Should a convicted felon be eligible to serve as mayor of Gilroy or on the City Council?

• Absolutely NO! Furthermore, failure to disclose such information should
be grounds for immediate removal from office (especially if it involves
an egregious crime such as meth dealing). Such an act is very character
revealing. At the very minimum, all candidates should be required to
disclose all convictions (misdemeanor or felony). To not do so is to
defraud the citizens of Gilroy! • Yes, they should be able to serve. While full personal disclosure should be required, rules should not determine if someone with criminal history should run or not. Let the voters decide. • No, neither. • No. Part of the consequences of our behavior is how it effects our future. As much as I believe in turning a new leaf in life, in this situation I believe the answer is no. • As long as he or she has paid their debt to society, hasn’t hurt anyone other than themselves nor has re-offended, yes. • Yes. I support returning full citizenship, including the right to vote and ending any other restrictions placed on felons who have served their time. Their debt to society ought not to be lifelong. With our punitive, vengeful criminal laws and burgeoning prison population, we have disenfranchised a large and growing number of people. I favor more programs for re-integrating those leaving prison and helping them turn around their lives and become productive, contributing members of society. • No. Amend the City Charter to forbid it. At the very least, make every candidate answer the question when filing for election so the voters know before the election what’s going on and who they are voting for or against. • Yes, everyone deserves a second chance, but they need to be honest and forthcoming regarding their past indiscretions. • Yes. If our laws don’t prohibit this. It should be up to the voters to decide if a person has truly hurt society. If a person has taken the punishment and moved on, let the voters decide.

Leave your comments