1. With the economic downturn, where would you allocate the limited budget that the city has every year and why?
Mario Bouza, Seat 3: Police, fire, and city main core services. When the economy is in a recession and unemployment increases, the crime rate usually goes up.
Will Kennedy, Seat 3: If the city’s finances are placed in a truly dire situation, I would focus funding on core city services, i.e. police, fire, roads, water, and infrastructure. Other city functions such as the Parks and Recreation program, which are very important, but less critical than core services, would have to take second priority.
Karen Hardy, Seat 4: The city must deliver basic services first, police, fire, water, sewer, garbage pickup, park and building maintenence. Putting off capital projects and limiting hours of operation is one way to cut costs.
Brian P. Lowery, Seat 6: In my honest opinion, it is important that the City of Santa Clara use funds for infrastructure improvements. I would set policy that would allocate the funds to four areas; starting the construction of the library in the Rivermark/Northside library, do the recommended upgrades to the International Swim Center, upgrade the streets and sidewalks in the South of Forest neighborhood and finally, repave streets that badly need it. I would do this because it is important to maintain our Santa Clara ‘Quality of Life’. These types of improvements make our city attractive to both new business and young home owners and bring Civic and community pride to our neighborhoods.
Jamie McLeod, Seat 7: Santa Clarans enjoy a great quality of life because of our great core services – public safety, utilities, libraries, parks, community centers. We need to continue to focus our resources on our core services. Are most basic services are public safety, utilities, water and sewer services. If we continue to manage city resources wisely, we should be able to provide our full range of services. And by stimulating economic development, we can further expand city services.
Ciaran G. O’Donnell, Seat 7: The focus has to be on making the city attractive to jobs, avoiding duplication of effort, and not being too fancy. If necessary we would have to cut back on overtime and outsourcing. City services need to be accessible without driving too far. I am in favor of a common sense business like atttitude towards government.
2. The recent financial crisis seems to be reducing income to state and city governments. Is there a chance this funding shortfall could negatively impact the Northside Library?
Mario Bouza, Seat 3: The money has been set aside for the project, but if I lived in the Rivermark area I would concentrate more in having a well staff police sub station. The public service officer that mans the station does not have a weapon or even a tazer. With the transient traffic from other cities that passes by Rivermark and having a school to protect that is not safe having a under staff station (tight budget).
Mary Emerson, Seat 3: There is a chance, which is why we need to make sure that we are thoughtful about how we spend scarce resources, and invest in the things that will serve the needs of residents. There are two parts to the funding question for the library: money to build the library, and operating budget.Redevelopment money has been earmarked to build the library. However, this could be impacted in a couple of ways. The initial cost estimates were developed a few years ago, and there may not be sufficient cushion to make up for recent increases in building costs. Further, the state is taking $3 million in RDA funds to help balance the budget.In fact, there is money in the RDA today for the library -- including overruns -- and if that were insufficient, the RDA has plenty of borrowing capacity that should cover any extra. However, all of the cash and borrowing capacity is currently earmarked for the proposed SF 49ers stadium. Until that money (& borrowing capacity) is released, there is a real risk that there will be insufficient funds to build the library and the community center.The operating budget is a little more complex. The library has been planned for ten years now, and has not been built due to a lack of operating funds. With the current economy, it will be even more difficult to find the money to operate the library, and we will have to be creative.We should start by scrutinizing our budget, ensuring that there are no unnecessary expenditures. Next, we should look at our current lease agreements, etc., and review whether there are opportunities to increase our income from them.We could look at whether there are opportunities to partner with other communities in the area (SJ, for example) to pool resources to staff the library, in exchange for providing a community library for the North 1st St. neighborhoods.Finally, we should look closely at the extent to which we can use volunteers to augment staffing for the library.
Will Kennedy, Seat 3: The redevelopment funds which are going to be used to build the Northside Library have already been allocated. General fund money will be used to operate the library. I anticipate that the project will move forward in the next year or so. However, given the unprecedented events which are occurring in the national economy, I cannot rule out that the project will be delayed. I hope this will not happen, as Riverside residents have waited a long time for the library to become a reality.
Karen Hardy, Seat 4: The Northside library money has been put aside the operation money is the concern. The other libraries have already limited their hours. That could work for the Northside.
Kevin Moore, Seat 4: I fully support the building of the Northside Library and will help find the money to make it a complete reality.
Brian P. Lowery, Seat 6: Yes, this funding shortfall could negatively impact the Northside library. Currently, the state is considering holding back Redevelopment Agency (RDA) money in order to balance its budget. However, I believe that the City does have sufficient funds to start the library which could take up to two years to complete and should start this project immediately. During the Roosevelt era, public works projects were used to keep people employed and restore Civic pride. I think that our City should do no less. I will fight hard to ensure that funds are not taken from the planning and building of this library. The library will play an important role in bringing the Northside community together. This project should not be held hostage to either a down economy or other projects deemed more important.
Jamie McLeod, Seat 7: Yes, if Council members are not committed to the library, first, and a stadium project, second. We have enough borrowing capacity in the RDA to build several libraries. But we have to keep that money available. The January 2008 feasibility study said the project would be feasible if the city maxed out on our RDA borrowing capacity (and made several other commitments). That is why I voted against it. I’m not against a reasonable proposal, but the deal before us was not a good deal for our city (my key criteria for a stadium is on my web site at www.jamiemcleod.org). I will oppose a deal that is not financial good for our city or has a negative impact on our neighborhoods.
Ciaran G. O’Donnell, Seat 7: I was very impressed by my visit to Rivermark. I do not expect the Northside Library to be affected, however it would be good that it be carefully planned. I would ask you to be patient and to explain to your children the importance of saving, there is an important moral lesson for all of us.
3. With the state budget shortfall of $3 million, can we receive commitments that the $1 million set aside and negotiated for the Northside Library/Community Room is preserved?
Mario Bouza, Seat 3: Refer to answer # 2
Mary Emerson, Seat 3: The lions share of the RDA budget is currently earmarked for the SF 49ers stadium project. Rather than nickle & diming small projects (such as the library and the community room) we should reduce or eliminate the amount of money reserved for the SF 49ers stadium project.
Will Kennedy, Seat 3: The additional $1 million is redevelopment money, and has already been allocated for the library. I see no reason why the state budget shortfall should impact these funds.
Karen Hardy, Seat 4: The money is put aside and will be protected from the state. I was on the Commssion that had the land set aside for the library. I know it is important.
Kevin Moore, Seat 4: I fully support the building of the Northside Library and will help find the money to make it a complete reality.
Brian P. Lowery, Seat 6: As a candidate I will say that I will honor what has been negotiated for the Northside Library. The question to be asked here is, can we build a library and how much funding do we have? I would be happy if a library could be built with sufficient funds because it is better to have a library then no library at all. This may sound like a capricious statement but it is not intended to be. It is important for the City to satisfy all of its commitments and thus be fair to all the different communities. Every community should be entitled to receiving some funds in order to maintain its own infrastructure like streets, sewer systems and proper drainage.
Jamie McLeod, Seat 7: Absolutely. I worked hard with RiverMark residents to ensure the additional $1 million in this past budget, and I will oppose it being taken away. Realistically, the only threat to the additional $1 million for the appropriately-sized library community room is money being allocated to the stadium. Short-changing our Northside Library is not an acceptable option. Given that we’ve seen the costs for the convention center expansion skyrocket in the past few years, I’m concerned that the money we have put aside for the library may not be sufficient. We should design the library and run the projections again before finalizing an allocation to the stadium project.
Ciaran G. O’Donnell, Seat 7: I believe you mean $3 billion. I know that the community rooms in the Central Library are very much used and do not expect them to be affected. Here in the city, we also have community rooms in parks, this is for day use but they are also quite good.
4. We have to shop far away because shopping malls and major stores are far from our area. What are your plans with regard to having commercial infrastructure/retail surrounding the high density housing currently being constructed in the Rivermark neighborhood? Are you considering any effort to join the city of San Jose in developing the North 1st Street area? What do we have to do to get a Whole Foods and Target store here?
Mario Bouza, Seat 3: Boy, you must have been speaking to my wife. I love Whole Foods or even a Trader Joe's. As a member of the City Council I would be in contact with corporate headquarters telling them what a great financial investment they are missing by not coming to our city. I would be open to discussion with San Jose, but I would rather have the store in Santa Clara.
Mary Emerson, Seat 3: We should look at having some sort of staff position responsible for economic development, with a strong focus on bringing in the types of retail and services that people in our city would use on a regular basis. This will increase our quality of life and also keep our tax dollars in Santa Clara.I would be open to working with San Jose to ensure there are adequate services to meet the needs of residents of both cities in this area. Our communities do not stop at the city limits. Rivermark and the other Northside Santa Clara neighborhoods are closer to the North 1st St. area than to much of Santa Clara. Realistically, we should be looking at regional solutions to the needs of neighborhoods.
Will Kennedy, Seat 3: If the North 1st area is developed according to San Jose’s plans, I would anticipate an increase in stores such as Target and Whole Foods in the area because of the greater customer base. We have been monitoring San Jose’s plans in the North First area to ensure that there is not a negative impact to Santa Clara. The Santa Clara Unified School District has also been deeply involved in ensuring that adequate resources and land set aside for schools for the new residents.
Karen Hardy, Seat 4: The city does not build business, they can only encourage them. I worked hard to convince the Rivermark developers that a grocery store/drug store was needed. San Jose has been difficult to work with, they have not worked to get any retail or even schools on North 1st Street. I do know the Mayor of San Jose and one council member personally. I would do everything in my power. The Mervyn's plaza on El Camino is being redeveloped that is the best opportunity for a Target, and a Trader Joes. I too like Whole Foods but they are not expanding at this time.
Kevin Moore, Seat 4: I would love to see a Whole Foods or nugget store...we need to form a committee.
Brian P. Lowery, Seat 6: I have been a strong proponent of placing commercial development in areas targeted for housing. And the reason for this is twofold. First, there is a cost to placing housing infrastructure in a designated area. Police, Fire, water and electricity costs, school and playground all become immediate issues. The City cannot just rely on property tax to pay for these associated fix costs. Secondly, the residents living in these housing structures will need to supply their daily living needs; food, clothing, automobile gasoline, dentists, doctors, nurses and the like. I think the Council should do a better job of addressing these issues whenever a housing project is considered. Currently, the City is considering putting up 811 apartments on the former Kaiser property without any regard given to commercial/retail structures. If elected to your City Council I would work hard with you to get either Whole Food, Wal-Mart or Trader Joe’s in your area. The sales tax generated from these types of stores would bring necessary income to the City’s General Fund.
Jamie McLeod, Seat 7: We need better development of our retail sector as we’ve been losing retail stores throughout the City. Four years ago, I proposed hiring an economic development officer for the city, to focus on attracting and retain businesses to the City. While I could not get the support to do that then, I think the economic downturn will raise interest in such a proposal now. We can also support the potential for retail through our General Plan Update process, identifying areas for Retail or Mixed Use. While the North San Jose project is expected to bring in more residential and retail, it was not well planned with regard to identifying development of services, including public safety, schools, parks and libraries/community centers. I’d love to have a Whole Foods in the city – the Economic Development Committee, on which I serve, works staff to identify key opportunities.
Ciaran G. O’Donnell, Seat 7: I definitely support retail and professionals, e.g. doctors and dentists. There is a lack of retail in the whole city. I really understand what you are saying about supermarkets. Thank you for your input about Whole Foods and Target.
5. Rivermark Plaza has too many cars, but not enough parking. How would you address the parking situation?
Mario Bouza, Seat 3: By increasing the guide line on the amount of parking spaces to store square footage in a commercial center. I argue with the planning and the council regarding the amount of spaces allowed for high density development (1.6 spaces of parking per unit) I have never seen a .6 car! That's what the present council decided.
Mary Emerson, Seat 3: The parking situation at Rivermark Plaza can be viewed as a testament to how desperately underserved the Northside area was prior to the Rivermark community. These shops serve not only the homes in Rivermark, but also the existing homes in Northside Santa Clara, homes in the North 1st St. area of San Jose and people who work in these areas.It may be difficult to retrofit the plaza with new parking. However, as we work to bring additional retail into the area, we can learn from this experience and take a broader view of the customer base.
Will Kennedy, Seat 3: While it’s difficult to add parking after the fact, I’m interested in any ideas generated by Rivermark residents as to measures which can be taken to help alleviate the parking shortage.
Karen Hardy, Seat 4: As a Planning Commissioner we tried to require just enough parking (too much parking and the retail will not thrive a good example of this is the Cupertino Square formally Vallco). The original plans have a larger parking garage which the developer could build if they want to. I have found parking at Rivermark on Saturdays, it was just a little farther away.
Kevin Moore, Seat 4: Let's get some more Valet and plan for additional parking options.
Brian P. Lowery, Seat 6: I am aware of the parking issue in the Rivermark Plaza precisely because I shop their on a weekly basis and use the Wells Fargo Bank there as well. Parking is definitely an issue there in the Rivermark Plaza. To be honest, I do not know of a way to increase the parking in that area. The new library to be placed near the plaza would bring added parking woes to an already congested area. Unfortunately, the City did not include parking in its plans when it approved the Moreland Apartment Complex. Friends who come to these apartments just park outside or somewhere in the Rivermark Plaza complex. The only way I know of that will solve this problem is by addressing what was done in the Valley Fair Complex a few years ago. A 4 story parking lot complex was built on the existing parking lot. This would definitely solve most of the parking problem from a practical point of view, but it is not aesthetically pleasing to the eye.
Jamie McLeod, Seat 7: Good land use planning helps to avoid these types of problems. It is tough to provide more parking once a project has been completed. However, there may be opportunities for exploring tie-ins to existing public transportation networks or shuttles for short, frequent trips (like to Safeway). The City has been working on providing additional bicycle facilities and encourage bike use.
Ciaran G. O’Donnell, Seat 7: I am in favor of a city subsidy for local transportation. Have you done a survey to find out how many would use a shuttle running every fifteen minutes. Have you asked Prometheus whether they would be willing to contribute. How many people are interested.
6. What are your thoughts about extending the San Tomas Aquino trail south beyond Highway 101? Is it true that another 1.25 miles will open in 2009?
Mario Bouza, Seat 3: Yes, is true and I use the trail. Back in 1985, I was using the Los Gatos creek trail and plans where in the drawing board for the other trails. Also I think we should put emergency call boxes along the way, like the Los Gatos creek trail.
Mary Emerson, Seat 3: It is important to have useful bike & walking paths in the region. Besides promoting good health through exercise, they form an important piece of the transit infrastructure.
Will Kennedy, Seat 3: As of next year, the Creek Trail will be run from the lot at San Tomas/Monroe to Highway 237. The lot at San Tomas/Monroe will serve as a staging area for those who wish to park their cars and ride.
Karen Hardy, Seat 4: The creektrails you mention are not in the boundaries of Santa Clara.
Brian P. Lowery, Seat 6: These are the San Tomas Aquino current trail paths that I am aware of:
- Reach 1 (Bay Trail to Agnew Road) - 1.76 miles (trail section complete and open)
- Reach 2 (Agnew Road to Scott Blvd.) - 0.84 miles (trail section complete and open)
- Reach 3 (Scott Blvd. to Monroe Staging Area) - 1.25 miles (section under construction)
- Reach 4 (Monroe Staging Area to Pruneridge Ave.) - 4 miles (0.2 mile of creek trail section not yet constructed + 3.8 miles of bike lanes and routes that currently exist)
I think it is important to extend the path if it is the right thing to do for the citizenry. It would be nice to have a trail that enabled one to either walk or bike through our City and I would be a sponsor of that. I am a bicyclist and would be an avid proponent of extending this trail wherever possible.
Jamie McLeod, Seat 7: I think we should absolutely extend the creek trail as far as we are able – ideally the length of the city. Neighbors sometimes raise public safety concerns when “retrofitting” creek trails through existing residential neighborhoods, and these need to be addressed. And, yes, we are scheduled to have another phase of the creek coming online in 2009.
Ciaran G. O’Donnell, Seat 7: Please refer to my ballot statement I am explicitly supporting this. So far as I understand, the project is on hold because of a California Supreme Court order in July striking down the tax that funded it. I really support these kind of trails and would like to see them in their neighbourhood.
7. Can you speak to the success of the Santa Clara Green Power program and what you will do to improve/maintain this program?
Mario Bouza, Seat 3: Green power, actually the city started a program back in 1977 with solar heating for your swimming pools and I was one of the early homeowner that join the program, from back in the early days. We should be proud of the development we have achieve in our city. We should concentrate in attracting new business into our city that are pioneers in the Solar field.
Mary Emerson, Seat 3: Currently, 28% of the electricity generated by Silicon Valley Power is from renewable sources. Compared to the 5% statewide average, this is a tremendous achievement. We need to maintain this level of commitment, and consider ways we can expand our use of renewable energy sources. In addition to looking at large scale solutions, such as solar farms, there are opportunities to do smaller scale projects that will bring additional benefits. For example, solar power in the schools can also be incorporated into the curriculum, creating learning experiences. Solar panels can also be used in parking lots to shade vehicles, while generating power.
Will Kennedy, Seat 3: The City has been doing a substantial amount of outreach and publicity to encourage residents and businesses to join the program. Our participation rate is approximately 9%. The city has many other policies which encourage "going green" such as the new green building program which requires builders to fill out the LEEDS checklist to measure the degree to which their project is energy efficient.
Karen Hardy, Seat 4: The green power is a new project but enough before that the city power is about 75% from hydo electric which is green power. Green power is a priority.
Kevin Moore, Seat 4: Continue with goals and continue to promote programs and options.
Brian P. Lowery, Seat 6: ‘Green Power’ is more meaningful than ever given what we know about ‘Global Warming,’ another term for “climate change”. The City of Santa Clara has been proactive in this area for the past 40 years. One of the City Council’s Principals and Priorities for 2008-09 is to “affirm commitment to reduction of greenhouse gases and development of sustainable renewable energy and green power resources.” The City’s curbside recycling program is one of the best in this country and makes a 50% reduction in the waste generated by our residents and is a good step in the right direction. The City’s use of recycled water for landscaping, playing fields, golf courses, agricultural and other not-drinking purposes has made it a leader here in the South Bay. As your Council Member I will continue to support these efforts plus the City’s goal to reduce CO2 emissions from City Hall Buildings by 2011. And all these efforts by the City make good use of our Taxpayer dollars.
Jamie McLeod, Seat 7: I am very proud of our environmental stewardship through Silicon Valley Power. When staff came to us with a proposal for an 8% Green Challenge, my response was, “why not 10%?” And that is our current goal. I would like to see us promote our Green Energy program more successfully throughout the City. And I would like to see the city be bold and develop a “solar farm” – using city property or leasing the rooftops of private property to set up solar panels. We should also be working with local solar businesses to be supporting their R&D.
Ciaran G. O’Donnell, Seat 7: I am very grateful to the contribution of the city to renewable energy. I am in favor of solar, and wind energy and acclaim the efforts of companies like Sunpower and Applied Materials in Silicon Valley that are investing in this technology. I believe in clean natural gas for the use of public transportation, and delivery vehicles to provide revenue to the city and lower the cost of food. In a future outlook, e.g. five-ten years according to UN experts countries must consider adding nuclear power to the solutions. I would lobby in Sacramento in favor of this.
8. Do you have any plans to expand connectivity of VTA buses around Lafayette and Hope?
Mario Bouza, Seat 3: I would encourage VTA to expand is services,you can not neglect the need to the area.
Mary Emerson, Seat 3: The city participates with VTA today, and needs to continue to expand the work done to create useful and usable alternative transportation solutions for all of us.
Will Kennedy, Seat 3: The VTA has ultimate authority for the bus routes, although the city sometimes provides input as to type of service the city needs. If there is a need for service in this area, we can request that it be provided.
Karen Hardy, Seat 4: The city does not control the VTA that is a county opperation. We can only request and the residents requesting it is more powerful.
Kevin Moore, Seat 4: All for it! Stadium should bring more options.
Brian P. Lowery, Seat 6: One of the great travesties about the Rivermark project is that no plans were put in place with regards to public transportation. It is not enough for a policy maker to state that if we build a “Planned Community,’ that public transportation will follow. It is not enough for us to wish that BART will come to Santa Clara just because we are the center of Silicon Valley and as such, public transportation will follow. It has become increasingly obvious to me that people will find jobs wherever they can and usually, these jobs will be in scattered areas nowhere near public transportation. And this sole fact hurts public transportation precisely because the success of public transportation depends on its ability to serve frequented traffic corridors. Currently, Lafayette and Hope are not frequented traffic corridors in so far as where the job locations are. As a Policy maker, I would make every effort to secure proper public transportation in the vicinity of the Rivermark area precisely because there is so little of it.
Jamie McLeod, Seat 7: It would be great to have more public transportation opportunities throughout our City, including on the north side. VTA is a regional body and Santa Clara has only a limited voting power, but developing strong relationships with our neighboring cities is important to be successful in leveraging more resources for Santa Clara.
9. Trains & Airplane Noise - what could you do to help prevent noise pollution and stop the noise, and prevent air pollution?
Mario Bouza, Seat 3: The airport was there first, I was one of the citizens that raise the concern when the development came up. We must keep the operating hours as it stands, also as newer aircraft are replaced by the old fleet (American will be replacing the MD 80 with a quieter and more fuel efficient and less polluting aircraft, the new line of 737 and 787, Southwest will also follow the same lead.) That should make a different. Other issues regarding noise and traffic and pollution is the propose Stadium site, at least we can do something about that now. No Stadium.
Mary Emerson, Seat 3: As SJC expands, and airlines move to newer more fuel efficient fleets, the City of Santa Clara should take the opportunity to work with the airport to ensure that rules regarding noise, flight patterns and curfews are in the best interest of all of the residents in the area -- especially the flight path.
Will Kennedy, Seat 3: As for noise generated by jets, one avenue is greater enforcement of the flight curfew. Although the city is not the entity which is responsible for enforcement, we can urge the airport to take action in case of violations.
Karen Hardy, Seat 4: I lived on Calle de Primavera. I understand the airplane and train noise. The city required the better windows in new construction and complaints to the airport commission when the airport curfew is broken is the best you can do. The reality is the trains and airport were there first and any construction after that is a choice.
Kevin Moore, Seat 4: Better future planning!
Brian P. Lowery, Seat 6: As a Policy Maker, I think it is important for the City to let the City of San Jose know that the City does not appreciate flight noise occurring after the 10:00 pm timeframe precluding extenuating circumstances. In addition, San Jose has plans to increase the airport size which will put further pressure on the 7:00 am to 10:00 pm timeframe. As a Policy Maker I will be make sure that the San Jose Airport follows the guidelines that it has set with respect to its neighbors. Similarly, with respect to the trains that follow the Lafayatte corridor, I would ensure that the trains too follow the policies that they have set with regards to hours of operation precluding extenuating circumstances. I have walked the Riverside precincts several times now and am aware of the noise made by both planes and the trains. I find it to be annoying as well. I would be sympathetic to figuring out ways to either reduce or diminish it.
With respect to air pollution, as your Council Member I will continue to support efforts by the City’s to reduce CO2 emissions from all City Hall Buildings by 2011. As a Policy Maker, I would make sure that a sufficient set of ‘Green Building’ codes are implemented on all new, planned housing developments.
Jamie McLeod, Seat 7: I used to serve on the Airport Noise Committee and I worked hard to ensure that San Jose fully complied with the established noise abatement program which provided residential retrofits to reduce the noise from planes and trains from being heard inside people’s homes. For new projects, we can reduce the exterior noise heard inside of homes by requiring projects to have adequate noise mitigation measures. And we can work with our regional partners to ensure rules are in place to prohibit new trains or airplanes that use our regional stations and airports meet noise standards.
Ciaran G. O’Donnell, Seat 7: The airport has a ten p.m. curfew. I am in favor of high speed trains which I first took more than twenty years ago with my father in France. Air pollution is caused by fossil fuel power plants, and cars. We need to carpool more and use public transportation.
10. Additional comments & information:
Mario Bouza, Seat 3: http://www.mariobouza.com/, (408) 835-6872, (408) 985-7978, email mariobouza@yahoo.com
Mary Emerson, Seat 3: http://maryemerson.org/
Will Kennedy, Seat 3: http://www.kennedyforcouncil.org/
Karen Hardy, Seat 4: I hope you realize the city council sets policy and anyone who will make you a bunch of promises is not dealing straight with you. I have been candid and honest with you to the best of my ability. writeinhardyseat4.com
Kevin Moore, Seat 4: http://www.smartvoter.org/2008/11/04/ca/scl/vote/moore_k/
Brian P. Lowery, Seat 6: http://www.lowery4citycouncil.com/
Jamie McLeod, Seat 7: If anyone wants a more detailed response, please have them call me (408-768-3579). http://jamiemcleod.org/blog/
Ciaran G. O’Donnell, Seat 7: http://www.smartvoter.org/2008/11/04/ca/scl/vote/odonnell_c/
No comments:
Post a Comment