52 responses to “Pointed Critique of Peceimer”

1. fred

   November 1, 2013

   Letter: Ortiz for the open seat
   November 01, 2013, 05:00 AM Letter
   Editor,
   I agree with those who say that Ann Keighran and Michael Brownrigg deserve re-election. As a six year member of the Burlingame City Council, I believe it to be the best council I have seen in my 35 years in Burlingame. I am also supporting Ricardo Ortiz, whom I believe to be the best candidate for the open seat. Ricardo brings a unique combination of business know-how, leadership and community service. His campaign has risen above the false and misleading statements of others while offering sound advice and problem solving ideas. During this election, I have been surprised to hear statements made out of pure ignorance, manipulation of facts and willful disregard for the truth. Some think you win an election by joining community organizations just prior to the election. Some argue, that If you don’t agree with them, you are simply not listening. They don’t understand that listening sometimes ends in not agreeing. As a councilmember, you must listen to all. Because Ortiz is a banker he knows business and finance. As a Rotarian, he lives by its creed “service above self.” Ortiz has impressed me as an avid supporter and volunteer for BCE, AYSO and other community related organizations for many years. Ortiz has shown me that he indeed “listens.” Please vote for the best open seat candidate, Ricardo Ortiz.
   Jerry Deal
   Burlingame

2. Mark

   November 1, 2013

   Mr. Kent, I’ll give you a pass as you are probably knocking on a lot of doors these days and probably don’t have the BV website as your homepage every time you open your browser, but if you paid attention to my posts, I have nothing but contempt for the conflicts of interests that are so rampant in the city council and planning commission. If I were a lot younger, I’d probably study to be an architect and get on the planning commission and watch the captive $$$ roll into my bank account while I pretend to care about the city and critique competitor architects designs. What a nice living–and probably an even better one if one gets elected to city council as an architect. Oh, and when you retire from the planning commission, you can be a consultant for the city’s environmental reports since you were once part of the city government.
   Alas I digress– my initial point is that I have no objections to Mr. Kent’s pointing out of conflicts, but how he has chosen to do it in an antagonistic and accusatory fashion on the BV, but we’ll see in a couple of days whether that methodology is or isn’t successful.
   And Holyroller, what is the deal? you flip-flop more than John Kerry in the 2004 elections. You are objecting to campaign information being disclosed when you earlier asked Mr. Kent how much he makes and how much he pays for his mortgage and then asked to see the $$$ contribution documents since you couldn’t find it on the city website? Seems like the campaign contributions and disclosure website would be perfect to placate your initial nosiness but now you take this ‘Holy-er than thou’ attitude that there is too much privacy invasion and you give Joe grief for posting something that you basically asked for?? Don’t understand.
   Now by posting this under a Peceimer thread, I just gave that guy more publicity. I vote to close this thread, now that I’ve had the last word!!– I’m joking of course.