When Lissette Espinoza-Garnica ran for office four years ago, they participated in the Daily Journal endorsement process. Though Espinoza-Garnica did not receive the endorsement, we appreciated the time they gave to us in explaining their perspectives, philosophies and ideas for the district and the city.
This time Espinoza-Garnica opted out of the endorsement process, which meant our story on the race between them and Isabella Chu did not benefit from a complete perspective. We enter into our endorsement process with completely open minds and this was a loss for us and our readers, who we know would be interested in knowing how their perspectives, philosophies and ideas for the district and the city had either changed or remained the same in the four years they have held office. Still, we respect the decision and consider the offer to communicate to be open as we represent thousands of readers on the Peninsula who are interested in what their elected officials are doing and thinking.
Isabella Chu also ran for the District 3 seat four years ago, and is now offering practical and common-sense solutions on a range of issues — primarily public health and public safety with an emphasis on safe streets for pedestrians and bicyclists. She is also a proponent of more housing in the city and adapting to meet the needs of growing households. She also has a firm grip on land use and budget issues. She is a good choice, and a safe one.
However, Espinoza-Garnica provides an important voice on the council, which is provided by others at times but in less of a direct way as they do. At the center of their focus is low-income and immigrant communities who can be left out of the discussions at City Hall. Policing, housing and the environment are key issues for these communities and others and Espinoza-Garnica’s votes and public statements on these issues has not strayed.
We did not get the conversation we wanted to ask specific questions, but a primary part of our job is to watch and report on actions of our government and so we know Espinoza-Garnica’s actions.
We may not agree with all of their statements and actions but we do know that they represent a point of view and a population that deserves attention in our government and inside its halls of power. Espinoza-Garnica has shown no evidence of losing sight of that need.
It is unusual for an elected official to not seek our endorsement and it is also unusual for us to grant it in that circumstance. But nothing has ever stood in our way of recommending the person we think is best suited for the position, and there is no reason for us to sway from that now.
Lissette Espinoza-Garnica deserves your vote in District 3.
(5) comments
This endorsement feels like it was written by a child. I challenge you to come up with better reasons to endorse a candidate that is not well liked by the citizens, and who refused to be interviewed. It's almost as if she scores high on the "wokeness" scale, and that is reason enough for the endorsement. I think the citizens deserve a more in depth analysis.
But to be fair, while Isabella Chu keeps talking about bike lanes, she hasn't exactly delivered while on the planning commission either.
If you want to be taken seriously, you have to turn down a few circulation studies at some time.
This is a somewhat surprising endorsement.
1. Jon Mays just recently explained how local Jurisdiction use the Brown Act to hide information from their constituents
2. We can assume that "low-income and immigrant communities" have an even harder time to express their needs and voice their opinions
3. Lisette Espinoza-Garnica voted against opening up council meetings for remote Zoom comments again
There is some irony hidden here somewhere. Once you find yourself regularly voting with Mayor Jeff Gee, you know you have become "The Establishment".
https://www.smdailyjournal.com/opinion/columnists/brown-act-and-its-true-meaning/article_3dc8716e-55e7-11ef-8613-4b962c69fcf4.html
she wont stand for the pledge so I won't stand for her.
agreed
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.