Editor,
I want to address the write-in candidate opposing Supervisor Corzo. Yes, the one with the nickname. I disagree with both his methods and positions. He was a leading opponent of the apartment project at 4 W. Santa Inez Ave. in San Mateo, a fully compliant development that the City Council was warned state law required it to approve. The resulting denial led to litigation that cost San Mateo taxpayers upwards of $1 million. Don’t believe me? Ask the city for the records.
He is also a leading opponent of the proposed Horizon Recovery facility at 101 N. El Camino Real. Similar treatment programs have operated successfully in San Mateo for decades without becoming the dangerous or criminal environments opponents portray. Most of us know someone who has needed treatment, needing help does not make someone a criminal. Supervisor Corzo supports this facility because it is the right thing to do for the people of San Mateo County. Vote for Noelia Corzo for supervisor District 2.
Rick Bonilla
San Mateo
The letter writer is a former councilmember and mayor of San Mateo.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(4) comments
There are many unfortunate things in public life. One of the saddest is watching a former politician attempt to rewrite history to avoid accountability for decisions that occurred under his own watch. Sad indeed.
The facts are straightforward. At the time of the 4 W. Santa Inez controversy, Bonilla was Mayor.
Residents did what residents are supposed to do in a democracy: they spoke up, organized, and asked questions about a project affecting their neighborhood and quality of life.
The final decisions, however, were made by elected officials led by then-Mayor Bonilla.
If those decisions ultimately resulted in litigation and significant taxpayer expense, responsibility rests with Bonilla and those he led in public office—not with residents who exercised their right to participate in the public process.
Attempting to shift blame years later may be politically convenient, but it does not change the historical record.
As for the proposed Horizon facility, Bonilla and his gang of Amourence Lee, Seema Patel, and Jon Ebneter are all misguided and way off track. No one is arguing that individuals struggling with substance abuse do not deserve treatment. They absolutely do.
The questions residents have raised concern transparency, location, scale, cost, alternative site evaluations, and whether taxpayers have been provided sufficient information to determine whether this is the right project, in the right location, at the right cost.
Those are reasonable questions. They remain reasonable no matter how often supporters attempt to dismiss them.
Public debate should be grounded in facts, accountability, and transparency; not selective memory.
Blaming residents for participating in the democratic process is not leadership.
Spinning a story to rewrite history is not accountability. Sad indeed.
Taso - can you explain again why your name is not printed on the ballot? Since there is only one name, and yours is not well known beyond San Mateo, Corzo will likely win by default. Very unfortunate.
Dirk, friends and supporters begged Taso to run after Corzo went another step too far by deciding where a drunk tank should go in San Mateo with essentially zero community input. The one meeting she held earlier this year, she was rude, dismissive, and shut down questions from residents. By the time this situation completely blew up, it was too late to file. But Taso could get his name on the ballot via write-in, so here we are. There are a couple of other LTEs that give some good info on Corzo’s record, most notably Michael Weinhauer’s on Friday. Many times, people leave the dot unfilled on a candidate that is running unopposed. So while it would have been better to have Taso’s name printed on the ballot, his name has gotten out beyond San Mateo, and I believe (because I’m very optimistic!) that he has a real shot of winning on Tuesday. Write in Taso!
No thanks, Mr. Bonilla. Based on your past LTEs and comments rehashing Dem talking points, fake news and lies, and advocacy of America Last policies, if you’re “for” a candidate, my first inclination is to run in the opposite direction. Vote for anyone but a Dem. If Dems are the only candidates, vote for the candidate who would do the least amount of harm.
If a recovery facility is needed, locate the facility in an area where people want it. It’s the right thing to do as opposed to foisting something unwanted on residents. Think Corpus. Didn’t Corzo endorse Corpus? I’d recommend you mosey over and read Vikash Bhagwandin’s LTE (https://www.smdailyjournal.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/write-in-taso/article_19652753-4065-4fa7-a9b2-f537fb186de0.html). You’ll be convinced to vote for anyone but Corzo.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.