City Accepts Aid to Combat Gangs

The number of homicides in San Jose over the last six months has already surpassed the total for all of 2010, which is why the police department is accepting federal assistance to combat gang violence.

The SJPD will be adding two agents from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to specifically focus on gangs, which police say are responsible for 14 of the city’s 27 homicides so far this year. There were 20 homicides in San Jose in 2010.

In a meeting with San Jose Inside last week, Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen said there have been discussions between himself, Police Chief Chris Moore and Mayor Chuck Reed about what the city can do to reduce the murder rate. One possibility Rosen suggested was implementing injunctions in certain neighborhoods that are infested with gangs.

Rosen added that the last time the city imposed injunctions—which are designed to restrain violent activity and can include forbidding certain colors from being worn outdoors as well as dispersing loitering groups—was roughly two decades ago. Oakland is currently funding injunctions in response to gang violence.

Reports say the two officers coming over from ICE have focused their efforts on removing gang members who are in this country illegally. Rosen’s office supports deportation of violent criminals, but since he took over the DAs office in January, prosecutors have been told to consider “collateral consequences” when negotiating a guilty plea for lower-level offenders.

While the office under previous DA Dolores Carr did not take such matters under consideration, Rosen says, the county now offers illegal immigrants options that could allow them to stay inside the country or prevent a family from being broken up, as long as the person is not considered a threat to public safety.

“We want the sentence to weigh the same, even if they’re constructed a little differently,” Rosen says, adding that the focus will be on “consistency and individual fairness.”

He added that prosecutors offer similarly structured plea agreements to U.S. citizens, not just illegal immigrants.

Josh Koehn is a former managing editor for San Jose Inside and Metro Silicon Valley.


  1. ICE, being a wholly owned subsisidiary of ‘Government Industries’, has produced a successful business model based on growth.
    ICE knows that concentrating it’s efforts and resources on STOPPING illegal immigration would be a bad business strategy.
    If they did their job they’d be putting themselves out of business.
    But by FAILING to do their job and actually allowing illegal aliens to freely enter by the southern border and packed into shipping containers from the Asian mainland, ICE creates for itself expanded opportunities for growth in MANY markets across the U.S. including cities like San Jose. And as long as they continue to fail to do their job, more and more of these business opportunities will be created!

    U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is a leader in the 21st century economy. It’s well connected management team clearly understands that perpetual failure is the key to success in any long term Government endeavor.

    San Jose should be proud of it’s role in supporting ‘Government Industries’’ efforts in leading the way into the economy of our Brave New World.

    PS- ALL you union guys deserve a tip of the cap too!

  2. > While the office under previous DA Dolores Carr did not take such matters under consideration, Rosen says, the county now offers illegal immigrants options that could allow them to stay inside the country or prevent a family from being broken up, as long as the person is not considered a threat to public safety.

    Didn’t Obamba just sue Arizona on the grounds that only the feds have jurisdiction over immigration matters?

    How can Rosen offer illegal immigrants “options that could allow them to stay inside the country”?  It’s not his place to be offering such “options”.

    I would call it rogue district attorney behavior.

  3. with apologies to Rodgers and Hammerstein…

    Meaningless statements and half-hearted measures;
    Rebranded forces and government treasures;
    Bundled grant dollars all tied up with strings;
    These are a few of my favorite things.

    Amnestied wetbacks and young gang affiliates;
    Norteños, Sureños, assorted illiterates;
    Elected officials who rule as if kings;
    These are a few of my favorite things.

    Girls on probation with muffin-top figures;
    Barrio thugs with their fingers on triggers;
    Graffitied corners and meth dealing rings;
    These are a few of my favorite things.

    When the mayor lies,
    When the chief drools,
    When John Galt complains,
    I simply remember my favorite things,
    And then I don’t feel so bad.

      • Yes, Officer D. That WAS pretty good but you haven’t heard ‘The REST of the Story’;

        COLAs and sick days too many to mention,
        Early retirement and six figure pensions,
        Dining on tri tip and corn on the cob,
        God I love having my Government job.

        Gullible public that thinks I’m admireable,
        Ironclad contract that makes me unfireable,
        Punching a timeclock and doing my time,
        A lottery payout on taxpayers’ dime.

        When the pay’s cut,
        When the dough’s tight,
        When Monitor refrains,
        I simply remember my favorite things,
        And then I do NOT… com plain!

        PS- Officer D, I appreciate that you actually wrote out the gushing, “Oh My God” rather than condescending to Officer X’s adolescent application of “OMG”.

        • You’re right.
          My apologies to you and all the other readers, and especially to Officer D and BS Monitor, both of whom are thoughtful and much appreciated contributors to these discussions.

        • Galt,

          I used to enjoy your postings but as of late, you disappoint me. I thought you were one of the few who actually did their research. Apparently you just drink the kool aid and rant. Blindly following chuck reed’s hyperbole is so last year. Come on now, you must be able to come up with much more than the “6 figure retirement blah blah blah” rant. Weren’t you watching for the last two months while that was factually disproven?
          Dude if that was true I’d have applied to the city months ago.
          John you disappoint me.

        • > COLAs and sick days too many to mention,
          Early retirement and six figure pensions,
          Dining on tri tip and corn on the cob,
          God I love having my Government job.

          In jest, there is truth.

          Mediocrities and dullards feel the just sting of the Galtian wit.

          Well done, Galtus Magnus!

        • Thank You JG, for the word of appreciation. One of the things I learned quite a while ago in this line of work is that no one can be entirely right or entirely wrong all the time. I have tried to be clear and honest about when I agree or disagree with pretty much anyone and tried to introduce fact-based argument for my perspective. There have been times when I’ve vehemently disagreed with PLO (merit and outcome of passage of Measures V and W), and others wherein I find myself in complete agreement (commercial zoning conversions, BMR housing, etc). I’ve agreed with BSM and have appreciated his thoughtful advocacy of public safety, but probably disagree with him as to the efficacy and merit of the POA of which I’ve been forced to become an open critic. I agree with you that San Jose’s business model needs to change in a variety of ways, but have disagreed with you as to the application of free-market principles when it comes to the delivery of municipal services.

          One of the points that I’ve tried to make over and over again is that Mayor Reeds egalitarian approach to addressing wages, benefits and pension reform is entirely wrong. He has repeatedly given librarians (for instance) intellectual and moral equivalence to public safety employees, an assertion which is so ridiculous and bizarre that I’m amazed he hasn’t caught even a little bit of grief over it. Librarians won’t be putting out structure fires, providing life-saving care, extricating people from mangled wrecks, chasing/catching robbery or homicide suspects, monitoring sex registrants, investigating domestic violence incidents or rapes, or any other of the hundreds of safety-related activities which go on every single day. Unfortunately, his attitude pervades City Hall and has apparently been adopted by all too many Councilmembers.

          The reality is that public safety jobs cannot be readily filled by the vast majority of city employees. They typically lack the background, constitution or interest. As such, public safety employees are a far more scarce commodity than clerks, admins, janitors, park maintenance employees, etc.  They ought to be treated as such.

          Finally, with respect to the pension issue: I spoke personally with PLO to discuss an alternative pension model which was a hybrid of the existing system and a 401k/IRA-type system. I believe that it had the potential to resolve the unfunded liability issue, address the issue of retirement age/years of service, eliminated the COLA issue and, over time, would have created an internal surplus to offset the unfunded liabilities generated by prior retirees. It wasn’t a perfect solution, but I believe that if it was presented to the rank and file, it would have generated significant buy-in – especially since it would enable us to take better financial care of our families in the event our our death. That proposal never went anywhere, and I never heard back from PLO. I bring this up because you should know that there are alot of us out there who are engaging in truly outside-the-box thinking, trying to engineer workable solutions that don’t put current employees at a significant disadvantage and don’t place the city as an employer at a severe competitive disadvantage.

          And, that is my main concern with all of this: San Jose has never been a true competitor when it comes to public safety wages and benefits. Where San Jose competed was in the diversity of job opportunities and in having a largely sterling national reputation. With all that has gone on with San Jose’s public safety professions, San Jose is non-competitive in wages and benefits, no longer has the same diversity of job opportunities/specialized assignments and is no longer an employer of good repute. I don’t know that San Jose will recover from this – not even in the long term. I believe that San Jose will see an accelerated attrition of public safety employees as even somewhat senior officers and firefighters lateral to other agencies and that San Jose will be place in a position of having to make their wage/benefit packages more competitive in order to offset the lack of opportunity and tarnished reputation.

          Finally, scrutiny of the budget would reveal that none of this actually needed to happen. The budget contains so many expenditure for non-charter services that, if the leadership in City Hall were interested in being truly responsible, there was plenty of opportunity to do so, simply by prioritizing expenditures responsibly. San Jose’s leadership, by and large is far more interested in pandering to special interests of all stripes than it is in engaging in genuine fiscal responsibility, as again, an evaluation of their voting record in such matters as the Mexican Heritage Plaza, RDA expenditures, grants paid out of the General Fund, transfers from the General Fund to the other funds etc. reveal.

        • With respect to the COLA’s, refer to my post from the other day. With respect to the sick time buyout, I proposed a change to how it is structured which maintains the incentive to employees, but significantly reduces the financial liability to the City. Why don’t you verify that with PLO as well. We had that conversation in person.

          It is so frustrating to me that our detractors criticize endlessly and the nporpose truly unworkable solutions – if for no other reason than that they are either illegal or cripple San Jose’s ability to compete as an employer. Then, on the other hand, there are those who are supposed to be our advocates the president and VP of the POA for instance, who lack any kind of imagination to come up with novel workable solutions and lack the intestinal fortitude to force the City to negotiate in good faith.

          This last contract is a perfect example of that. It was deeply flawed, incomplete, and set the stage to hand over to the City every competitive advantage that the POA membership once enjoyed. They did nothing effective to combat the loss of status in the community and failed even to make a stand on principle to show how the city repeatedly refused to negotiate in good faith.

          The repercussions of all of this are only just now beginning to be felt, like the temblors heralding a volcanic eruption. Truly, I believe nearly 30 homicides is just the tip of the ice berg. And Why? Because of an idealogue of a mayor with his sights set on MLB and a stadium, because of politicians who are at the minimum focused on their careers instead of what’s good for the city and who, more often than not have sold their souls to special interests, and because of a POA board which largely lacked the intestinal fortitude, intelligence and imagination to either come up with novel solutions to the problems the city faces or listen to those who have. And, to make matters worse, those of us who are or have been critical of the board, critical of the contract, critical of policies and decisions can’t get any traction. As an example, I posted a comment on which was deeply critical of the contract proposal and it was never published. I used no profanity, didn’t criticize the individuals responsible and focused only on the issues. I knew at the time that I ‘penned’ it that there was little chance that it’d see publication, so I photographed it as well.

          But, I digress. The point is that there are those of us who, in a thoughtful way, have proposed changes to the wages/benefits model. The ideas are out there, but we can’t get any traction with the city and we can’t even get any traction from those who are suppose to represent our interests.

        • OfficerD,
          I can’t disagree necessarily with any of your specific points. I would only note that your focus is very narrow. You have an agenda that is important to you and to your workmates. It’s unrealistic for you to expect the public at large, or the political leadership, to be as singlemindedly determined to advance the interests of what is after all a ‘special interest group’, as the members of that group.

          I’m quite aware that many of your political positions are in line with my own, which I believe would be for the public good if they were ever actualized. I’d appreciate that agreement and that alliance if it amounted to anything. But it’s just words. I think that you more than offset the potential good of your personal political beliefs and even your own voting power when you join and support a public employee labor union. You cash in your powerful moral, human potential to make a positive difference, to an organization that doesn’t share your human conscience. Whatever political opinions you might hold are negated. In the singleminded pursuit of it’s chartered mission, the organization to which you hand over your political power is just as likely to use that power for purposes antithetical to your own beliefs as to consistent with your own. Not to mention that many union members who aren’t even residents of San Jose have dubiously intentioned political power here by virtue of their union membership.
          When I rudely mock, criticize and hyperbolize public employees it’s not personal. I’m not satirizing good people OfficerD and Joseph DiSalvo’s intentions and wishes. I’m satirizing the reality of what OfficerD and Joseph DiSalvo have naively and inadvertantly allowed their intentions and wishes to be translated into.

        • OfficerD,
          You forget that people can look at the same set of facts and form different conclusions.

          I’m not an expert on the labor history of San Jose and I’ve never claimed to be. I’m no rocket scientist either, but without knowing a single detail of the origin of the ‘sick leave buyout’, I can state with certainty that it HAD to have come about as a result of employees maxing out their sick day allottment and was an effort to get them to simply show up to work when they were able. THAT is a sad statement about the work ethic of the employees. I don’t know if the POA had anything to do with it’s institution and I never claimed it did, but it’s members certainly cashed in on and in doing so took advantage of an employer who was only trying to treat them well.
          Try those extortion tactics where I work and you’re out on your ass.

        • John, first, I’d like to point out that the POA of today is quite different from the POA that I joined as a recruit. Lately, more often than not, I find myself in opposition with the POA – either their positions or their methods. Understand also that my advocacy of the needs of public safety is not the moral or intellectual equivalent of agreement or walking in lockstep with the POA. I do neither. Understand also that many San Jose officers are quite dissatisfied with the POA for numerous reasons. They are so dissatisfied in fact that they have attempted to withdraw their membership, only to be told that they cannot do so until November. And this, after George Beattie personally and publicly asserted that members would be free to withdraw at any time.

          Finally, I’d point out that satire and fallacy are quite different animals. I don’t mind the satire, but when, in your satire, you also disseminate bad information, information that can be proved to be false, you do no one a service and it erodes your credibility. For instance, arguing against the sick time buyout and blaming the POA for its existence while ignoring the true history of it and that it was the city which put it into place also erodes your credibility. On this point, I would add that, with recent attrition, retaining the sick time buyout in one form or another is going to be absolutely crucial in order to maintain manageable staffing levels.

        • “I can state with certainty that it HAD to have come about as a result of employees maxing out their sick day allottment and was an effort to get them to simply show up to work when they were able. THAT is a sad statement about the work ethic of the employees.”

          You can state with certainty??? Sad statement about the work ethics of employees??? Once again, you are wrong. Why do you so consistently make statements that so blatantly show that you don’t know what you are talking about? The reason for the sick leave buy outs was to keep them from using it so there would be more officers on the street. It costs less than hiring and training new officers. The logic was that if the officers were paid for their sick time, they would be less apt to use it and come to work…even if they did not feel well.

          You are a sad person.

        • OfficerD,
          Help me out here. I’m temporarily biting my tongue and with a monumental effort of will I’m refraining from responding sarcastically, angrily, and probably even a little uncivilly to the remarks of ‘And once again’.
          Would it be imposing on our cyber-acquaintance too much to ask a small favor?
          Would you please point out to ‘And once again’ the enormous flaw in his argument regarding the reason that the ‘sick leave buyout’ policy was enacted? I’m pretty sure you know what I’d say about it but it wouldn’t mean anything coming from me.
          But if you said it, he just might hear it.

        • Actually, while I can’t attest to specific reasoning at the time that it was negotiated, the sick time buyout was proposed by the City in lieu of a pay raise. If I recall correctly, this was instituted about 20 years ago, though it was well before my date of hire and so I can’t be any more specific than that. Certainly, I can’t guess as to the reasoning employed by the City’s negotiators. However, “AOA” is correct in asserting that, over the long haul, the cost of the buyout vs the cost of staffing appropriately in a way that would offset sick time usage probably works out in the City’s favor.

          On the other hand, if we look at San Jose’s hiring practices historically, “AOA’s” inference doesn’t stretch credulity. San Jose has never in the last 3 decades – and possibly more – staffed its police department anywhere close to the national average.

          To my knowledge, sick time abuse hasn’t been an issue historically. I realize that the buyout probably skews the numbers for the last couple decades, but I think it’d be interesting to examine the numbers prior to its institution and see how much the numbers changed. On the other hand, I don’t think you quite understand the work ethic that traditionally has existed in the PD. Though there are a few bad apples, we are not a bunch of shirkers. The only reason San Jose has stayed as safe as it has is because it has enjoyed an incredibly aggressive, proactive and professional police force. Well, the force remains as professional, but alot of the go-getter attitude and proactive mentality has been sucked dry by incidents as the Phuong Ho case and a command staff, many of whom have become politically correct puppets and micro-managing twits. One thing we’ve learned from all this is that the command staff, chiefs and the city management all are entirely willing to sacrifice a good officer on the altar of political correctness and expediency. I think manyof us aren’t willing to put our careers on the line just to make great arrests.

          One of the things I proposed to PLO earlier in the year is a modification of the buyout program that retains the benefit, but doesn’t defer the payout until the end of an officer’s career. At this point, I don’t think that the city can afford to do away with it entirely. As an example, I worked the last four days with a raging sinus infection. Every day, we went out with cut beats on the team – usually 1/3 the officers that are normally assigned. One of those days, we’d have had 5 out of the 6 officers normally assigned to the team, except that one of officers on my team got reassigned to another district that was even more hard up officers than we were. With barely over 1100 officers, this is going to be our new ‘business model’ and I don’t anticipate it will change anytime soon. Sadly, that idea got about as much traction as a slug in an oil spill.

          One other item of note: I have noticed that more and more agencies are trying to solicit officers away from SJPD. On Friday when I started my ‘work week’, I checked out my email and saw that 7 different agencies where soliciting to fill scores of positions. That fire sale on SJPD officers is alive and well, and I know there’s alot of interest in these positions – especially among the more junior officers such as those in the 2nd tier of possible layoffs.

        • —“And once again (or whatever name you’ve got for yourself today),I know, I know. STFU. You don’t have to tell me.”—

          I couldn’t even say it. Thanks for the laugh. Kinda needed it wink

        • I think what we are running up against here is an insurmountable cognitive disconnect. John, you consistently describe those of us in public safety in a way that suggests you believe we are largely lazy, undereducated, unethical layabouts. I realize that, for some, this is a popular – and sometimes convenient – belief system to hold. Unfortunately, it doesn’t really stand up under open-minded scrutiny and it is certainly inconsistent with much of my experience with both my fellow officers and with numerous members of the Fire Department over the years. Most of the firefighters I know work their asses off to save a life, put out a fire, extricate a crash victim. The do it because that’s what they enjoy. Most of the cops I know enjoy the thrill of the hunt, finding crooks and jailing them, getting drugs or illegal weapons off the streets, making the streets safer. And, by and large, we endeavor to be professional, ethical and well-educated in our professions.

          As I said, the policy was instituted before my time so I wasn’t privy to the negotiation process. If you have special knowledge or documentation to support your claim – deeply held belief, even – that sick time abuse was rampant and that the abuse was the reason for the institution of the sick time buyout, please share it with us. Otherwise, your assertions are unsubstantiated opinions based on a clear set of biases.

          I think that one of the things that is hurting this city the most right now is arbitrariness – arbitrary opinions, beliefs, decisions and policies. I believe that this infests both sides of most of these sorts of debates and would very much like to see this blog rise above that and try to set a better standard.

        • OfficerD,
          In cases such as this Kathleen often says, “We’ll just have to agree to disagree”. That’s never set well with me. It seems to me that a ‘cognitive disconnect’ such as this is exactly when it’s most important to persevere because it’s an indication that we’ve finally run up against that fundamental belief upon which we really disagree.
          But let’s leave it set for awhile. Our subconsciouses will churn away at the ideas with which we’ve bombarded one another and we each may return to the discussion with a fresh perspective in a week or a month or whenever.
          Let me just leave you with this for now.
          I’m troubled to know you have developed a distrust of my motives and suspect that I’m just plain anti public safety. I just want to assure you that I’m not. What I’m really concerned about is the direction our political system is going. It just so happens that a high proportion of the discussions on SJI revolve around police and fire so that’s where my opinion is most often given the opportunity of expression.
          Work hard. Try to stay safe. I’ll do the same.


        • “Otherwise, your assertions are unsubstantiated opinions based on a clear set of biases.”

          It has been clear, from day one, that he has something against government workers, period. There is a constant put down. You have to wonder why.

        • OfficerD,

          Oh well. It was worth a try.
          But you disappoint me my friend.
          My criticism was not that the ‘sick leave buyout’ is not effective. Rather, that it IS effective.

          Would you have gone to work with your raging sinus infection those 4 days if the City wasn’t putting $1,500 or so in a savings account for you? Or would you have convinced yourself that you were too sick to work? (I’d like to believe that YOU would have gone in regardless, OD, or that at the very least you can acknowledge the pertinence of this question and my point in posing it)
          The reason the City offered the sick leave buyout is because officers who were quite able to work their shifts were calling in sick instead, knowingly leaving their fellow officers understaffed and at increased risk. The fault for this chronic, dangerous and expensive understaffing can clearly be laid at the feet of the rank and file beat cops of that era.
          The sick leave system was an “honor system”.
          What does it say about a person’s character who abuses the honor system?
          The City was attempting to treat it’s employees honorably and like adults. The employees returned the favor by acting childish and throwing the City’s goodwill back in our face and demanding in return the only thing that appears to matter to them- more money.
          So yeah. The sick leave buyout works. Policemen consistently show up to work now, not because they’re already being paid to, because it’s their job and because it’s the right thing to do. No, it’s because we bribed them with more money.

          And once again (or whatever name you’ve got for yourself today),

          I know, I know. STFU. You don’t have to tell me.

  4. Isn’t this the same county leading the charge for all counties to opt out of cooperating with the fed’s in reporting illegals arrested to INS/ICE to prevent their deportation?  The City and its police force as far back as under the beginning of the end reign of chief lil’ liar landsdown has maintained a policy of placation when it comes to illegals…

    Where do a$$-clowns like this come from? You can see from Rosen’s photo that he has physically adapted to talking out of both sides of his mouth.

    • Jeff Rosen and Chris Moore are just the latest in a long series of San Jose politicians who have invited and encouraged illegal aliens to live here.
      By continuing to elect “a$$-clowns” like this, the people of San Jose are now getting exactly the budget deficits, the crumbling infrastructure, the fractured community, AND and the gang violence we voted for.
      Ain’t our leftist politics wonderful!

  5. This Jeff Rosen guy looks like a real piece of work.

    Not only does he pick and choose which laws he is going to enforce, based on the voices in his head and his copy of “Political Correctness for Dummies”, but he is also running an operation with clear conflicts of interest:

    The Appearance of Conflict of Interest Sun, Jan 23, 2011 – 5:57 pm .

    “Jay Boyarsky Will Serve As The Chief Assistant District Attorney”

    San Jose is really in a race to the bottom for lousiest local government.

  6. Josh.
      What is the point? I am surprised that you as a man with your experience does not have a simply answer to our community dilema.
      Bud and I have been screaming in the desert for some help in this incredibly simple solution to our children’s health.
      Having 60 % drop out in our schools should tell you some thing is not right.
      Sure all the rascles that post will deny our responcibilities to our Village children.
      Why are we looking to the Feds to fund what we have rought?
      There seems to be a disconnect here. We send the guetto brothers to kill in some foreign desert land, while here the concil members do nothing to help the babies that are suffering from lead expouser from slum lords , cute god dam airports that shower death to all that lay below them.
      I am sickened by the politics that has prevailed for the past 50 years in our valley of Hearts Delight.
      I abhor setting the Dogs on folks that know when they are being ignored and abused.
      Of course it is an easy mark to have the cartells use these now adults to do their bidding, in our guettos, and all over our community. The money that is come by is what drives people all over this country to make meth. Look at your browsers friends!
      It has to start with the new borns of our community. Keep the lead away from these children, at least until they are 6 years old. That is the magic age where the brain has fully developed in a human being.
      The importation of leaded toys for the very young is not an accident or oversight. There is a whole nation of impaired brains being raised by those of us that could give a dam. You all know who you are!
      What I create at my anvil, is no match for the insolence of an uncareing philosophy of ignorance.

    The Village Black Smith

  7. > There seems to be a disconnect here. We send the guetto brothers to kill in some foreign desert land, while here the concil members do nothing to help the babies that are suffering from lead expouser from slum lords , cute god dam airports that shower death to all that lay below them.

    . . .

    > What I create at my anvil, is no match for the insolence of an uncareing philosophy of ignorance.
    The Village Black Smith


    Your tinfoil hat may be cinched down too tight.

    Could you explain to me the obscure, mystical reference to “cute god dam airports that shower death to all that lay below them.”

    Even though I technically don’t live or spend any time below an airport, I’m worried that I may be experincing the shower of death you are alluding to.

    Should I buy more guns?  Should I be wearing a gas mask.  Should I be sleeping in a pyramid?  Should I be carrying a rabbits foot.  Should I stuff a magic crystal in my underwear. Should I be eating only organically grown foods and using canvas grocery bags?

    Hurry! I need answers quickly.  There’s no time to waste.

    I’m alarmed.

  8. Bronco,
      It’s the Gas that cute little airplanes burn as they ascend to the skys that rains down on the inhabitants as exhaust. Reedhill View Airport is the grim reaper.
      Check out the web sites that list lead poisoning of children under flight path at Hillview, and slum housing where lead paint is still an issue..

    The Village Black Smith

    • >  It’s the Gas that cute little airplanes burn as they ascend to the skys that rains down on the inhabitants as exhaust. Reedhill View Airport is the grim reaper.



      Somehow, my Mercury News failed to bring this crisis to my attention.

      Sounds pretty grim.

      What’s the body count?

      Is it as bad as Chernobyl?

      If they made the airplanes uglier so that they weren’t so cute, would that help solve the problem?

      I want a full report.

  9. Conflict of interest??? San Jose doesn’t enforce federal laws, what is the real reason for enlisting the help/oversight of two-federal agents???  Politics at its finest….Pathetic!!!!  How bout bringing back VCET!!!!

  10. The website to go to is http://WWW.LEADEXPOSUER.COM
    I realize that Bronco and his pals at the Mercury News, may not get around much, but perhaps those of you that want to know if your babies are at risk, will make a few calls to your Pediatritionists, and mention Broncos name as the guy that made you realize, how ignorant the publication keep us.
      Thanks Mr. Bummah

    The Village Black Smith

    • Smithy:

      Important safety tip: don’t eat lead paint.

      There.  Happy now?

      I actually haven’t eaten lead paint since 1953 or 1954.

      I think the lead pain problem is well in hand. Some Democrat along the way solved it.  If you think lead paint is still a problem, blame Democrats.

      Time to move on to twenty-first century problems.

  11. Bahmah,
    Your complete ignorance on this issue is befuddling.
    Blood Lead Toxicity is the 21st century’s biggest problem.
      The perfect brains comming out of countries that are not contaminated with lead, will be the New Age for any Society that can channel that intelligence.
    “Blood Lead Toxicity” Look it up! “Man Up Bronco”!
      NO / Bronco Bahmahs left behind!!!!!!!!

    The Village Black Smith

    • > Blood Lead Toxicity is the 21st century’s biggest problem.

      Nothing to worry about, Smithy.

      President Obamba’s EPA is on the case.

      If it were as big a problem as you think, President Obamba would have made a speech.

      No speech.  No problem.

  12. Gangs have no respect of societies laws for there are no consequences they feel will deter their actions.

    Gang injunctions are political and judicial “Tom foolery”. The gangs will ignore injunctions, the Police and the rest of us.

    San Jose has become the MURDER Capital of Silicon Valley.

    What is needed:

    1.) President Obama to issue an executive order that gangs are a threat to out national security and suspend Habeus corpus on gang members.

    2.) President Obama would also have to authorize Military Police units to be dispatched to any state or city that requests them to bring the “gang” problem into submission. This would also intail stockade infrastructure and logistical support.

    3.) President Obama would then have to authorize a coordinated “round-up of the gangsters”. Military Police would detain and guard gang members.

    4.) President Obama would also have to authorize Militatry Tribunals to decide the fate of gang members.

    5.) Local leaders would have to authorize and construct a battle plan to reset the deterence clock. Elements of this battle plan: attack gang finances, employment and property holdings with the intent to permantly crush them for all time.

    As to the District Attorney’s “gang injuctions”, twist the pieces of those papers into a cone and stick them where the sun does not shine for all the good it misrepresents.

    The law, as it stands to day, is ineffective and incompetent to address gangs and the open warfare they perpetuate upon our society.

    Tough times require inovative and tough measures. By the way, President Licoln was the only President ever to suspend Habeus corpus.

    I think President Obama should do the same.

    David S. Wall