San Jose Officials Plan Trip to Copenhagen, the ‘City of Cyclists’

San Jose officials want to travel to Copenhagen, which has branded itself the “City of Cyclists,” to study how the area has adapted to cyclists and pedestrians.

Copenhagen reports that as many as half of its residents commute by bike.

Councilman Johnny Khamis, Deputy Director for Transportation Planning Paul Smith, transportation specialist Zahi Khattab and Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition’s Colin Heyne will attend a weeklong trip sponsored by the Knight Foundation.

The Aug. 23-29 excursion will include tours, classes and meetings with Copenhagen public officials and a side trip to Malmo, Sweden, to see how the city developed from an industrial to high-tech economy.

“Participants will view everything in both cities with an eye for how it could be adapted and improved in their own communities,” City Manager Ed Shikada writes in a memo.

San Jose’s Bike Plan 2020, a blueprint for future growth, maps out 500 miles of proposed bikeways. The first priority is to improve traffic safety with new striping, traffic signals and curb ramps along the key east-west bicycle route through the city.

More from the San Jose City Council agenda for August 12, 2014:

  • A federal $291,000 federal grant will help the San Jose Police Department buy 179 new pistols and eight digital trunk radios. Some of the money will also help continue a class that teaches parents how to mentor troubled kids.
  •  The city’s ready to work with Turner Construction to design and build the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, which will move into City Hall by next year.
  • San Jose will pay $750,000 into a project to spruce up local bus stops. The VTA will put down another $1 million for the two-year project, which will allow the agency to create public art installations at 21 bus stops.
  • The city needs to collect $33.8 million in secured tax revenue this year to pay debt service on its general obligation bonds. For a single-family home valued at $500,000, the levy is $126.50 this fiscal year.
  • Vice Mayor Madison Nguyen plans to attend a climate change conference in Hawaii next month. Her trip is sponsored by the East-West Center, a Honolulu-based research group.
  • A joint-use agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Water District will allow the city to continue maintaining recreational facilities along Gold Creek at Jeffrey Fontana Park in south San Jose for another 25 years.
  • Caltrans plans to build four miles of new carpool lanes between Highway 237 and Interstate 880.
  • Telecommunications services and equipment will cost the city $4.9 million this year, a deep discount since the state has a deal to buy in bulk and pass the cost down to local agencies.

WHAT: City Council meets
WHEN: 1:30pm Tuesday
WHERE: City Hall, 200 E. Santa Clara St., San Jose
INFO: City Clerk, 408.535.1260

Jennifer Wadsworth is the news editor for San Jose Inside and Metro Silicon Valley. Email tips to [email protected]. Follow her on Twitter at @jennwadsworth. Or, click here to sign up for text updates about what she’s working on.

73 Comments

  1. Where is the outrage over Khamis recently taking a week long trip to Ireland, and now taking a week long trip to Copenhagen? You know, the staunch fiscal on the city council who likes to remind people he is a financial advisor. What a fricking joke he is, along with most of this city council and mayor.

      • (a) Council’s Summer Vacation was the month of July – They have been back in session since last week. (b) there is no free vacation – someone is paying for it, either we tax payers are paying directly or the council and staff’s trip is being funded from their office budget that is funded with tax dollars – wither way we are paying.

        • HE’S not paying for it. For him it is free. It is also summer time, when most people go off on trips of some sort. Doesn’t matter if his “summer vacation” was in July. He got another one. For free.

          • I get it.. What do you think of this: Khamis “got” the vacation that he was promised as part of his Council Union’s Benefit Package ( the month of July +/- off). Khamis is now “TAKING” a second (second this year) unearned, unnecessary all expenses paid vacation.

            This is even more outrageous since Khamis took two vacations last year – his Council Union Benefit Vacation then a trip to Ireland with his Chief of Staff and covered both their expenses out of General Fund Money.

        • I think it is disgraceful but is sure says a lot. I hope all of the voting public are paying close attention.

    • Khamis is a Politician . He says one thing , but does another . He is a pathological liar and a man of “Zero” integrity.

      • The trip is being funded by the Knight Foundation, not the City of San Jose or tax-payer dollars.

        • The trip…plane flight, hotel rooms etc. Is being paid for by the Knight Foundation. What is not being paid for by the Knight Foundation are the salaries which are wholly being paid for by the taxpayers. Yes the taxpayers pay for this trip.

  2. Why is San Jose always trying to be ‘like’ other cities? Why not just be unique. This reminds me of time partner and I were in Amsterdam, sitting at a table right next to SJose employees apparently in Amsterdam ‘studying’ how Amsterdam works. WTF. Boondoggle city.

    Why is San Jose paying employees to copy what other people do? Throw them all out. Hire people who can actually give vision, not just repeat what may or may not have worked somewhere else.

    • Notice that whatever they go to research in the other countries never come to pass in SJ? What did the city get out of their trip to Ireland? Anything new/different/updated/made better? What a sham.

  3. It’s interesting that it’s the Republican that’s all for spending money on this sort of thing.

  4. > •Vice Mayor Madison Nguyen plans to attend a climate change conference in Hawaii next month. Her trip is sponsored by the East-West Center, a Honolulu-based research group.

    The climate will continue to change with or without Maddie’s presence in Hawaii.

    An utterly pointless trip.

    How come they never have these trust-fund children conferences in Tumbleweed, Texas or Dead Varmint, North Dakota?

    If Maddie doesn’t like her job and wants to spend quality time with eco-activists, she can resign from the City Council.

    • “How come they never have these trust-fund children conferences in Tumbleweed, Texas or Dead Varmint, North Dakota?”

      That’s an excellent notion. It would be a lot cheaper to hold one of these gatherings in, say, a fine community like Rochester, Minnesota (or how about Fresno?), where all the necessary facilities are readily available. But they obviously don’t give a damn about not-wasting the funds in the public treasury. So they get “free” vacations to Hawaii instead.

  5. Wow, as many as half of Copenhagen’s residents commute by bike! No wonder the councilman is so interested. Imagine if Mr. Khamis, one of a coterie of council members more intent on altering public behavior than managing the city, could get the same results in San Jose?

    But not so fast there. San Jose is more than five times the physical size of Copenhagen, a city which is approximately the same size as Mr. Khamis’ council district. Commuting by bike in San Jose (which appears beyond the capabilities of the corpulent councilma), with its horrible roads and splendidly diverse but hazardous collection of drivers, will never be practical or safe for enough residents to justify the council’s obsession with it. Hell, the city can’t even field one-tenth the traffic cops its needs.

    But why should common sense stop the councilman from getting a free trip and the residents another dose of crappola? Bon voyage.

    • The size of San Jose doesn’t matter, what matters is the average distance from your home to your job or alternatively to public transportation and from public transportation to your job. For example the bike lane on San Fernando St see significant use from people either living downtown or getting there via bus and who want to go to Diridon station.

  6. So let me make sure I have this correct…public safety response times are at an all time high, our library hours are diminished, are roads are falling apart…yet are council members are going to the Netherlands and Hawaii AND we happen to have found $750,000 to spend on art for bus stops.

    Who the hell is running this City???

  7. The face of arrogance rears it’s ugly head once again. These people don’t care about this city or poor services… They are a very arrogant bunch. Khamis will most likely bring his little buddy, Shane Connolly on another city sponsored vacation.

  8. I think they’re just stealing from the taxpayers, in order to pay for a lovely summer jaunt to Denmark. But even if they’re totally sincere, they need to take into account the reality of how MANY people are going to inevitably perceive this. And then decide not to do it.

    Couldn’t they just READ about Copenhagen’s bicycling policies?!?

  9. Our streets are in disrepair, and we don’t have enough cops to keep our city safe. There is no point in investigating how to make San Jose more cycle friendly. Public safety is the foundation that we need to focus on. Without a strong police presence, why would anyone feel secure enough to ride a bike here? We expect the police to provide security for us, but what is San Jose willing to do to provide the police with the security to work here?
    Forget trips to Denmark. The council needs to get back to basics.

  10. Max,
    The size of the city has a direct impact on the average distance from home to work, especially in San Jose, where residential expansion was allowed to extend more than twelve miles south of downtown without any good faith attempt at moving jobs in that direction. How many commuters facing a lengthy bus ride (don’t you just love the smell of homelessness in the morning?) to the downtown or, worse, to the actual heart of Silicon Valley, are going to want to add a time-consuming bike jaunt to their commute? Those few inclined to do so (and I’m not disputing they aren’t way better citizens than the rest of us) are already doing it.

    All Mr. Khamis is going to learn in Copenhagen is that San Jose isn’t Copenhagen, and he could’ve figured that out just by comparing crime rates and academic achievement.

  11. Tomorrow this will be forgotten about. Johnny “Lance Armstrong” Khamis will go on his trip to Europe, come back with not one shred of useful information, and it will be business as usual. Nobody from the city council or the mayor will bat an eye, and the Mercury will never question the validity of this trip. Next week Khamis will be on the dais ripping on the greed of the city workers, while he make plans for his trip to Copenhagen. Thanks SJI for at least making this a small issue for a few hours.

    • ever caught sight of Khamis on a bike?? And he’s trying to promote…..what does one call it?,,,,.biking!! ever heard of …..lead by example??

    • Are they also paying for his city salary which he will get while on holiday, I mean business, in Copenhagen? I highly doubt the city is not paying for any of Lance Khamis’s salary.

      • That is most likely true so the point is still valid about the trip being to expensive and repetitive given the fiscal state of the city.

  12. A couple of years ago a Bay Area bike coalition reported on its study which showed that a mere 2% of SJ residents’ trips are by bike, as opposed to 10% in Palo Alto, where the students make up most of the difference. No matter how many times Khamis and others go on a junket, SJ will never see 10% of trips by bike, let alone the alleged 50% in Copenhagen. And by the way, why didn’t the junketeers go during the July recess so they could spend August at the job we pay them to do…at which they are failing miserably? Even if we get 10% of folks in bike lanes, this policy is punishing the remaining 90% with traffic delays which result in more air pollution in order to pander to Sam “Bike Boy” Liccardo and Johnny “Lance” Khamis. But the voters keep re-electing them, and their fellow politicians, each of whom scratches each other’s back. Sadly, the voters are getting only what they deserve.

  13. The reporting in this SanJoseInside.com article is accurate. Unfortunately, many of the posted comments in response are inaccurate or misleading, at best. All of the costs of this trip for Councilmember Khamis and for the City employees and the nonprofit participant that will attend are covered by the Knight Foundation – a non-profit that focuses on funding civic innovation initiatives, amongst other priorities (http://www.knightfoundation.org/what-we-fund/). Councilmember Khamis was asked to represent the City of San Jose on this trip after the Councilperson who was originally going to attend had to withdraw due to a medical issue. He was the alternate selected by the Mayor, in consultation with City management, to represent San Jose because of his role in making transportation policy as part of the VTA Board of Directors and his work on the Council.

    The Knight Foundation awarded grants to teams from five different cities that will be attending this study trip. No taxpayer dollars from the City or any other taxpayer source is funding this trip. All costs are covered by the non-profit Knight Foundation (http://sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/33527).

    Councilmember Khamis is not tacking on any personal time to the beginning or end of his visit to Copenhagen – he is there strictly for the study mission of learning from Copenhagen’s experiences and successes in implementing transit alternatives, in a climate much less conducive to many of these alternatives, such as bicycling, than ours. What is learned from other cities who have successfully implemented new transportation concepts or technologies can be of great benefit to San Jose as we face substantial population growth in the coming decades. Also, anyone who has taken business trips knows that the schedule usually allows for little down-time and you are required to be separated from your family for the time you are gone – something the Councilmember typically prefers to avoid.

    For those who commented on the July recess, this is a time when the Council is not meeting in regular session. This does not mean the Councilmembers have ceased working nor has the City stopped functioning. San Jose has a Mayor and City Council that set policy and a City Manager that manages the day-to-day operations of the City. The July recess is simply when formal policy-making is not taking place at the Council level. Even the members of the public who carefully follow City policy-making activities likely appreciate the break that occurs each year. Regardless, policy implementation and administration is still taking place. Also, for those who contacted the Councilmember’s office during the recess, you will know that constituent service continues throughout the recess, as well.

    Many who attended the July 4th Family Festival at Almaden Lake will know that Councilmember Khamis was there helping to put on the festival, tearing down the tents and booths that night, and back with a handful of others the next morning cleaning up debris from the park grounds and lake. He also held several meetings (http://calendars.sanjoseca.gov/district10/d10.htm). Finally, he did take his family on a family vacation for two weeks, since July is the only time of year when the Council has an extended period of time in which they are not meeting in formal session and children are not in school in which they can take a vacation as a family.

    If one has specific questions or concerns regarding this or any other City matter, Councilmember Khamis is more than happy to hear from San Jose residents. One may contact him at [email protected].

    • Mr. Connolly:

      Thank you for the comments. We rarely hear from the council members or their staff on this blog. I respect your comments and understand that the Knight Foundation is paying for it. I wish they would pay his salary also while he is away.

      The more pressing issue to me is that this trip, junket or vacation (pick one) is just not necessary. It has been done already. Mr. Khamis should be working on more important issues. FIXING THE CITY”S WOES. I hope the constituents of District 10 take notice.

      Lastly, who was the Council person that had to withdraw? Just curious.

      • My pleasure, and thank you for sharing your thoughts. Like with any salaried employee (in this case, an employee of the voters of San Jose), one’s salary doesn’t stop when you are on a business trip, nor do you get compensated for the weekend days that you are traveling, schlepping around airports, or otherwise working. Rest assured, The Councilmember will not be neglecting important policy issues. He continues to work on issues of importance to District 10, whether public safety (he just co-authored a memo on fireworks safety with some of his colleagues), quality of life issues – he is meeting with a group of stakeholders on graffiti and copper wire theft later this week, for example – road maintenance (he got $16 million in added one-time funds dedicated to street repairs in this year’s budget), and more.

        Councilmember Herrera was originally designated as the Council representative that would attend.

        Best Regards,
        *Shane

        • “He continues to work on issues of importance to District 10, whether public safety (he just co-authored a memo on fireworks safety with some of his colleagues), quality of life issues – he is meeting with a group of stakeholders on graffiti and copper wire theft later this week, for example – road maintenance (he got $16 million in added one-time funds dedicated to street repairs in this year’s budget), and more.”

          Did you really just reference his “work” on a fireworks memo while his district is being overrun with residential burglaries, and home invasion robberies?
          Has to be one of the funniest things I’ve read in weeks. Shane Patrick, you never fail to demonstrate to us just what a sociopath you are.

        • Appreciate the clarification, So, Reed is still rewarding/choosing his ‘click” members to go on these coveted trips, while the non-click members of Council slog away in their offices doing routine boring work while the short-term council member get rewarded with trip to ,,Hawaii, no less.,,,,never mind..the non-clicks most likely feel their represented residents better appreciate their dedication to service from the Council office,

          • Sounds like someone on the 18th floor got butt hurt, but I sure understand about the click thing. It is common practice at CH.

    • Mr. Connolly’s long winded response misses the point of all the criticism. San Jose’s public safety is in a crisis situation and not a single council member has put forward a plan for fully staffing SJPD and SJFD in a timely manner. Residents do not want council members traveling on junkets to study bicycle lanes when there are so many unresolved problems that have been ignore for too long by the city council.

  14. As a Dane who lives in California and has worked for the City of San Jose for past 20+ years, I can tell you emphatically that San Jose will NEVER be like Copenhagen in regards to bicycle transportation.

    The Danes grow up riding their bikes everywhere and the transportation system is built around bicycles… ( roads specifically for bikes with traffic signals, train cars for bikes, buses for bikes.. Etc ) and the cost of a car is astronomical (due to taxation) which is the reason family’s can usually only afford one car thereby forcing the other family members to ride their bikes everywhere.

    Americans simply love their cars too much and as a result would rather drive than ride a bike for business purposes. Not to mention that drivers here don’t give proper regard to bicyclist like they do in Denmark. In Copenhagen the bicycle has the right of way…. ALWAYS.

    It’s just part of their culture and I don’t see San Josian’s ever adopting bicycles over cars anytime soon…. Sadly this is a waste if time and the money should be spent on something else…. Like cops and firefighters.

    But… I’m happy to volunteer my translation services if they want to take me with them ;)

    • Soren thanks for your insight into this matter.. unfortunately this information will fall on deaf ears who are of the mind set that says: “Yes, but we must at least try and even try again until we achieve our desired outcome which is that you must give up your car and get on your bike – or better yet get on our bike, you know the ugly green ones we strategically placed around the city that you never use? We will make you use them,, yes we will!”

  15. Not true actually. If you study the history of the movement in the Netherlands for example, they were highly car-centric before they decided to change. The same ‘it will never work’ comments have been made in many cities around the world, only to be continually proven wrong as more infrastructure was put in place. This is why most US cities are now moving towards multi-modal transport models….because they have been shown to work. On the other hand, cities that have moved away from multi-modal transportation have uniformly seen dismal results. There are many recent examples in China, in which cites that were quite navigable by various means are now dominated by all day gridlocked arterials and the worst air pollution in the world. Another example is Brussels, which would be a good contrast city to Copenhagen, as they went down opposite paths with respect to multi-modal transport. These could be easily visited in the same trip to see the contrast. Brussels demonstrates that policy making is the primary factor in determining transportation choices, not culture or historic preferences, as nearby cities that made different policy choices could not be any different.

    I applaud policy makers for wanting to visit other cities and find out what has worked and not worked for them. Most professionals make trips for conferences in order to keep up. I think most people would appreciate for example that their doctor occasionally attends conferences on the latest medical advances, vs just going by whatever they learned in the 1970’s. Its the same advantage for policy makers also.

    The world, and San Jose, is changing quickly, and we need to be looking at alternatives to the 1970’s transportation models in order to have a bright future. Policy makers need to be informed of these choices, and the outcomes that have resulted from them in other cities.

    • Priorities. What good are bikes if you cannot retain ownership of your bicycle due to thefts and burglaries? What good are bike lanes if there is no one to monitor driving laws to ensure you aren’t killed in an unsolvable hit and run collision?

    • Because she is right on the brink of solving global warming, along with “Lance” Khamis.

        • In the words of the immortal Sgt. Hulka, “Lighten up Francis”. Lance Khamis, nor any other councilmember, has any reason to travel to Copenhagen under the pretense of studying their bicycle system. There is not a shred of information he will bring back that could not be found on the internet instantly.

  16. Utterly ridiculous. Didn’t we invent things like the email and the internet in this valley? If that is too complicated, can’t the policy leaders use century old technology like telephones and television to study the issue.

    “Honey, we need a new car. Let’s fly to Detroit, Munich and Tokyo.”

  17. SJMAX–because if she goes to Hawai’i now, she doesn’t have to pay for it. Just another pig feeding at the public trough.

  18. There’s no money for police, our city is rivaling Oakland for murder rates, and yet there’s money for yet another boondoggle? We need to vote these freeloaders out of office. Let’s get people in who actually care more about the safety of San Jose residents than they do the ‘perks’ of their office.

    They do not need a trip to Copenhagen. They need an ethical reboot.

    • 1. The City of San Jose has budgeted over $324,000,000 for police services this fiscal year. This represents 33% of the City’s General Fund which also funds fire services, parks, libraries, community centers, graffiti abatement, code enforcement, park rangers, and other City services. Over half of the City budget is spent solely on public safety (police/fire).
      2. No, we do not rival Oakland for murder rates – they are at about double the murders YTD and far higher on a per-capita basis, and rate in SF is dramatically lower this year from recent years and is now slightly lower than San Jose’s on a per-capita basis. SF’s rate is dramatically lower this year from past years though they have 300 fewer police officers.
      3. Again, no City money is being used for the trip – that’s zero taxpayer dollars.

      • Thanks for entering the fray, You are the D10 Chief of Staff, former D1 Budget guy – and extensive education in finance and managing budgets in the private sector. The media is always reporting the costs to SJ’s budget attributed to the police department. Never real numbers just as a percentage “of the Budget.” Usually in the 30-35% range.

        Here you say that the $324mill is 33% of the “City’s General Fund” (which I agree is TRUE). Then you close saying “…Over half of the City budget is spent solely on public safety (police/fire).” Police and Fire DO account for about 51% of the GENERAL FUND ***NOT*** the City Budget.

        The City Budget (according to The City Budget in Brief and other docs” http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30539) Indicates that the “City Budget” is made up of Three different Funds (1) the General Fund (2) the Capital Funds and (3) the Special Funds making up 30%, 24% and 46% of the City Budget respectively. The total “City Budget” is $3,298,305,392.00.

        Given the more accurate context of City Budget as officially described by nothing less than the “City Budget” itself the Police Department uses 9.8% of the Budget while police/fire (public safety) used 15%. Far different than 33% and 50% and far more accurate.

        It would be nice if you as someone with your position and experience would (1) accurately represent what the budget is and then the numbers and percentages in relation to the REAL budget instead of misrepresenting the General Fund as the “Budget.” It would go a long way towards establishing your credibility on the matter as well as Councilmember Khamis’ – who knows the Merc and SJI might even feel compelled to report more factually on the matter…. what a good thing that would be for everyone.

        • I had already established that I was discussing the General Fund budget, though, in retrospect, I agree that it would have been better for me to carry the reference throughout, as opposed to using “City budget” as shorthand. Had I done so, it would have obviated this attack from the anonymous troll brigade. Mea culpa.

          • The “consistency” of using “general fund” through your post still does not amount to accurately describing what the “City Budget” is. The “General Fund” IS 30% of the City Budget and NOT the “City Budget.”

      • “3. Again, no City money is being used for the trip – that’s zero taxpayer dollars.”

        Uh, big, big lie. His salary and benefits, while he is in Europe, are totally paid for with SJ taxpayer money. He should stay here and tend to SJ city business; not on a political junket to Europe. Can neither you or Khamis see they hypocrisy in all this, or do you simply not care?

        • Lets wait and see what expenses (if any) are submitted for reimbursement …

      • Shane,

        Is what the Meyer says about the budget true? General Fund, Capital Fund and Reserve Fund? If so…how huh money is in the reserve fund and exactly what is it used for? It seems now, in contrast to what we were lead to believe, that public safety is using far less of the taxpayer money than other priorities the city politicians seem to have.

        As a taxpayer I eagerly await your response.

        • Don’t take my word, don’t take Shane”s (unless you are wiling to take his spiteful name calling)… But, do take the City’s word according to its own “Budget in Brief” publication. (http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30539)

          The “Total Special Funds” amount is $1,534,221,665. ($1.53Billion) or 46% of the City Budget.

          Here are some other “interesting numbers” for you from the 2013 Public Employee’s Salary Data Base:

          Shane P. Connolly – Senior Council Assistant U City Council – Base: $71,415 Other*: $537
          MDV**: $6876 ER*** $41,304 Misc**** $1255 TCOE***** $121,386

          * Lump sum payouts for Vacation, Sick and Comp Time, Bonuses and other taxable cash payments in 2013

          ** Employer Contributions to medical, dental and vision plans

          *** Employer Contribution to pension

          **** Other non-cash costs of employment

          • Why does Shane’s compensation matter? Several reasons

            (1) SPC is a political staffer – a mercenary, carpetbagger – short term/Temporary PUBLIC employee (he has a job as long as an elected official employs him) This particular political staffer espouses the views of his last two “bosses” Pete Constant and now Johnny Khamis – most notable are the views that there be no “cash-out” for unused sick leave. I don’t know about Comp or Vacation as most employees can cash them out AT THE END of their employment with the City. Some bargaining units (often referred to as UNIONS) so allow unused vacation to be cashed out from time to time. It should be noted that at SJPD employees vacation is only allowed to accrue to the level of twice the annual number of hours earned… (if employee earns 140hours/year the most he/she can accrue is 280hours. Any vacation earned in excess of 240 is lost forever – the employee is not allowed to cash out anything over 240 hours)

            (2) Pension: $41k in taxpayer money for SPC’s pension! Both Khamis and Constant are “pension reformers” if they had their way there would be no pensions for public employees – public employees like Constant, Khamis and Connolly are. All worked for and were successful to a degree in limiting the pension benefits for all SJ employees especially future employees. Meanwhile they one day will reap the rewards of their protected benefits. Protected Benefits? Yes, thanks to the SJPOA and Local230 MEF/AFSCME… legal efforts fighting Measure B resulted in those benefits being preserved – even if they specifically crafted Measure B to exempt their benefits from attack.

            (3) Perhaps most important is that Shane Patrick Connolly introduced himself to this thread as “Chief of Staff, District 10” – a PUBLIC EMPLOYEE and then showed his true colors – something he never seems to be able to avoid when dealing with people who disagree with him. Shane resorts to petty “name calling” in a sarcastic condescending reply where all I did was ask for accuracy. Wasn’t specifically referring to me? Fine who are these members of the “troll brigade.”

            Stay classy Shane – there are people out there who think you’re better than the way you allow yourself to behave when questioned – the taxpayers deserve better from their “employees.”

          • The silence coming from Shane is deafening. After reading the budget document you posted and reading other budget documents from the city website it is apparent the city politicians are hiding the true numbers when it comes to the budget. The General Fund is only one of many many funds the city maintains for its total budget and it’s not even the largest. It is dishonest at best for the elected politicians to use these number to skew the true financial picture of the city.

          • Don’t worry, Michael. I haven’t forgotten about you. If you email me at [email protected], I will be happy to personally respond to you. I do not find it necessary to get in a tit-for-tat with people who post attacks using ersatz identities on message boards, nor do I abide disgusting libelous remarks from their ilk (especially when they cannot spell correctly)!

          • That’s right Shane, when you can’t argue facts (in any forum) dismiss the facts on account of spelling mistakes… good bureaucrat!

            Just remember – no one hear wondered when you would make an appearance – you just did when your ears started burning.

  19. Studies, studies, studies. “How”, the professional politician and his arrogant, contemptuous staffer muse, “can we spend time and money to make ourselves appear to be in favor of bicycling?” Studies. They do studies. They take trips. They issue statements.
    If our endless parade of politicians, led by the insufferable Ken Yeager and now joined by Johnny Khamis, would devote a fraction of the effort to DOING something as they do to doing studies then we would years ago have had a continuous network of uninterrupted bike paths along Guadalupe Creek and Los Gatos Creek . We’ve got the land. Just finish building the freakin’ bike paths so they’re finally actually useful for getting somewhere.
    Enough with the studies. Stop it with the trips. Quit trying to turn California into Europe.
    This is San Jose. Get over it.

  20. Just as the city listened little to people that lived in europe for years over the little used streetcars, i doubt they will listen to anyone in Kobenhaven. As we all know politicians do what they want with tax payers money, and usually it matters little to them how they waste it. downtown cannot come up with its own ideas? maybe we need a new leader downtown hello??