Opinion

1. It’s OK to spend some of that $20-plus million in the bank

• Perry Woodward, hands down, no question. Gilroy does not need another "old guard" good 'ol boy. Someone capable, intelligent and independent needs to take the reins at City Hall to move Gilroy forward. Woodward brings fresh ideas to the table and will be far more effective, even with a slight change in the Council. • Woodward. • I can't response other than "Not Decided." Councilmen Bracco and Woodward must provide their plan and position for our city for us to make a decision. What has transpired during the past four years does not set either of these men in a position of leadership in my opinion. Whomever is to be mayor must have strong control over the city manager and staff. It is not enough to be a mayor without complete control and guidance over staff. Too often staff controls the city, not the council. Both candidates are strapped tightly to the police and its union. One through his business the other through his familial relationship, which leads me to believe they will do nothing to rid our city of binding arbitration with the police union. • Oh, I'd have to vote for Perry, but I would give Dion a job in the "Raising Alarm Department"! • If I must, OK, Dion. • Dion Bracco, he has worked long and hard, is a regular citizen with a down to earth approach. • Perry Woodward. I am not really excited about either choice but I really can't relate to Dion Bracco - his ideas and point of view seem dated and uninspired. At least Perry seems to have some enthusiasm and energy for the job. • Dion Bracco. Aside from the inquiry into Perry Woodward's alarm information, I think Dion has the most common sense and will work for all of Gilroy. Dion works here and knows many of the locals that have businesses and I feel he would be better at bringing the community together on issues of importance. • Dion Bracco. He has been a very involved in the community person both before and during his City Council member tenure. I have known him to care deeply about Gilroy, its senior citizens, children, families, public safety including long-term involvement in the Gilroy Gang Task Force, DARE program, Gilroy Exchange Club and youth sports. • Neither one. There is no real information about any of their qualifications, just some negative reporting about actions taken to find out things about Woodward. Really? Let's hope some transparent and capable people step up to the plate in the coming months.

Councilman's home alarm inquiry into mayoral competitor much more than just troubling

National Historic District could be the saving grace for a revival of downtown Gilroy

• No! I think they should pass a law banning cats, they're messy, they roam and I'm highly allergic! • No. Although I have never smoked and am disgusted by the smell, another layer of making victimless crimes into enforceable laws is burdensome to our already over burdened police department. Gilroy police staff need to spend their time and our tax dollars on more serious crimes. • I'm a non-smoker married to a smoker. My hubby has free reign of our shared outdoor spaces. He leaves the indoor spaces alone. That's how it should be. I don't see why we nonsmokers can't continue to share our community outdoor spaces with our smoking fellow citizens. Is there any medical data to prompt this? Or is somebody's nose out of joint? If Gilroy has its own cigarette tax, I think that will hurt Gilroy merchants as smokers pick up their coffin nails in a lower tax town, say on the way home from work. • Yes. If it works for New York it ought to work here. • No. I hate smoking, hate cigarette butts and second hand smoke, however, I do believe in personal rights and I do not believe government should have a say in a citizen smoking in the park or on a trail. • Noish ... not crazy about it, a little too Big Brother ... but, eventually, I think it will come to that. • No. When will Americans realize that government intervention into their lives has gone far enough. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are being jeopardized by government's relentless thirst for power. • Yes to the banning in public places, but no to the additional tax on retailers as they are providing something that is legal to the public who want it. The tax burden is high enough for retailers, but it is only fair to ban a substance from annoying others in public areas. • No. What benefit is gained from handcuffing citizens and then taxing them at the same time? You tax a retailer and retailer raises prices. Stop this insane thought of grabbing control. Perhaps it is best that the city move to a 3-month in session operation. • Yes. I am tired of smokers infringing on my health and enjoyment of public facilities. • NO! Not only un-enforceable they are un-needed. Negative effects from second hand smoke from outdoor smokers is unlikely. Current cigarette taxes and anti-smoking laws and outreach programs are effective. • Yes. I have been a part of the Healthy Gilroy Campaign along with youth advocates from Gilroy and Mt. Madonna High and several community based organizations. The Healthy Gilroy Campaign also includes the city of Gilroy staff and County Tobacco Prevention. One lady at the senior center has been a smoker for many years and supports the retail license fee because she is raising her grandson and does not want him to have access to tobacco products and suffer health problems like she is experiencing. I think the Dispatch article was really bias and did not get the other point of view just the Chamber of Commerce's.