Chan opts out of Kimber Park battle
By Matt Artz
Wednesday, December 7th, 2011 at 8:25 am in Uncategorized.
This is tucked away in the council report, but I thought it was unusual enough to merit its own post. The council had the unenviable task last night of taking sides in Fremont’s fiercest turf war. Being the smart cookies that they are, however, they staked out some middle ground and left themselves lots of options going forward.
But noticeably absent in last night’s 3-1 vote was Councilmember Sue Chan. She doesn’t live in Kimber Park. She does have a relationship with the land owner, Sheena Chang, but that’s not why she said that she recused herself. Heck, she has close relations with Centerville district landowners David Beretta and Jack Rodgers, but that didn’t stop her from participating when they had business before the council.
Chan said she decided to stay out of the Kimber Park battle because her husband’s dentistry has lots of clients in Kimber Park and gets lots of referrals from Kimber Park. That would seem a carte blanche to back out of future politically bruising neighborhood battles that comes before the council.
[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]
December 7th, 2011 at 8:20 pm
This information is not correct. Chan did recuse herself in the Mattos Daycare issue, using the same (lame) excuse of a patient living in the triplex. Only problem, the patient moved out months before the issue came before the Council in November 2010. The vote had been scheduled for September 2010, but was conveniently postponed (by the Council)until:
1. After the local election
2. Ms. Chan was in China in November 2010.
It’s good to have friends.
Ms. Chan’s election motto was “I’ll fight for YOU!” Guess we should have asked her who she would fight for. It certainly isn’t the residents of Glenmoor or Kimber Park. She will run for relection next year. It would be prudent to hold her to a higher standard this time around.
December 7th, 2011 at 8:51 pm
Was said beautifully on another board – if Chan opted out of voting for reasons of her husbands patient list, then she would have to opt out for every vote.
Perhaps she should just resign now and allow someone on the Council who isn’t so worried about their spouses costumer base. It was a gutless move.
December 8th, 2011 at 7:44 am
In response to “So What,” I was referring to a council discussion on ways to spruce up Centerville that involved Rogers and Beretta, not the daycare dispute on Mattos.
December 8th, 2011 at 8:56 am
Very professional journalistic repartee there, Matt Artz: “So what?”
Geeeez.
December 8th, 2011 at 9:33 am
I think Chan recusing herself is the same as siding with the developer.
December 8th, 2011 at 2:26 pm
Matt wasn’t saying “So what”. He was addressing his response to comment #1 written under the pen name “Sowhat”. I suppose it’s possible comment #1 was written by somebody whose actual name is Sowhat.
December 8th, 2011 at 5:40 pm
Thanks for the clarification, Matt. My point was to show that these recusals are a convenient excuse for Ms. Chan to “run with the big dogs” but not actually do anything significant. When rock meets hard place, she’s out the door.
#6—it IS possible Sowhat is my actual name………..but not likely!