Tag: dion bracco
Longtime Gilroy resident and current councilmember Marie Blankley joined the city’s mayoral race on June 19. The seat is...
GILROY—Two former employees of a towing company owned and operated by Gilroy Councilman Dion Bracco have lawyered up and are suing him for nearly $700,000 in overtime they allege they were never paid. Rafael Torres and Angel Fletes, who worked for Bracco’s Towing and Transport for six and seven years, respectively, as tow truck drivers, also allege other labor law violations in the lawsuit filed Tuesday in Santa Clara County Superior Court.
The city council has carved out a vision for Gilroy’s next 15 years and, after its annual two-day strategic planning session, there’s a blueprint that outlines the steps needed to establish Gilroy as one of the most desirable destinations in the country.
Calling it the “best turnout they've seen in years,” City Council members were delighted with the sheer number of applicants who showed up eager to serve on City committees during the regular meeting Monday.
In the midst of all the shoulder patting, thanking, well-wishing and congratulating that transpired at the City Council chambers Dec. 7 when the public officially welcomed Don Gage as their new mayor, retiring Councilman Bob Dillon’s parting words put it best.
The Gilroy Arts Alliance is asking the City for more than $800,000 for upgrades to their interim building on Monterey Street, a request that City Council decided they need to study more before making any decisions.
When it comes to electing public officials, bankruptcies matter.
• Yes. While bankruptcy is many times unavoidable, it still likely reflects some fiscal irresponsibility in getting there. It certainly would cause me to take a closer look at what may have been the reason and then a judgment as to their ability to understand city financial matters. • Yes. Public representatives should be held to a higher standard of care since they having direct control over our health, safety and welfare and the potential to abuse the power entrusted to them! • No. Especially if the bankruptcy was many years ago. We need to concentrate on current issues and concerns. • Yes, somewhat. While I try to keep in mind that often bankruptcy is unavoidable, it does give me pause and make me consider their candidacy a little more. • Yes. Personal fiscal responsibility reflects a person's ability to be fiscally responsible with our tax dollars. • Yes. I don't think knowing a candidate filed bankruptcy in the past would keep me from voting for them, but the voters need to know all the information that helps us make an informed decision about a candidate. Someone who filed bankruptcy may not be the best candidate to run our city. • No. I have voted already. That said we are asking candidates to manage city budgets so this could potentially be a deciding factor. • Of course it should. There’s judgment involved and we need our Council people to make good decisions and fiscal issues are critical to the health of the city. Spending all the city funds and declaring bankruptcy would not be a good idea. • No. However, personal monetary decisions made public through declaring bankruptcy can sway people into believing that this will transfer into the candidate’s decision making processes in a public servant position. I don’t believe this is true, given personal money issues have many factors that we may not be aware of nor should we be. • No. The bankruptcy itself would not change my vote. If I knew the reason why it occurred may change my vote.
According to court records, mayoral candidate and current Councilman Peter Arellano claimed $670,359 in debts when he filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in November 2004.
Not sure what to make of the Gilroy Political Action Committee, an arm of the Chamber, which erected those borderline insulting campaign signs that scream, “It’s the Gilroy Economy, Genius” that endorse a slate of four candidates. Am darn sure the candidates didn’t give that slogan the stamp of approval even though, in theory, they might concur. The PAC’s motto is of the same political vein, “If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.” What’s so odd is that for decades the Chamber has been unfailingly unwilling to offend. “Preserve and protect” could have been the motto. Case in point: Though it’s Government Review Committee staunchly opposed the binding arbitration clause in the city charter for public safety employees, the chamber politely refused to do public opinion battle and weakly presented the case without a recommended course of action to the City Council after much flapping of wings. Perhaps what we have emerging is the Chamber’s alter ego that has been bottled up for years and now, like a college teenager who’s left an ultra-strict household, it’s time for a new motto: “GilPAC, let the wild child out.”