Interesting that one of Lisa Matichak's top funders is an anti-Obama Republican. Will voters do their research, or will they just assume she's a Democrat like they are?

Frank,

I agree.

No one should vote for someone simply because they are part of a PARTY, they should not be voted for because they have pretty and large campaign signs, they should not get vote because they FUND RAISE well.

They should not be rewarded by spreading deception on Measure D.

They should not be rewarded for abuse of power to exile those they feel are unworthy of residing in the city.

They should not be rewarded in making it so the city lost more discretion regarding housing by provoking the state to enact more state laws controlling what the city powers are.

They should not be rewarded when they take the interests of outside non resident private owners interests above the city residents and citizens.

Those with actions that preserve and protect the rights of the citizens in Mountain View should be rewarded.

THEY DESERVE YOUR VOTES.

@SG, and ... they Should Be Rewarded for ?
This of course entirely depends on someone's own politics and values. It is good to look what a candidate HAS DONE in advancing actual legislation. Not (IMO) what they "promise" but what they have been working successfully for. If they have 'lots of talk' but no particular success - beware. If they have successes, assume that they may have more successes at ADVANCING ALONG THE SAME FRONTS. [pro, anti housing projects and rent control; pro, anti more commercial building]
I do not consider, having small specific 'changes of mind' to be disqualifying for my vote.

In response to Steven Nelson:

“@SG, and ... they Should Be Rewarded for ?”

Good question!

It appears that for at least MAK, LM, and JG, they will not act with regards to the City of Mountain View citizens unless REQUIRED to do so by either County Orders or the State Orders and Laws.

In effect, they are just complying with higher orders, and do not take any “LEADERSHIP” action to benefit the people of Mountain View

It is interesting that the City Council started talking about buying older properties when it was being signed as a STATE law. The story is called “Moms 4 Housing-inspired bill becomes California law” and the new law SB 1079 is found here (Web Link

I can only imagine what MAK, LM, and JG are thinking about this new law specifically it begins the process where cities are enabled to charge owners that leave residential properties vacant or blighted. The fines can be as high as $2,000 a day. Just watch, the City Council will NEVER enforce this law without the state taking it to court. As long as the California association of Realtors or the California apartment Association has succeeded in getting their “AGENTS” to sit on the Council.

What is their position on this?