fetch” for him. Do I support him over Ms. Martinez, of course I do. I am not ready to turn over the mayor’s position to one who recently was involved in urban terrorism by selling drugs to children. Do I support him over Mr. Collins, yes. Why? Because I fear that Mr. Collins will take votes from Pulido and allow Ms. Martinez to win the election…just as he affected the race between Sal and Jennifer.
Where is the whine? Are we not allowed to share a comment/position/opinion without an unnamed response critizing one’s position? If you have strong convictions about a subject, why not sign your name? Or, perhaps you are the one who steps and fetches for Pulido.
Glen,
When I am uncertain about a story I call it a chisme. I realize you don’t know Spanish but even you must know that “chisme” means “rumor.”
We try to have fun here at the Orange Juice. Some people in politics take themselves too seriously and freak out over everything I write. They really need to get a grip.
I worked very well with you on the Redevelopment and Housing Commission. You have conveniently chosen to forget that, haven’t you?
You and Julie have been empowering Pulido and his cabal for over twenty years. How’s that working out? Last time I looked this city was exploding in crime and headed for bankruptcy. Isn’t it time to stop doing the same thing and expecting a different result?
Martinez may not be perfect but at least she is not Pulido. And George is a gentleman with great ideas. Either is a better choice than Pulido, who is perhaps the worst Mayor in Orange County.
Glen,
The drug selling incident happened in her early teens.
It is not a recent transgression as you say. Michele is 28years old. This happened about 15 years ago as a result of peer and economic pressures.
I understand you and Julie are part of Team Pulido and so your attacks continue that have no relevancy in the campaign.
Do you not beleive in people having a second chance in life, after overcoming childhood hurdles?
She is now a councilwoman, she will be receiving her B.A. this year and she will me applying for law school in 2009.
She is a success story of groups that assisted her in overcomming obtacles entrenched in some neighborhoods like the one she grew up in.
Why do you not congratulate her in becoming a positive citizen and a leader of Santa Ana instead of attacking her over a negative experience of her early teens?
It is OK for you to disagree with her politcs and her vision for Santa Ana. You avoid this . There is no interest in Team Pulido discussing these points.
The strategy is to attack her childhood? How unproductive and irelevant is this to the objective voter.
Do you support groups like the Boy Scouts,the Boy’s Club ,Kids works and others?
Their mission is to assist Youth to overcome obstacles, similar to those Michele overcame with their help.
If you support these groups and criticize their successes, are you not hypocritical?
What message are you and Team Pulido sending to this city’s Hispanic children living the experience Michele lived?
Is Team Pulido saying We believe in spending public and private monies to assist you getting out of a negative enviornment but when you do get out we will remind everyone of your past an then impede your right to participate in civic interests?
I forgot , you ARE on Team Pulido, you are just doing your job for the team.
By the way, coucilmembers and their supporters that do nothing to correct the gang violence in Santa Ana are the ones involved in urban terroism by ignoring the gang violence.
The councilmember involved in urban terrorism is not Michele. It is those that ignore the gang violance and their supporters.
Michele is actively involved in finding a solution to this city issue.
Art,
What is your plan for closing the City’s projected $28 million budget deficit for FY 2008/09?
While Busty’s comments sunk his gubernatorial appointments, his position that he should be judged on results pure and simple (that is to say his performance) leads me to ponder what other stones unturned lie out there for the electorate to consider?
When the LA Times published the article on his public comments on waterbras, I wrote here that Thomas Mauk should be held accountable for his performance as the chief supervisor, if you will, of Busty Bustamante. As Art has written, Busty Bustamante now states that he didnt make the public statements that the LA Times has attributed to him during the OC BoS meeting.
So the question is: was he at the meeting representing the city of Santa Ana (as an elected public official) or was he there as a county employee and senior departmental head reporting to Mr. Mauk?
Mr. Mauk has publicly stated that this is a personnel matter and that his office relies on internal investigations, and not on outside reports, of incidents involving Orange County employees. I would presume that means that he is under investigation for his public comments (and therefore his behavior), as a County employee, during a publicly scheduled meeting of the Orange County Board of Supervisors.
I suppose that means that Thomas Mauk is doing exactly what Busty has asked: to be judged on his performance.
After reviewing the recently adopted City of Santa Ana Code of Ethics, the question that I have is whether it applies to Busty. After all, he did vote for it. I would think that it would apply to any conduct exhibited by an elected or appointed official of the City of Santa Ana. The issue is in what capacity was his attendance at the OCBoS meeting where his comments were directed towards the Santa Ana Chief of Police. I would think that his actions would be as a result of his acting as an elected representative of the City Council of the City of Santa Ana.
So I asked myself: does Busty represent the City of Santa Ana, as an elected official, in any other capacity?
Lo and Behold: Busty is on the League of California Cities policy committee which oversees state-wide policy issues and discussions in the area of personnel and human relations.
So are we to assume that the City of Santa Ana and its residents, through its Mayor and City Council, condone and support Busty’s comments at the OCBoS meeting, as a duly elected member of the Santa Ana City Council?
I have yet to see any action by the Santa Ana Mayor or members of the City Council that would indicate otherwise. There has been no public in- council discussion regarding Busty’s comments and its reflection on the City of Santa Ana. There has been no official sanction against Busty for his public comments as a member of the Santa Ana city council.
So we can only conclude, then, that Busty’s comments are representative of the sentiments and beliefs of the residents of Ward 3 that he represents, the electorate of the other wards of the City, of the City Administration, the Police Department, of the Mayor, and, last but not least, his colleagues on the City Council.
The silence is deafening.
Given that Busty wants to be judged and re-elected on his performance, are the voters of Santa Ana, in re-electing him, saying that his public comments reflect their individual and collective thinking towards women living in or working for, the City of Santa Ana?……
I suppose that the voters of Santa Ana, especially the women voters of Santa Ana, will do what Busty has asked them to do: judge him on his performance.
Just thinking out loud……….
#12…You are correct, I do not speak a language other than English and although I have read the word chisme often, had no idean what you were saying.
You are correct again, in that elected officials place far to much importance on themselves and negelect those who voted them into office. However, having said that, how are readers to know you are just having fun at the old OJ and are not serious about what you write…even though your share a Spanish term here and there to qualify what you have written?
I work well with everyone on the Commission, including Louis, Debroa, Roman, Jennifer, Lynnette, Mario, Vince, Mike, Iliana, Nelida, Irma,Lisa, and yourself. I hadn’t forgotten we served together for a few months, I just didn’t realize I had to recognize that fact.
We have empowered Pulido for the past 20 years…if you count our two votes among the many thousands he has received, then the answer if yes.
Yes, George is a gentleman, and I have already shared my concerns with his name being on the ballot.
I don’t share your opinion that Miguel is the worst mayor in Orange County (did you forget to include the chisme?)…at least until you provide documented proof that the other 23-25 OC mayors are worse.
Regarding Michele, it is very simple for me. I do not want her to represent me in Washington DC, Sacramento, on various boards in Orange County like OCTA or AQMD.
Glenn Stroud:
You said “Regarding Michele, it is very simple for me. I do not want her to represent me in Washington DC, Sacramento, on various boards in Orange County like OCTA or AQMD.”
Following your logic, I suppose a voter, especially a female voter, reading your comment, could apply your thinking to Busty and conclude that, given his public comments, you are not supporting Busty for re-election.
Does that mean that you are supporting Steve “I am after the Mexican Mafia but I would be happy to sit for a sanity test” Rocco as the councilmember representing Ward 3?
Or are you voting for Art Pedroza?
Now remember, you have supported the Pulidista machine in the past. Before you answer, are you certain of your vote or are you an example of the Bradley effect in Santa Ana?
#18…not familiar with the “Bradley effect”. Also, have not “supported the Pulidista machine in the past”. Did not support Sandy or Tino in 04 and Vince several years ago.
#18…in the world of politics, one could conclude anything. If your “public comments” is a reference to the highly publicized water bra comment made by Carlos, it was an unfortunate comment made even more unfortunate by continual denials. An apology should have been made immediately and would have saved everyone a lot of time and ink. However, having said that, I do not feel that a foolish comment should be on the same level as that of selling drugs to children, no matter the positive turn around that individual may have made. Selling drugs to children is not acceptable nor is it to be forgiven.
No, I will not be voting for Pedroza.
I would like to see the mexican mafia destroyed, so Rocco (after a negative sanity test) could be a consideration.
#13… if my comments have no relevancy to the campaign for mayor, why have you taken the time to respond? I do not speak for the Pulido reelection committee. I have expressed my opinion on why I would not want Michele to represent me as mayor. If I am the only Santa Ana voter to express this concern, then apathy will prevail and Michele could become mayor.
Glen,
If you do not speak the Pulido Team strategy, why bother to be part of the committee?
I answered the relevancy question precisely to point out to you that your attack is not relevant. why do you find this odd?
Are you simply saying you are not the Team Pulido spokesperson?
Your committee does have a unifying agenda. If not why would it be called Pulido’s Campaign Team?
You have expressed your oppinion. Are you saying Team Pulido has no issue with Michele’s chilhood mistake? That it is just your issue? This is important to know. You know the answer, as you are part of the team. Let us know.
Out of curiosity. How do you know Michele sold drugs to children? The sales could of been to adults. You chooce to write sales to children conciously for your attack to have added punch. This places translucency to your agenda. You dont’ really care. If you did, you would be a strong activist in the fight to find a solution to the drug business in problem areas. I have not heard any activism from you on this issue.
Do you consider an adult irresponsible blunder no different than one occuring in the early teens? I don’t understand your differentiation or association with Bustamante’s adult and Michele’s childhood irresponsible blunders.
If you despise Michele’s past so much and you consider her a urban terrorist. Why do you and Julie call her so much asking for her help with city issues.
If you despise her past and will not forgive her for a mistake of her childhood, why have you and Julie been part of her softball tournament committee?
Why do you participate in civic activities with someone you describe as a urban terrorist?
Why have you not told her to her face that you consider her a urban terrorist during so many opportunities you had available when asking for her help with city issues or when working with her on her softball committee?
In this case voters not reacting to your attack is not due to apathy, rather it is about beign able to differentiate substance from hyprocricy.
It is shameful behavior on your part to be so two faced with another human.
#22…I have not attacked Michele, I have said why I do not support her for mayor. If you consider my concerns an attack, you have very thin skin.
You are correct in that I don’t know for certain that she sold drugs to children. The fact that she sold drugs is sufficient reason for me not to support her for mayor.
Are you saying the foolish comments made by an adult Carlos are the same as a teenage Michele selling drugs?
All gang members are urban terrorists.
You are incorrect…I have never called Michele and I don’t recall sending her an email. Julie has, but then she is not involved with this post.
Ah, the softball committee. Yes, I was involved the past two years. It raised money so the kids at the Boys & Girls Club could enjoy a summer of fun and exciting things to do. Michele had the idea. She did little work on the committee, at least the 08 tournament. Lynnette Verino ran the ship and did yeoman’s work to put it all together.
Why were you involved?
Again, you are mistaken…I have not asked her for help on a city issue. Julie has, but then she is an elected official and has said often she is available to help all residents of Santa Ana.
Why do you choose to attack me for expressing my opinion of Michele on why I do not support her for mayor? I do not want any person who has sold drugs (as a minor or an adult) to represent me and my city in Washington DC, Sacramento, OCTA, AQMD and any other board or commission that the mayor would be involved with. This is my position.
Glen,
You say your oppinion is not an attack on Michele. Why do you consider my oppinion of your comments an attack on you. One of your other contradictions.
Thanks for clearifying your concern of sales as generic.
I did not associate Bustamante with Michele. You did. There are no similarities. Why did you associate them?
You state “all gang members are urban terrorist”. Fine I am not going to argue this with you.
My point is that you called Michelle a urban terrorist. you are wrong to describe her in that manner. Review your own definition.
She is not a gang member and she never was a gang member. You should apologise.
I have enjoyed our discussion. I and others understand better who and what you are.
You have the right in this country to vote for anyone you want based on rational reasons or otherwise. This is a beautiful country for that reason.
Thanks for the discussion Art. I too have learned more about you. See you around town.
Mr. Stroud, I think you need to confirm your facts with Ms. Verino. Michele Martinez was very active in 2007 and 2008 with the Softball Fundraiser. Of course, Ms. Verino and Ms. Amezcua both took the lead with the committee because they were both CO-Chairs of the fundraiser. This does not mean that Councilwoman Martinez did not play a role. I received several calls for sponsorships and volunteer support for this event directly from her. She has been one of the major sponsors for the fundraiser, she was also very active in getting sponsorships, and volunteers for the event and lastly I saw her personally cleaning up and helping with the snack bar. You tell me what other council member or elected official is committed like councilwoman Michele Martinez? Lastly, Councilwoman Michele Martinez is fortunate to have supporters like Lynette Verino and others who played a major role in the success of this Softball Fundraiser on behalf of the children of Santa Ana.
FYI
I also saw Dr. Lomeli cooking with Mr. Thomas Gordon at the event as well.
Santa Ana Pride…
“ITS ALL ABOUT THE KIDS OF SANTA ANA”
If you are calling Councilwoman Michele Martinez an Urban Terrorist for her Childhood. I would like to know what Mayor Miguel Pulido corruption is called?
No #26
Believe it or not, it’s NOT all the about the kids of Santa Ana.
Who in the hell do you think you are. Dismissing the elderly, childless couples, empty nesters, young adults, etc, etc.
This City is made up all kinds of folks, children are just part of that makeup. The parents that chose to bring their children into this world need to take responsibility for them.
While it is perfectly acceptable for the City to develop and fund programs and opportunities for the youth of Santa Ana, it should never be expected to ignore or shortchange any other “members” of the City family.
#28,
Who said it is all about the youth and ignore everyone else?
#26 was addressing the comment on the softball committee.
Michele is involved with all the residents of the city. She is actively involved with the senior citizen groups for example.
You are paranoid rabid and make no sense.
Glen,
Why don’t you run for council? Mayor?