Buncha cowards! Angry kranks; there's no shortage of those folks around.
I like that the mayor isn't putting too much stock in it or their cowardly threats. I live in the neighborhood so I'll be watching.
Oh, and to those making threats, you just convinced me to vote for Matt K. I won't tolerate this in my town. [Portion removed due to disrespectful comment or offensive language]

derp...Mike K.
Oh, and where can we get a yard sign to show our support for him?

Ha, Mike has lost the vandal vote : )

The people doing this are pathetic -- they don't know how to persuade others in an open debate, so they resort to tawdry vandalism. It's sad.

This has happened before:
Web Link

The Voice calls this news. I hope they provide equal space to those running against MK.

@ Matt K. - Why don't YOU give it up? Leave the Annex alone. Some of us ARE happy the way it is. It appears me that YOU are the one who is always unhappy with the way the annex is. And no, I didn't mess with your sign. BTW - All those signs along Cuesta are littering and an eye sore in front of the Annex. They should be removed.

How about the vocal minority opposing the Water District Flood Protection take up a collection to fund the flood insurance premiums of those 3,000 impacted properties? Since it might take 100 years to do that, the design flood could have possibly occured by then. The reason "it has never happened" is that in December of 1955, a lot less of the Valley of Hearts Delight was paved than in present day Silicon Valley. If that rainfall event were repeated today, folks would be stunned as to where water would run.

In my opinion, the Cuesta Park Flood Basin is a make work project by the Santa Clara Valley Water District.

However much I disagree with Mike, I respect his right to have his own opinion. Vandalism has no place in our society.

Although Mayor Kasperzak is one of my chief rivals in the race for City Council, I want to unequivocally state that I find this type of behavior to be reprehensible! I don't care what he has done or said there is no excuse for defacing or removing his signs or making threats!

The Mayor and I do not see eye to eye on any number of issues, but I absolutely support his right to free speech, which is what his signs represent. I have zero tolerance for anyone who tries to suppress free speech no matter what the perceived provocation.

That being said, those that are truly unhappy with the Mayor have 5 alternatives on the ballot and can vote for 4 out of the 5. The best way to express your opinion is to show up on Nov 6th and vote!

Jim Neal
City Council Candidate
Web Link (facebook)
@neal4mvcc (follow me on twitter)

While I don't agree with such tactics, those calls don't sound very threatening to me. Maybe this is more a sign of the wimp factor showing through.

That is way out of bounds. It is a threat meant to intimidate. The calls should be traced and arrests made.

Jim - that backdoor plug is the worst kind of politicking. You just lost my vote.

The whole sign vandalism thing happens all the time all over the country, but to call a man's home and make threats? That's terrorism and I hope in this day and age they can find out who the enemies of MV are. If you think making threats is OK to get what you want in MV, I don't want you in MV, I want you in JAIL!

USA,

I am very sorry to hear that you disagree with my views on the first amendment. I was very up front about my thoughts on the matter and just like the mayor, I have a right to free speech. We will be at a forum at the Mountain View Public Library on Monday (All the candidates, not just me) and I hope that you will come to hear our positions on the issues.

Jim Neal
Candidate, Mountain View City Council

vfree: I think this is news because it's against the law to deface or remove campaign signs. There's a very strict hands off policy when it comes to these signs. Seems every election season people need to be reminded about this law.

I rode by the signs this morning and they seem to be on public property next to Cuesta park.

Is all this about a politician creating a story to get some publicity?

Interested in this discussion about political signs ... am not an MV resident though (live in PA but close to MV), so don't care so much about the particular candidates in question (good luck to you all!)
1) Is it illegal to remove or deface a political sign?
2) Is it legal to place a political sign on public property?
Which trumps which? I remember seeing some "Yes on Prop. 8" signs back when that was on the ballot on the cloverleaf to get on 280 at El Monte and really wanted to tear them down ... but didn't do anything on that occasion. It would be nice to know for the future. In any case, if it is legal to remove them (since they shouldn't have been there in any case), that seems like a better solution to defacing them which is essentially adding to them ... condoning their placement in a way.

We thought only Merlone Geier Partners, Prometheus etal had his home phone number? Maybe it was them calling about density rezoning?

It's more density so we can build more....

It is not legal to deface or remove a political sign. It is legal to place them on public property. Just because you do not believe in a candidate to a proposition does not give you a right to remove/deface a sign. It IS freedom of speech.

Mike's large sign (on the permitted public-space corner near the new homes on Grant Rd.) was also uprooted, bent and thrown in the bushes over the weekend. Waverly Park also needs to watch out for political vandals.

Legal to place on public property.(specific locations)

MVCC

SEC. 3.23. - Public property—Prohibition on placement: Exception.

No person shall erect or display, or cause or authorize any person to erect or display, any political sign on any public property.

a.
Exception. Notwithstanding the prohibition on placement of political signs on public property, the city council shall designate by resolution, public properties upon which political signs may be placed. Political signs placed on public property pursuant to this section shall be posted no sooner than seventy-five (75) days prior to an election, and such signs must be removed within ten (10) days following the election. Each candidate or position on a ballot measure shall be limited to one (1) sign for each public property location designated, and each sign shall comply with the placement and size limitations of this article.

Copies of the resolution shall be available from the Mountain View city clerk.

Illegal to deface

MVCC
SEC. 3.26. - Unlawful removal or interference.

Except as otherwise provided in this article, it shall be unlawful and in violation of this article to deface, remove, alter, make additions to or conceal a political sign without the consent of the candidate or, in the case of ballot measures, the sponsor of the particular ballot measure position.

(Ord. No. 24.95, 12/12/95.)

SEC. 3.27. - Violation as misdemeanor.

In addition to the remedies of this article relating to the removal of improperly posted political signs, any violation of this article shall be deemed a misdemeanor and shall be punishable pursuant to Sec. 1.7 of Chapter 1 of this code.

Jim Neal has my vote.

Crank phone calls are quite easy to trace. Has an arrest been made?

Crank phone calls from blocked numbers are not easy to trace. It require you to have AT&T turn on a service that you must invoke immediately after a call by pressing some buttons. Then, in order for AT&T to do the trace, you need to submit a police report to them. AT&T will then do the trace and provide the number and related info to the police. It's doable, but not easy.

Mike must have done this to gain some publicity and sympathy. Just another tactic to get elected. This guy is a career politician. I don't trust him. Unlimited benefits , high salary and cushy job for doing nothing. who can blame him...

Agreed

Agreed X2.

Jupiterk:

High salary? Council members get a whole $500/month before taxes. Mayor gets $750/month before taxes.

Facts are a good thing to know before making judgements.

I think Jupiterk was referring to potential for all the kickbacks and under-the-table deals beginning with the gangland style no-bid renewal of the garbage contract.

Re: jupiterk, john, roger, and observer

As GSB states, council members get very little compensation for a job that requires enormous commitment of time. There are no benefits and the accusation of kickbacks is absurd. If you don't like the decisions being made, you should get involved (and get informed before spouting nonsense).

You're right. Politicians are never connected to corporate interests, under pressure from lobbyists or unions, and never, ever, ever have have other outside business and real estate interests that can be looked out for while serving in public office. And there's never any news on corrupt politicians. And they certainly have thick skins and small egos. Whew! I'm glad we've got that all straightened out.

Jim Neal for City Council

No, you're right. People never just want to help their local community. They serve on the city council to bask in the glory of public adoration and reap the rich rewards of corruption.

"You're right. Politicians are never connected to corporate interests, under pressure from lobbyists or unions, and never, ever, ever have have other outside business and real estate interests that can be looked out for while serving in public office. And there's never any news on corrupt politicians. And they certainly have thick skins and small egos. Whew! I'm glad we've got that all straightened out."

"Mike must have done this to gain some publicity and sympathy. Just another tactic to get elected. This guy is a career politician. I don't trust him. Unlimited benefits , high salary and cushy job for doing nothing. who can blame him...

--------------------

There's a different burden of proof when making general statements, and specific ones.

Saying all lawyers should drown at the bottom of the sea vs. advocating that Johnnie Cochran should be drowned in his bathtub are not the same levity.

One will get you laughed off, while the other can get you arrested.

Both are still inane, if you have no supporting information to backup your statements.

If you'd like to talk with me about this or any other issue, why not come to Mocha with the Mayor. I will be at the Starbucks at El Monte and El Camino this Monday from 10:30 - 11:30 AM. I meet with residents on the 1st and 15th of each month.

I have heard through some staff members that a few council members are occasionally bothered by crank calls from 2-3 Cuesta Annex people unhappy with the water project.

As to the Mayor, check out his income/gift filings (FORM 700) and you will find he is a trust fund baby. He doesn't need the small salary (except the PERS and health care benefits) and like most politicians does crave attention and feel entitled.

He wants to be a career politician, but will need to step up his game to party officials. A RINO at heart, the Dems dont take him seriously.

Other than that, a pretty nice guy.