Post Endorses McCarthy for City Council

The paper is the first local media outlet to endorse the challenger.

As elections near, those who have not yet decided who to vote for may choose to look to endorsements to help shape their decision. Five candidates are running for four seats on the Redwood City city council: , , , and .

The San Mateo Daily Journal endorsed the four incumbents: Aguirre, Bain, Foust and Pierce. However, the URL no longer links to the original article.

In contrast, the Daily Post editorial board chose not to endorse all four incumbents, and instead chose to endorse challenger Paul McCarthy.

Reasons they cited:

  • “McCarthy is a sergeant in the , a position that carries a high level of responsibility and public trust.”
  • He opposes the of $21 per company and $15 per employee (Measure M)
  • He opposes the from 10 to 12 percent
  • “New blood is needed on council.”
  •  “He’s a solid citizen who is well informed on community issues.”

The Post chose not to endorse Barbara Pierce, because she has served the longest on the council, since 1999. The editorial board thanked her for her service, but said “16 years is too much for anyone… Time for new blood.”

The San Mateo Daily Journal said “Kudos to Paul McCarthy for deciding to run for Redwood City Council and forcing the four incumbents to wage a campaign. However, it would be nice if he were to run a vital campaign.”

The Post shared the same sentiment, stating “We wish he was waging a more aggressive campaign because it’s hard to knock off an incumbent.”

Mayor Jeff Ira had the same attitude towards McCarthy, calling

Sharon Levin October 28, 2011 at 02:58 PM
Now, as everyone knows (well, everyone who knows me, or reads my blog) I have real issues with our current council (I am very sure the feeling is mutual) but I have to say that I am tired and frustrated (and puzzled) by the 'new blood' argument. Why is politics the only field that wants people with less experience, not more? Do you ever hear "I switched doctors, mine has been practicing for 25 years, so I thought I'd go with someone right out of med school." If you are voting for or against someone, don't vote no only because of 'too much experience' (truly the dumbest reason ever) or vote yes because there's 'no experience' (okay, maybe that's the dumbest reason ever). Vote for what you know about the person and what they bring to the position. If they have a lot of years in office, but you trust them, feel they've done a good job in the past, vote for them (this is NOT an endorsement of Barbara Pierce). If you feel that they may be new but have a lot of background, have been involved in local groups, etc. before and you think they have a lot to bring to the council (other than out with the old, in with the new) then vote for them (and again, this is NOT an endorsement for Paul McCarthy) then do so.
Catherine Fraser October 28, 2011 at 03:19 PM
What I don't like about Mr. McCarthy is the fact that he's not running a campaign. He's against things without solid backing on his responses. The current council works tirelessly for the community and have earned their spot to continue doing just that.
Barb Valley October 28, 2011 at 04:38 PM
Was that a pig that just flew past my window? Must have been, Sharon, because I actually agree with you - who woulda thought? I've never understood the 'new blood' argument myself.
Barb Valley October 28, 2011 at 06:31 PM
I wanted to read the original Post article before commenting but their Little Blue Boxes are not convenient to me and they do not publish online. Recently they added the ability to search their archives online but articles do not appear for seven days and while the searching is free, reading the article costs $2.95. So the Post, a Palo Alto based newspaper, has recommendations for the City Council election in Redwood City. Do they also have recommendations for Mayor of San Francisco? I found their reasons for endorsing Paul McCarthy lacking and for NOT endorsing Barbara Pierce ludicrous. According to the article above, the Post feels that Mr McCarthy should be elected to the City Council because he’s a CHP Sergeant (high level of reasonability and public trust), opposes both Measure I and Measure M, is a solid citizen well informed about community issues and ‘new blood’ in the Council is needed. [continued in next comment]
Barb Valley October 28, 2011 at 06:38 PM
[continued from previous comment] This is more than I know about Mr McCarthy since he didn’t submit a candidate statement for the Voter pamphlet, I have no idea which community issues he’s aware of or how he plans on addressing them. I don’t feel he’s sincerely interested in serving on the Council. If he were, he’d be actively running a campaign. The Post opines that Ms Pierce, as the longest serving member (since 1999), should be the tossed aside to make room for ‘new blood’ saying “16 years is too much for anyone…” With those seven words, the Post completely discounted Ms Pierce’s experience, accomplishments, community service and the role she’s played since 1999, in making Redwood City the community it is today. And do the math - That’s TWELVE years. Imagine what she can accomplish with four more
Sharon Levin October 28, 2011 at 07:10 PM
If Councilwoman Pierce would oppose Cargill, I'd be happy to imagine what she could do with four more. Since she does not, the thought frightens me.
Barb Valley October 29, 2011 at 04:37 AM
I could have sworn I replied to your comment earlier today, Sharon but here goes again. I have no idea what Ms Pierce's position is on Cargill, I don't believe she's ever stated one. I do know she supports the open and democratic process the Saltworks plan is going through now. I also know the current plan is not the final plan. It's going to be 2-3 years before the Planning Commission forwards the plan and their recommendations to the Council and I suspect at that time the Council will turn it over to the electorate for the Aye/Nay decision. It's the right thing to do. So, Sharon, it really doesn't matter what Ms Pierce's current position may be.
Sharon Levin October 29, 2011 at 04:30 PM
Wow, and isn't that interesting since you were a member of the Committee to Save Schaberg. Thought that we'd agreed on something else. :-)
Sharon Levin October 29, 2011 at 04:37 PM
The 'open and democratic process' re: Cargill is a bunch of hooey. It is abundantly clear that this is an environmental nightmare. Surrounding water districts have stated that they will NOT sell us any extra water (badly needed if this goes through). Our Mayor went to a fancy dinner sponsored by DMB and Cargill (okay, maybe it was just Cargill, don't want people to be distracted if I don't have this exactly right) said that he didn't care what people thought of that decision (even though I have pointed out under the state's ethics exam - he is REQUIRED to consider what people think regarding a possible conflict of interests, he is given the public trust and is expected to treat it with respect) AND he has never agreed to a dinner with Save the Bay (they've invited him to meet with them). The fact that none of the Council have questioned any of this (at least publicly) and keep hiding behind the 'we need more research' shield screams to me that they are pro-Cargill and are just trying to figure out some kind of a go-around to bring this mess to Redwood City.
Barb Valley October 31, 2011 at 06:15 PM
Participation at the various public information events (EIR scoping sessions, etc) , as well as the many times this project has appeared on the agendas of the Planning Commission and City Council meetings attests to the open and democratic nature of the process. Environmental nightmare? Wasn’t that one of the arguments against Foster City and Redwood Shores? And, as has been pointed out on more than one occasion, surrounding water districts have not been approached regarding the purchase of water from them for this project. That “ fancy dinner” was sponsored by DMB for Peninsula business and political leaders attending an annual weekend conference known as the Progress Seminar. Ira also said just because he enjoyed the dinner “doesn't mean Saltworks will get whatever they want, carte blanche”. You never have to wonder what Ira thinks or how he feels about anything – he puts it right out there. That’s a point in his favor in my book. Ira has never been invited to dinner by Save The Bay. (STB did have lunch with Former Menlo Park Mayor and Council Member at the time, Andrew Cohen shortly before Mr. Cohen filed a FPPC complaint against Rosanne Foust and also introduced a proclamation against the Saltworks project. Interesting timing, no?) But I digress. What on earth would STB have to say to Mayor Ira that they have not said in articles, opinion pieces and attendance at Council meetings?
Sharon Levin October 31, 2011 at 06:30 PM
He also said, "“Some (elected) people were afraid to go because they didn’t want to be associated with Cargill,” Ira said. “I’m not afraid. I really don’t care what people say.” So, environmentalists talked to the Menlo Park mayor about the environmental impact of this development. Horrors!
Barb Valley October 31, 2011 at 07:02 PM
Yes, he did say that. Further evidence of what I said, "You never have to wonder what Ira thinks or how he feels about anything – he puts it right out there." Save the Bay is not just an environmentalist, they are the primary opponent of the Saltworks development. They opposed the development long before DMB even submitted their proposal. Remember Measure W?
Sharon Levin October 31, 2011 at 07:10 PM
Yes, but AGAIN, Jeff Ira would have been required to take a state ethics exam and I can tell you that a violation of ethics is to not take the public's trust seriously. He is SUPPOSED to care what people think or what his actions say. Yes, I'm okay with Save the Bay being the primary opponent - they are the primary opponent BECAUSE they are environmentalists. Sigh
Barb Valley October 31, 2011 at 07:15 PM
To clarify my 'membership' with CSS ; I attended one meeting. I did some investigation on my own and, based on what I discovered along with what I can only characterize as the Committee's vitriolic attack on a cherished story teller, I requested that you and other committee members remove me from your eMail contacts.
Sharon Levin October 31, 2011 at 07:49 PM
Um no, Committee to Save Schaberg focused on the fact that a retired librarian was promised $200,000 over 5 years at the rate of $80/hour when a neighborhood library was threatened (by the way, those hours are now being filled at a much, MUCH lower rate - there will be a Schaberg blog post on that soon) and you asked to be removed from the list when we questioned you about your membership in (and the fact that you held an office with) Citizens for Redwood City - a group that had tried to pressure us into behind the scenes, off the record meetings about the use of this money. (The Committee was open to any public meetings at anytime - the history of this can be followed by reading past Schaberg blog posts)
Evelyn Winnegar November 07, 2011 at 07:47 PM
Hmmmm -all politicians, dead or alive were "new blood" at one time, but you don't hear them talking about that aspect of an election (especially the deceased!) Makes me think they feel threatened somehow at the mere thought of a new one entering their domain. We still have three oldies to vote for. Perhaps they have a fear that a newbie will rise up to become as responsible as they think they are! Our RWC Council has nothing to fear from the introduction of a new member, least of all, Paul McCarthy. Even a doctor started out somewhere, somehow. I started out with one of my doctors in 1962 and another in 1967 and was blessed to have both throughout their careers. Good thing someone like Abraham Lincoln came out of nowhere at the beginning of his political career, even though he didn't win an office at his first try. .


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »