The not very objective reporters at the Voice of OC have been confronted with evidence that Santa Ana Mayor Miguel Pulido did ask the OCTA to continue his health benefits, way back in 2007, and at the same time he told them that he was opting out of Santa Ana’s health insurance program, and yet the Voice of OC continues to attack Pulido.
The Voice of OC questioned why Pulido, and Councilman Vince Sarmiento, have higher benefits than their counterparts on the Council. Could it be that they have more kids than their peers on the Council? Council Members Martinez and Alvarez have no kids. The other Council Members have, at most, two kids each, as far as I know.
Why doesn’t the Voice of OC reveal that Irvine Council Member Beth Krom makes more than any of her fellow Council Members and she makes more than Pulido and the other Santa Ana Council Members?
Click here to read the rest of this post.
Have you noticed that the Amezqua camp, knowing they have no chance at winning, keep trying to go Negative on Pulido while never coming up with even one positive reason to vote for their home boy? I’m tired of the mud slinging. I’m not the biggest fan of any of the Mayoral Candidates but Pulido will get my vote because he seems like a more positive person and he always has positive ideas about the future of the city.
***MEMO TO THE LIBOC STALKERS: I AM AT LUNCH USING MY OWN COMPUTER SO PLEASE LET MY EMPLOYER KNOW THAT WHEN YOU FORWARD THIS TO THEM. AND THANKS FOR YOUR LOYAL READERSHIP***
It is rather sad that the local “media” folks are buying into these faux scandals being concocted by Mayor Pulido’s opponents. They are doing their darndest to paint the Mayor and Council as an equal to those in the City of Bell. That is simply not the case and it is shameful for them to do this.
It appears that the campaigns of Amezcua and Helen Martinez are long on criticisms but very short on answers. They are willing to slime the incumbents but have not as of yet articulated any sort of message as to how they would fix things or operate any differently.
In the case of Amezcua he was allied with Mayor Pulido for most of the time he has been in office. Now that the Mayor has changed course and turned his back on the “usual suspects” and others that have long held this community hostage Amezcua turns on the Mayor. Why?
Obviously Amezcua was just fine with folks like the unhinged Glen Stroud, the bigoted Debbie McEwen or the convicted felon Tim Rush having free reign at city hall. I for one don’t want to see as take a step back to those days and welcome the new direction the Mayor is taking.
As usual you leave out that there is no document showing that Pulido ever told the city he wanted out, or that he originally said he had two plans in case one didn’t cover everything
the truth,
Pulido hasn’t directed the city to give him these benefits, since 2001. That was clearly stated in the post.
Ream’s staff clearly erred. This is a non-story. Time for Amezcua to actually tell us what the heck he intends to do as Mayor. It would be great to write about the issues instead of this B.S.
“Time for Amezcua to actually tell us what the heck he intends to do as Mayor.”
Only one problem with that Art, Amezqua has no plan. As you say, he was all for Mayor Pulido right up until the point that he decided he wanted to be Mayor and then surrounded himself with the same old crowd that is never happy unless they are telling the rest of the city how to live our lives. The funny thing is that Amezqua will get beat by at least two others in the race. Al is yesterdays news and should go back to running his lawyer ads on page 27 of Minihondas.
“I AM AT LUNCH USING MY OWN COMPUTER”…….. Hmmmmmm
Some people have 2, 3 or 4 lunches per day, especially if there is a physical evidence in support.
“Some people have 2, 3 or 4 lunches per day, especially if there is a physical evidence in support.”
Some people drink Vodka for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
I guess…
I should add that Ernest Miller Hemingway referred to the RUM as Liquid Sun — not Liquid Lunch.
But he was not vegetarian.
What happens to the cash?
I understand that when a benefit is not taken or rejected, a cash equivalent if given in its place.
How much “cash equivalent’s” are they getting and from whom?