Editor,
Are ethics important to San Mateo? Jan. 17’s news was explosive, indicting the former Oakland mayor for corruption. This includes helping her to win her election narrowly by secretly funding opposition mailers, exchanging funds for business dealings, etc.
The FBI credits Oakland’s Ethics Commission for bringing initial attention to this matter.
San Mateo’s own history with our council, especially over the last nine years, has also eroded public trust to the point where a resident group called Ethics San Mateo was formed.
Ethics San Mateo has previously urged the council to form an Ethics Commission, but that has thus far fallen on deaf ears.
In light of some new faces now on the council, the stain of bad actors remains. And this partially cleaned house holds no guarantees for the public. There are still those in the wings desiring the role of puppet master. The shambles left by the last nine years can truly be positively impacted under the watchful eye of an Ethics Commission.
2025 is a brand-new year. The council sets its priorities at its upcoming Blue Sky meeting in February. Encourage councilmembers to install an Ethics Commission now. Email them at: citycouncil@cityofsanmateo.org.
We need leaders leading with positive change who are interested in rebuilding integrity and public trust.
Lisa Taner
San Mateo
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(4) comments
There is a great example about ethics coming to the next city council meetings.
In 2023 C/CAG members got an education on Equity Focus Areas in San Mateo County. It was determined that the county wants to support children and working class families with solid bicycle infrastructure. Basically if affluent children and students in Berkeley and Palo Alto deserve bike lanes, the same is true for low-income children and students in the North Central neighborhood, in Redwood City, in North Fair Oaks, in East Palo Alto, and in South San Francisco. C/CAG and the county even hired a Chief Equity Officer Shireen Malekafzali, whose main job is to make sure these Equity Focus Areas, these Equity Priority Areas, these Communities of Concern are treated better in the future than they have been in the past.
The current city manager Alex Kojikian is aiming to commit several ethic violations - basically the same violations he did when he was working for Redwood City:
- not enforcing municipal parking codes - everyone uses streets as private car storage. Streets are a mess.
- streets are made for transportation - no tax payer funding should go to the private storage of a minority of people with too many large vehicles.
- C/CAG has an Equity Framework, which all cities, city managers and city councils have ratified - Alex Kojikian is trying to violate that Framework.
- The city wants to replace bike lanes through "bike boulevards", which have already failed in Redwood City and San Mateo.
- In the past HUD and similar grants have ended up in inner-city freeways, jails, and parking lots - San Mateo is trying to do the same here.
Let's see if Mayor Rob Newsom Jr., Deputy Mayor Adam Loraine, rookie council member Nicole Fernandez, rookie council member Danielle Cwirko-Godycki, Lisa Diaz Nash understand what ethics violation they might soon be committing. We will have an eye on them. We will remember the decision. We will remember the names if these kids are losing their bike lanes.
You have one job Shireen Malekafzali.
Well, this is quite the stretch! The city government is to support its residents, not special interests who push bike lanes through at any cost to residents’ well being. While I wish the process was faster, I respect Mr. Kojikian’s efforts to fix a wrong that occurred before his tenure began in San Mateo. That’s when that City Council voted to completely ignore CDBG grant rules and resident voices and remove more than 200 parking spaces on Humboldt, crippling many from safe access to their car, and put in bike lanes that are rarely used by anyone, especially children because parents tell them to ride on the sidewalk where it’s safer. I have confidence that this City Council will do the right thing and fix the mess started 3 years ago.
Infrastructure for people walking and biking is known to improve physical health, mental health, depression, dementia, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's; they help with sustainability, air pollution, noise pollution, make kids smarter, increase test scores, increase business revenue. Even Libertarians and Fiscal Conservatives love them, because they represent freedom, they are cheaper to build, they increase self-reliance, reduce health care cost, need no subsidies, great for the local small business economy, increase livability and more. (https://www.hsca.ca/blog/2023/1/3/a-conservatives-case-for-bike-lanes0)
Bike lanes, sidewalk, curbs are the basic ADA infrastructure every city needs.
But giving our gas tax dollars to people squatting their private property on public roads is an ethical violation. We don't need a poll from the residents, of course every one wants stuff for free, it's called greed. You offer cheap parking, people will take it. You offer free parking, people buy three more cars.
But streets are made for transportation and that is ethically where tax dollars must be spend on first. Any space that isn't needed should be given to service parking (mail, deliveries, gardener, nannie, emergency responders). Street space should never ever go to private storage. We don't want your old sofas on the street, we don't want your garbage cans 24/7 on the curb, we don't want your clunkers and "classic cars" out there either. If the street is needed for bike lanes for school children - that MUST have priority. I'm sure any Ethics Commission worse a lick would tell you the same.
The City of San Mateo presented data at a public meeting on December 7, 2024 that suggests 10,000+ bicycle trips per month using the Humboldt St bike lanes in San Mateo.
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.