Your headline writer must have been in a Christmas spirit when
creating the headline above Eric Leins’ Glen Loma Ranch article
(Union concerns holding up housing project
– Dec. 19). The more accurate wording would be: Union threats
holding up housing project or union
intimidation/bullying/greed/arrogance/demands/coercion.
DEAR EDITOR:
Your headline writer must have been in a Christmas spirit when creating the headline above Eric Leins’ Glen Loma Ranch article (Union concerns holding up housing project – Dec. 19). The more accurate wording would be: Union threats holding up housing project or union intimidation/bullying/greed/arrogance/demands/coercion. The union message is clear: if they don’t get control of the Glen Loma Ranch project, their legal SWAT team will find any means possible to harass and delay the project.
In this instance, it’s a 200-page environment protest moaning of the union’s alleged “concerns.” That the report “used four separate environmental consulting firms” that “produced a document thicker than the environmental review it blasts” only reflects the union mindset: if you can’t bully them into submission, bury them with irrelevant “concern.”
As Mr. Leins points out: “Critics in the Bay Area have claimed that such environmental concerns from the unions go away if developers sign binding agreements to hire union labor.” For legitimate and sensible reasons, developer John Filice refuses to be bullied by this union strong-arm tactic. “I’d be crazy to guarantee something seven or eight years down the road,” he has said. Such common sense doesn’t register with union “leadership.”
Because of this union effort for more power, the City Council will meet to vote on approving/denying the Glen Loma Ranch project. At the meeting will be the Council’s union zealot (sitting in the Council chair bought by the union for $12,000-plus and given this union-controlled puppet Paul Correa. Mr. Leins closed his article quoting Mr. Correa: “This isn’t about (unions getting) special treatment as much as it is being a special project … The city doesn’t want liabilities. If the unions have legitimate concerns, I’d rather pay the price now than have a larger price to pay down the road.”
Is that a union-directed threat at Council, Mr. Correa? As the union’s lackey, are you implying Council had better jump to the union’s intimidation or the city will face greater costs “down the road”? By what means?
It’s no surprise you’re willing to “pay the price now than have a larger price to pay down the road.” That’s what your union masters demand and that’s what you’ll give them. Do you ever plan to give time and effort to representing and working for the betterment of Gilroy and its citizens rather than the outside-Gilroy unions who own you? Union drones voted for you but non-union Gilroy citizens also voted for you — believing your union-paid barrage of promotional material that implied your interest was Gilroy. You’ve shown your loyalty and interest lies outside Gilroy and, as a Council member, you’re dutifully parroting union orders first.
Council duty should mean looking for, and working toward the best interests of Gilroy. All you’ve shown since being sworn n is your loyalty to union intimidation and its harassment of local business. Do you ever plan to work for Gilroy rather than the union bosses who bought you your Council seat, Mr. Correa?
When?
James Brescoll, Gilroy
Submitted Tuesday, Dec. 23
