This afternoon, the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors effectively wrote itself a blank check, by voting 5-0 in favor of a 5/8th of a % sales tax increase for the next five years, county wide.  

This new tax will appear on the November 4th "Special Election" ballot.  In order to pass, it will likely only need 50% plus 1 vote to approve.

There were very few numbers given as part of the "discussion" in Council Chambers in a meeting held at 2PM.

Some numbers stood out:  The sales tax would generate $330 million a year or $1.65 billion over 5 years.

That number well exceeds the anticipated impact of the federal cuts by over $300 million over the same timeframe.

If only 25% of the residents in the county use the County Medical & Health Services, why do 100% of residents have to pay for it?

This is a REGRESSIVE TAX - One that hurts most the people it is supposed to help: Low Income residents already struggling to keep up with rent and utilities.

More people will leave the County, and small businesses will also leave in droves as the taxes here keep going up and up with no accountability by the County.

NOTE, they’ve decided they’ll present it as a General Sales Tax increase (requiring 50%+1 approval), even though they claim it’s really a Special Use Sales Tax (requiring 2/3 of the vote). NOTE ALSO, that no where in the discussion did they mention the real reason Santa Clara County is losing MediCal funds due to passage of HR-1; because they choose to pay for healthcare of those in our country illegally.

SVGOP is a firm "NO" on the sales tax increase.

The Republican Party of Santa Clara County is run by “common sense” people. We have jobs and families.  We love our kids and raise them to be well educated and love America.  We demand a secure border, and we want our local cities and the County of Santa Clara to “show some spine” regarding crime and homelessness.  We do not support illegal immigration or our tax dollars going to defend those who broke our laws.  We don’t want the “Green New Deal”.  We want the homeless industrial complex to stop squandering our tax dollars foolishly. 

We want our voices to be heard.

We write letters and opinion pieces which we submit to the local media.  Their response? Crickets.  We post items critical (yet fair) of how the homelessness issue is being addressed – county-wide, and…. crickets.  We have received calls from some local media who tend to ask loaded questions, and our responses appear to have been too grounded in fundamentals, such as the US Constitution and the abovementioned common sense. 

So, what exactly is going on here?  Censorship.

What is censorship

According to Project Censor, a definition of “modern censorship” includes the subtle yet constant and sophisticated manipulation of reality by news media. This includes not only the exclusion of newsworthy stories and topics from coverage, but also the manipulation of coverage based on political pressure (from government officials and powerful individuals), economic pressure (from corporate entities, advertisers, and funders), and legal pressure (e.g., the threat of lawsuits from deep-pocket individuals, corporations, and institutions).

Censorship is best understood as a specific form of propaganda—deceptive communication intended to influence public opinion in order to benefit a special interest. (This definition draws from Censored 2013: Dispatches from the Media Revolution).   In this case, the special interest is the Democrat Party, pushing us ever closer and closer to Socialism, both locally and Statewide.

A one-party City, County or State is essentially tyranny.  We, the people, demand that our voices are heard and championed, as these are the values and voices that built this great country.  And, there are many, many people in this Valley who share these values and wish only to be heard.

Opinion of SVGOP Staff

After tens of millions of dollars, and countless speeches by city officials, the results are in: San Jose's homelessness crisis is getting worse. The most recent point-in-time count tells us that after all the handwaving and spending, homelessness is actually more prevalent than when the city started its most recent remediation efforts two years ago, as the homeless population increased to 9,600 (according to reports - in actuality, it most like is underestimating the true numbers…).

Anyone who works in business knows these results are completely unacceptable. These are the kind of results you get when your strategy is wrong. When your tactics are wasteful. And when your leadership is presiding over a culture of unaccountability.

To suggest, as Mayor Mahan and City Manager Maguire do, that these results are somehow a sign of progress is an Orwellian claptrap of the highest order. And to deflect responsibility onto other levels of government for not spending enough, as Mayor Mahan does, is blame-casting of a shameful order.

Here's where the City’s strategy is wrong and suggestions on how to fix it:

Problem #1: The Solutions are Not Scaling to the Scope of the Problem

We are building interim housing and long-term housing, sure, but it's obviously not enough.  We need solutions that will address thousands of homeless people, not hundreds.

Solution #1: Start building high-capacity homeless shelters ASAP. Cities such as Reno, NV, and San Antonio, TX lead the nation in addressing homelessness quickly and compassionately by greenlighting these quick-build, sprung structure campuses that get thousands off the streets with full care and services - in a matter of months.  And at a fraction of the cost. The SJ City Council has already approved these shelters in principle, due to the perseverance of Councilman Bien Doan. But the city has slow-walked their implementation, to disastrous consequences. 

Problem #2: Unaccountable Spending / Grifting by Non-Profits 

Our problem is not that we're not spending enough - we are - we're just spending it badly.  The city got ripped off not long ago by a state audit for having no idea where our homelessness spend was going - $200m went unaccounted for. And everyone in city government knows that our Housing Department has been historically staffed by Housing First advocates who wouldn't listen to opposing viewpoints {to be fair, our new Housing Director is an improvement, but he is still saddled with a legacy staff of left-wing advocates parading as objective civil servants. 

Solution #2: Enlist a blue-ribbon committee of local business community leaders to manage the non profits and city staff responsible for homelessness implementation, with a special eye to non profit corruption and grift.  The most recent point-in-time results tell us that both city and third party staff need more rigorous oversight and management.  Someone well-respected like Gary Filizetti of Devcon or John Sobrato come to mind.

When the directors of the non-profits involved in homelessness projects are routinely earning $350K a year, have lavish offices, spending tons on advertising, it’s not hard to see how little time it takes to burn through millions (reminiscent of the Harris for President campaign).  Also of note is that they all typically make donations to support the mayor, or the city council members, etc.

Problem #3: Strategic Perspectives

From the mayor, council, city staff, and non profit community, have always started from the wrong place: they ask "what can government do to help fix this?” instead of asking, "what is government doing that is causing this?" As much of our homelessness crisis stems from our ludicrous maze of government ordinances and regulations that restrict the market-creation of affordable housing, we should be fixing the failure of government intervention first, not intervening more. 

Solution #3:  WWAD?

What Would Apple Do?  Pick a notable local business leader – one who perhaps has one of the most successful companies in all of history.  Have them observe the functionality of the how the City operates, from the Planning & Building Departments, to Operations, Finance, Public Works, ALL of it and restructure accordingly.  The cultures inside the dysfunctional City are too far gone to correct.  Think “DOGE” the City.  Find the money.  Repair the culture and restore public confidence.  Then hire more police with part of the money saved and use the rest to provide real, permanent solutions to the homelessness issue.

Only if radical action is taken – and we mean radical – could the public expect any different results.

David G. Johnson
Chairman
SV GOP

One of the more popular narratives in the U.S. today concerns “green energy” and the elimination of the use of fossil fuels.  This topic is popular in the media throughout the U.S. as well as here in California.  One simply cannot read a newspaper these days without finding a reference to the greatness and future of solar power. But has anyone considered what they are saying when they demand for the push to end fossil fuels?  Or do they think about how much it will cost to build all of these new clean power facilities?  What about the REAL cost to the environment?

Make no mistake, clean energy has its place.  Reducing greenhouse gasses is a noble cause.  But before we rush headlong into destroying the economy (see below), let’s look at some facts about solar power and specifically energy uses here in California.

Today, solar power represents a mere 7% of the State’s total retail energy usage.  Currently, 41% of the state’s energy consumption is dedicated to transportation (fossil fuels), and another 24% of the State’s energy, mostly fossil fuels, is used for industrial uses.  With this in mind, one begins to see that the goal of the elimination of fossil fuels, while well-meaning, does not begin to address the end of fossil fuels. 

Fossil fuels are essential in the operation of many solar facilities.  Solar panels are comprised of a number of rare and extremely toxic and hazardous materials that are used in their manufacture.  Some of the materials used to make solar panels release in excess of 20,000 times the amount of green house gasses as the CO2 they are meant to help eliminate.   Additionally, there is significant waste in the manufacturing process used to create the solar panels.  Finally, the panels represent a huge problem at the end of their lives as there are currently no laws in the U.S. concerning how these toxic panels are safely recycled or what they will do to the environment when they are put into landfills. Source: California Energy Commission

It is useful then, to gain an understanding of the place that solar has in California, how much solar capacity the State has, and how much energy in total the State needs.  Without the proper perspective, it becomes easy to fall in line with the narrative. 

California Solar Production Compared to Other Sources

Currently there is one major solar facility in San Bernardino County, California, known as SEGS.  SEGS is actually a series of facilities that were initially built in the late 1990’s and commissioned in 2004, when it started with a capacity of 50 MW.  The complex has since grown to a capacity of 354 MW spread over several sites. These sites initially were built utilizing Solar Thermal Energy but that has since evolved into a photovoltaic complex. 

The facilities that make up SEGS now consist of a total of 9 solar power plants spread throughout the Mojave Desert.  The original site was a Solar Thermal Energy Facility, which when it was built, was the world’s second largest.  This type of facility uses sunlight to heat oil to 400 degrees C (or more) which is then used to transfer the heat to water to create the steam needed to spin turbines, thereby creating electricity.  This type of facility is located at Harper Lake and Dagget and employs about 140 people. Source: Solargenix Energy

One of the initial problems with Solar Thermal Energy is the use of fossil fuels.  In 1999, at the SEGS Dagget facility, a 900,000 gallon tank of Therminol (a type of mineral oil), which is a heat transfer liquid used to transfer solar heat to the steam tanks, caught fire and burned for hours.  Firefighters had to rush to keep the fire from spreading to other nearby tanks that contained sulfuric acid and caustic soda.  It seems that not all solar plants generate electricity without the use of other fossil fuels. Source: LA times

The largest U.S. Solar Thermal Energy facility is a Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) facility located at Ivanpah (Mojave Desert, near the California-Nevada border).  At a cost of $2.2 billion to build (of which $1.6 billion was federally guaranteed money), this facility uses 173,000 mirrors designed to concentrate sunlight to the top of three towers in which boilers are placed to transfer the heat to boil water which spin the turbines used to generate electricity.  This facility was, at the time of its initial construction, the largest such facility in the world, but it has never lived up to its potential due to the high construction cost and numerous incidents and glitches in its operation. These glitches include a fire started by the mirrors directing heat to the wrong part of the solar tower, starting the fire which caused the shutdown of that portion of the facility. Plus there are thousands of birds killed each year as they fly through the beam of heat generated by the mirrors.  The complexity of the facility also leaves open the possibility of any number of piping or other mechanical issues that impair full production.  Source: BrightWorks

The cost per KWh from various solar facilities such as mentioned here is also about two to three times that of the cost to produce electricity versus the more practical Photo Voltaic facility at SEGS.   As a side note, this facility created 1000 construction jobs to build the plant and has 89 permanent positions on site. Source: US Department of Energy

According to the US Department of Energy, the cost to build a solar plant based on the most recent numbers (2015) is more than four times as much as the cost to build a natural gas burning plant.  Natural gas facilities last between 30 and 50 years, while a solar plant only has a life expectancy of 20 years. Source: US Department of Energy

The cost to build a Solar Thermal Energy facility or a Photovoltaic facility, is considerably more than the cost to build a natural gas facility, as noted by the chart below.

As of 2018, the total percentage of solar energy produced in California represented just 14% of the state’s electricity needs, while energy from coal was 15%.  Electricity from nuclear power has fallen to 9.4% from the sole facility at Diablo Canyon, where production has remained constant as other sources of electricity have risen.  As a side note, Diablo Canyon was slated to be shut down in 2024 (but postponed), which will make California’s energy shortfall worse.

The combined totals of wind, solar, small hydro, geothermal and biomass produce 32.3% of the state’s total energy output, but that number reached 43.6% with the addition of large hydro electricity production.  Electricity from natural gas remains the top source of electricity with a total of 46.5% of the state’s total production.  Source: California Energy Commission

One other important fact is that currently, California imports 32% of its power from other states.  The total electrical generating capacity in the State of California is around 54,000 MW.  Remove the +/-10,000 MW from Diablo Canyon and the total magnitude of the problem begins to emerge.  If California produced 100% of the power it needed, it would need an additional 17,000 MW of capacity.  To achieve 100% “green” power from solar it would take roughly 20 square miles of panels!  That is a lot of panels. 

An essential component of the solar conversation has to do with how the solar panels are manufactured.

Solar Panels – How They Are Made

There are two types of solar power plants, photo voltaic (PV) and heat generating.  PV facilities use solar panels like the ones on your house to convert sunlight directly into electricity, whereas heat generating facilities use reflective panels to heat a liquid which is then sent to a turbine which in turn spins to create electricity.

The manufacture of solar panels and what happens to them once they have reached their life expectancy is of some concern. According to Chem Service Inc., an industry standards magazine, the manufacture of solar panels is, like fracking, reliant on a variety of chemicals in order to work successfully and efficiently. The panels use silicon similar to what they use for semiconductors, except that even pure silicon is not pure enough to make a solar panel efficient, so the raw silicon must be treated with a chemical-rich process.

First the silicon is mixed with copper and hydrochloric acid to produce trichlorosilane gas, which is then reduced with hydrogen to make silane gas.  The silane gas is heated into molten silicon which leads to silicon crystals that can be reformed and used for PV cells and microchips.  This process is very energy intensive and materially wasteful, with about half of the initial pure metallurgical silicon lost in the process.  Silicon dust represents safety dangers and silane gas is incredibly explosive (it ignites when it mixes with oxygen).

Some other chemicals used to make solar panels include cadmium, nitrogen trifluoride and sulfur hexafluoride. Cadmium is a naturally occurring earth metal, produced from smelting zinc, copper or lead ore. The EPA has noted that inhaling or being exposed to cadmium can lead to cancerous and noncancerous damage to lungs and other organs. Cadmium is also very expensive, and like silicon, only about half of the cadmium is used in the PV making process - so the rest is waste.  Finally the risk of any type of breach or leak of cadmium into the water supply would be very harmful.

While solar panels do not generate greenhouse gasses when they operate, the manufacturing process of solar panels does.  Two additional chemicals used in the manufacture of solar panels includes nitrogen trifluoride and sulfur hexafluoride.  As a greenhouse gas, nitrogen trifluoride is 17,000 times stronger than CO2 while sulfur hexafluoride is 22,800 times more potent than CO2.  These gasses are released into the atmosphere during the manufacturing process. Source: ChemService Inc. Magazine

Finally, there is the matter of what to do with the solar panels once they have reached the end of their life expectancy.  Currently, there are no laws in the US (as there are in Europe) with regard to the disposal of the used panels.  Most panels go to a recycler first, who will remove any copper wires and the aluminum frame.  But the rest of the panel is essentially chemically-laden glass which is toxic and potentially lethal.

According to the International Renewable Energy Agency there is a solar e-waste glut coming with an anticipated 78 million metric tons of waste being generated by 2050 with another 6 million metric tons each year thereafter. This is an environmental problem that has yet to be addressed. Source: Renewable Energy Agency

World Wide Manufacturers of Solar Panels

The drive toward 100% clean energy, and specifically from solar, represents a boon to the companies who manufacture the panels, or the polysilicon crystals used to make those panels.  The list that follows represents the top ten solar manufacturers and their country of origin as of 2019.

1. JinkoSolar,  - Shanghai China

2. Canadian Solar – Guelph, Canada

3. Loom Solar – Faridabad, Haryana

4. Trina Solar – Changzhou, China

5. SunPower Corp – San Jose, CA

6. Hanwha Q Cells – Seoul, South Korea

7. JA Solar – Beijing, China

8. First Solar – Tempe Arizona

9. SF-PV - Changzhou, China

10. Yingli Solar – Baoding, China

Source: SolarClap.com

As of June 2019, only two of those companies, Sun Power and First Solar, are located in the U.S., meaning that in order to continue to work toward 100% “clean energy”, that the panels or components will be purchased largely from China or from elsewhere around the world.  It is not clear if all of the panels manufactured by Sun Power or First Solar are made in the U.S., but it is likely that the polysilicon crystals are not.

Add to that fact that the construction, maintenance and operation costs of solar facilities exceed that of most gas-fired energy facilities, and that the solar panels themselves represent a toxic disposal problem that has yet to be addressed, and a new picture starts to emerge – that the true cost of the shift to solar has not been adequately addressed or publicly discussed.

While the move to “clean energy” is noble on its face, there is much to be said for energy independence.  The U.S. has a 1000 year supply of fossil fuels.  The thought that fossil fuels can / should be eliminated to “save the world” is short-sighted at best, and an outright lie at the worst.  

Goal of 100% Carbon Free by 2045

California has a stated goal of producing 60% “clean energy” by 2030, and 100% clean energy by 2045.  This information comes from CA SB 100, “The Clean Air Act”, a report produced by the California Energy Commission.   A close look at this document reveals that this goal only applies to the RETAIL sector. So we are looking at 100% (or green energy) being used to serve the needs of 7% of the total energy market.  It’s all about misdirection.  Smoke & mirrors.  A narrative put forth by well-meaning politicians and the media.  Let’s all (not) get on the bandwagon.

According to the Wall Street Journal, 80% of the world’s solar components are made in China.   The push to build more solar facilities in the U.S. represents what could be the single largest transfer of wealth to other countries in the history of this great nation.  Those panels require extremely toxic chemicals in their manufacture, some of which release extraordinarily high levels of greenhouse gasses. 

Finally, the disposal of the used panels represents yet another hurdle, as there are currently no laws or regulation as to their disposal. 78 million metric tons represents 172 TRILLION pounds of toxic waste.  How green is that?

It is becoming clear that solar by itself is not the answer to producing “clean” energy.  Nuclear power is clean. Nuclear facilities last a long time, and despite the bad rap that has been placed on these facilities, there have been very few issues here in the U.S.  Hydro power is efficient and clean, but there is not enough of it.  Biomass as an industry that is still in its infancy, but one that has potential to become an important part of the creation of green energy.  Natural gas is dominant and relatively clean, especially in California, and will remain the go-to source for electrical power for a long time to come.

With all of this in mind, we need more transparency when it comes to having an honest and realistic discussion about green energy.  Unionizing a labor force is not the answer, especially when the competition (China) is using forced labor to make solar panels.  We must also be honest about the cost, which is rarely discussed.  Any rational discussion about green energy should focus on the resources we already have in the U.S.  If we have a 1000 year supply of natural gas, it seems that it would be far more cost effective to utilize what already works.

Timelines to generate 100% clean energy are nothing more than a push to lower the United States and California specifically into a second-class society at the effect of the New World Order.  The total cost for the conversion of California’s energy to solar is in the trillions.  The footprint of these facilities is considerably larger than gas-fired power plants.  Solar facilities do not last as long as other types of facilities.  Disposal of used panels is clearly a problem. 

With regard to “going green”, the cost is clearly not worth it, nor has it been thought through.

David G. Johnson
Chairman
Republican Party of Santa Clara County

Respected local leaders:

Before these events go down the memory hole, let's take a moment to remember:

In August 2020, the San Jose's Mayor's house was vandalized by a left wing mob.
https://www.ktvu.com/news/protesters-vandalize-liccardos-home-mayor-thanks-neighbors-who-scrubbed-away-graffiti

In June 2022, an explosive device was planted on the front lawn of a moderate SJ city councilmember.
https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/man-arrested-explosive-device-san-jose-councilwoman-home/3427270/

In April 2023, two SJ councilmembers (one of whom is in jail for alleged sexual assault of a minor) accused local business groups of racism and "violence against working families"
https://www.opportunitynowsv.org/blog/10-cm-peter-ortiz-falsely-accuses-colleagues-of-violent-class-animosities-mayor-mahan-rebukes-him for opposing an ill-conceived giveaway to local housing non profits.  

In June 2023, far-left protesters from a local non profit group stormed a business group's offices, sending at least one employee to the hospital.
https://sanjosespotlight.com/collins-political-discourse-is-out-of-control/.

And just this month, Republicans attending a May Day celebration in East San Jose were violently assaulted, and their cars damaged. Despite our protests, these assaults have been brushed off by local media, the Mayor's office, and the SJPD. 

Notice a pattern?

Welcome to the world of Silicon Valleyeans who challenge the hard left orthodoxies of our local progressive movement, circa 2025.
 
Let me start off by saying we're big First Amendment supporters and we respect and defend the right of people--including the press--to be pretty much as wrong and as wacky as they want. They can oppose us, revile us, even ignore us at their discretion.
 
But when people start threatening us physically--that's too far. Way too far. 

And it's the moment our political and civic leaders need to step in and say, "Stop."

But sadly, they don't. 

Rather, they mostly remain strangely quiet.

And when they do respond to this politically-motivated violence, they end up hedging their comments by blaming conservatives for having the temerity to actually show up in public and express their opinions. https://www.sanjoseinside.com/news/mayor-liccardo-san-jose-police-issue-new-statements-regarding-violence-at-donald-trump-rally/

Compare this to the performative histrionics these same politicians display when smearing local businesspeople for simply exercising their First Amendment rights.
https://sanjosespotlight.com/san-jose-councilmembers-decry-racist-politics/

So let's be clear-eyed: Whether intentional or not, our local leaders' fecklessness in the face of political intimidation has the effect of essentially normalizing and enabling the ongoing menacing of local conservatives.

What we're seeing could be understood as a type of “soft tyranny,” and it needs to stop.

I'd like to warn that it will end badly--but the truth is: it's already ending badly. For local conservatives and businesspeople. For our political system. And for the reputation of our leaders. 

Our civic leaders' silence certainly contributes to the degradation of our local political discourse. But the damage goes deeper: It represents a monumental failure by our leaders to fulfill their responsibilities to protect citizens equally, to respect the First Amendment,  to respect diversity of opinion, and--most of all--to make SJ and Santa Clara County safe for everyone. 

We hope our civic leaders wake up and develop the courage to speak out against intimidation, violence, and othering--in all its forms.

David G. Johnson
Chairman
Republican Party of Santa Clara County

When the lights flicker, PG&E becomes a nightmare you can’t escape. For seniors and fixed-income families in Santa Clara County, the squeeze feels like a boa constrictor tightening around their chest. The affluent might shrug off a $400 annual increase (2024’s reality), but for those scraping by on Social Security or starter wages, it’s a monster under the bed—real, relentless, and growing.

This isn’t just financial strain; it’s a handicap to human flourishing—emotional despair, physical risks from unheated homes, and a future that’s darkening fast.

How Did This Happen?

PG&E’s rates soared from 25 cents/kWh in 2020 to 42 cents/kWh in 2024—a 68% leap—due to:

●      Wasteful Overspending: PG&E blew $9.3 billion on vegetation management (2017–2020), double the $4.7 billion authorized, with no proof it worked (nbclosangeles.com, 2024). Critics like TURN’s Mark Toney call it a blank check from ratepayers.

●      Wildfire Fallout: A $30 billion liability from 2017–2018 fires led to a 2019 bankruptcy, repaid via the Energy Cost Recovery Amount—your money funneled to shareholders, not safety.

●      Fraudulent Diversion: A 2022 audit found $1.8 billion meant for safety upgrades vanished into executive bonuses and dividends (calmatters.org).

●      Executive Compensation vs. Maintenance: Historical critiques (e.g., calmatters.org, 2019–2023) note PG&E diverted funds meant for pipeline maintenance and vegetation clearing to executive bonuses and dividends. A 2022 audit found $1.8 billion intended for safety upgrades was unaccounted for or misallocated, hinting at fraud or gross negligence. In spite of this, the CEO received a total compensation of $102,000,000 from 2020 to 2024 (estimate) and all executives received a total of 230,000,000.

●      Profit Over People: PG&E’s 8–10% guaranteed return rewards bloated projects (e.g., undergrounding lines) over cheaper fixes like covered conductors.

●      Green Energy: Long-term solar contracts and grid upgrades for EVs and renewables add ~6–9 cents/kWh (14–21% of rates). PG&E’s “clean energy” excuse masks deeper mismanagement.

●      Political Corruption: PG&E is both the beneficiary of political power and also a contributor to political figures. The Washington Post in 2019, documented PG&E’s $700,000 in contributions to Newsom’s campaigns and his wife’s film projects. The recently published book, “Fools Gold,” alleges that Newsom and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, received hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations from PG&E and its executives, after which Newsom supported policies, including the 2019 AB1054 legislation, that provided financial protections to the utility following its role in causing devastating wildfires.

The Nightmare Ahead: Cost Forecast

Without change, PG&E rates will devour more of your budget, creeping higher each year:

●      2025: 46 cents/kWh, $184/month—an extra $12/month ($144/year) over 2024’s $171.86/month ($2,064/year).

●      2027: 54 cents/kWh, $216/month—an extra $44/month ($528/year) compared to 2024, piling on as costs accelerate.

●      2030: 68 cents/kWh, $272/month—an extra $100/month ($1,200/year) above 2024, a crushing leap that could break fixed budgets.

For seniors on $1,800/month, that’s 15% of income by 2030—up from 9.5% today. A 71-year-old paying $450/month now could face $700/month, choosing between heat and healthcare. This isn’t a forecast; it’s a warning.

However, this simple projection is complicated by usage tiers, which can push even low-income users into prohibitive rates.

Seniors Under Siege

Santa Clara County’s 285,000 seniors (15% of 1.9 million residents) are hit hardest. With incomes often at $40,000–$60,000 (vs. the county’s $130,000 median), a $400 jump is a gut punch. Thirty percent are already “cost-burdened,” and 12% live below poverty. Rural seniors near Morgan Hill lack Silicon Valley Power’s $0.15/kWh lifeline. CARE discounts help (20–35%), but caps exclude many, and enrollment lags.

A Way Out: Reinventing PG&E

A hybrid system could tame this monster:

●      Retail Choice: Let competitors sell power over PG&E’s grid, forcing it to vie for your dollar.

●      Community Oversight: Elect local boards to audit PG&E and veto waste.

●      Performance Pay: Tie PG&E’s profits to lower rates (e.g., $0.30/kWh = 12% return; $0.42/kWh = 0%). Savings get rebated to you.

This could slash rates to $0.30/kWh, saving $300–$600/year per household—life-changing for seniors. But the fat cats profiting off waste will fight it tooth and nail.

Act Now—Before YOUR Lights Go Out

Call to Action: Slay the Monster Before It Devours You

The monster under your bed isn’t just real—it’s coming for your wallet, your warmth, and your peace of mind. By 2030, PG&E could siphon an extra $1,200 a year from you unless we act now. Here’s how to fight back today:

Support Your Republican Representative: Bypass the corruption in the Democrat Party.

FIRST: Contact the City Council in the City of San Jose.  Contact your County Supervisor.  Attend one of the coffees held by Marc Berman or Sam Liccardo (just to name a couple of people who send us their invites) and go and ask simple, basic common sense questions.

THEN:  Sign up to become a member of the Republican Party of Santa Clara County.  Go to SVGOP.com.  Let us know that you are “IN” for the fight.  We need lots of support via money AND volunteers if we are going to “Take Back California”.

Demand Accountability: Call your state representative—find them at https://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/—and demand a full audit of PG&E’s spending plus laws for retail energy choice. Your voice can force transparency.

Join the Resistance: Link up with groups like TURN (The Utility Reform Network, turn.org) to push for ratepayer protections and community oversight. Power grows in numbers.

Sound the Alarm: Share this article with neighbors, friends, and especially seniors—post it on X, email it, or hand it out. Awareness is the first strike against PG&E’s unchecked greed.

Shield Yourself: Enroll in CARE/FERA (pge.com/care) or Medical Baseline (pge.com/medical baseline) if you qualify—don’t leave money on the table while rates climb.

This isn’t just about survival; it’s about taking back control.

Act today, or brace for a darker, colder tomorrow.

While all local residents would likely agree that homelessness is a problem, stoking the flames of the City’s efforts to deal with the issue are off track.

We are speaking specifically of the recent protest arranged by a local group to meet at Carrabelle Park in San Jose so that the protesters could march over to the mayor’s house.

The logic behind this is curious, because the language used in the flyer is itself defamatory and factually incorrect.  The language used in the approved legislation by the City council removes the ability by the City to arrest any homeless person who refuses shelter three times in 18 months and now says that a homeless person who refuses shelter “cannot be arrested”, unless they are trespassing or committing other violations or crimes.  How about dealing with "petty" theft?

Local advocacy groups are effective in “stoking the flames”, while the larger issues of the high cost of housing, high taxes and other city and state-caused issues are the more likely culprit.  The City of San Jose must do a better job to fight homelessness to be sure.  Taking over local hotels will only erode any remaining support the mayor has. 

Instead of marching to the mayor’s house, those who do not like or approve of local policies should instead march to City Hall or Sacramento to protest the local and state Legislators who are the real cause of the high cost of housing, taxes and crime.

Regards,

David G. Johnson
SVGOP Chairman

Hi Ethan,

I cannot comment specifically on the Padilla video, as all I have to go on is overheated press reports.

However, there is an overarching issue in play here:

Federal officials have every right to enforce federal laws in California cities, whether it's Treasury, Homeland Security, or the FBI.

Any Federal, local or State officials or representatives are out of bounds when they try to obstruct , avoid, or negate those Federal organizations and their enforcement of Federal laws. 

The people of California should be extremely wary when representatives and officials start normalizing and encouraging violent obstruction of Federal officials doing their jobs - as this recalls the intimidation and terrorizing that characterized the Reconstruction Era South.

People in California should forcefully reject any politician who thinks they can personally stand in the doorway of a public school (like George Wallace opposing integration) or disrupt a Homeland Security officer doing their job and somehow try to stop Federal Laws from being enforced.

The rule of law is the rule of law.  And certainly the laws of the US and its Constitution are what need to be followed.

And no one is above the law.  

And anyone who is in a position of power - In Silicon Valley or anywhere in California  - should NOT be encouraging people to ignore, undermine or sidestep that fundamental principle.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Dave Johnson
SVGOP Chairman
408 540-540-8984

Most of us have heard of tyranny, but how many of us have more than a passing idea what it is, or how to recognize it when they encounter it?  As we go through this, I ask that everyone consider where they encounter tyranny as they move about their lives, businesses, etc.

The Oxford dictionary definition of tyranny is “cruel and oppressive government or rule”.  Some synonyms of tyranny are: oppression, cruelty, dictatorship, and authoritarianism.  Webster lists it as “oppressive power exerted by government”.  It is essentially an autocratic form of rule in which one individual exercises power without any legal restraint.  In its modern usage, the word tyranny connotates the illegitimate possession or use of such power.

But rather than focus on the classic definition of tyranny, let’s turn to what is called “soft tyranny”.  In order to discuss soft tyranny, we need to distinguish it from “hard tyranny”.  Hard tyranny is despotism, characterized by an autocratic group wielding absolute power and suppressing dissent. 

Soft tyranny, on the other hand, is a more insidious (gradual, subtle, drip, drip, drip – but without seemingly harmful effects) form of oppression where a majority of the people, or the state itself, rather than a single ruler, exerts control through intricate regulations and a system of subtle coercion, leading to a loss of individual liberty and a sense of powerlessness.

In 1830, Alexis de Tocqueville wrote “Democracy in America”.  Tocqueville saw that the greatest danger to democracy was that public opinion would become an all-powerful force, and that the majority could tyrannize unpopular minorities and marginalized individuals.  Tocqueville offered this definition of soft tyranny: Absolute, minute, regular, provident and mild.

Moving to present times, as one looks around, it is not hard to spot soft tyranny.  We are living in the middle of it here in Santa Clara County.  But let’s look at some examples, which I hope will illuminate the idea of soft tyranny, so that more of us will recognize it when it happens TO US.

1.    Our “mainstream” media pushing a narrative that is not true.  Liberalism good, Trump bad, etc.;

2.    Creating “free speech areas” as the only spot where people are free to express their views;

3.    The State of California’s gas taxes, electrification mandates, and endless regulations all designed to force people to comply.  Think “COVID”;

4.    All vaccine mandates (for example, to go to college in CA, one needs to provide proof of vaccination);

5.    Any and all laws or mandates passed that we did not get to vote on.  Think Ranked Choice Voting, or No Voter ID;

6.    Local police allowing Democrat Socialists of America to protest at a local Tesla dealership, and when those protestors attacked our peaceful patriotic demonstrators, the police did nothing, the Mercury news did nothing and the Mayor’s office said, “We do not condone violence.” – BUT REFUSED TO GO AFTER THOSE WHO WERE AGGRESSIVE;

 We could go on and on, and I want to hear from some of you who may have an example of how you have experienced soft tyranny.

Conclusion:  One way for the Republican Party here in Santa Clara County to be more effective is that we all understand when we are in a situation where we are experiencing soft tyranny.  We need to be loud and vocal in our pointing it out to let other people and “authorities” know that we do not agree with the stated “official” position, or that we did not vote for it, etc. 

Only if we stand strong against soft tyranny, will we be able to avoid the hard tyranny or despotism that is soon to follow.

As we gather in our homes, we want to express our deep appreciation for this Thanksgiving.  Andy Andrews wrote, “Too many times I have offered up the prayers of a beggar – always asking for more and forgetting to give thanks.  I do not wish to be seen as a greedy child, unappreciative and disrespectful.  My God has bestowed on me many blessings, and for these I will remember to give thanks.  I am grateful for sight, breath, and sound.  If in my life there is a pouring out of blessing beyond that, I will be grateful for the miracle of abundance.” [1] Accordingly, we should express deep appreciation for this Thanksgiving, to be thankful for, this season, despite what some may opine.

We express deep appreciation for this Thanksgiving for the help that Squanto and other natives provided to the Pilgrims

We express deep appreciation this Thanksgiving for those who set an example of mutual support and celebration which made today's Thanksgiving possible.  Unfortunately, in 1621 only 53 pilgrims of the original 102 lived to join in this traditional harvest thanksgiving. those surviving immigrants owed their lives to the Wampanoag tribe and in particular Squanto and Samoset.  Squanto was a tribesman kidnapped by earlier settlers who sent him to England[2].  However, he had every reason to mistrust or even hate these Pilgrims. Instead, he worked with Chief Massasoit’s charge and Samoset to use their native abilities and English skills to save the Pilgrims. Meanwhile, the tribesman had their own conflicts.    

A brief accounting of Squanto, a native who helped the Pilgrims survive

Squanto was kidnapped by the English captain Thomas Hunt in 1614 CE to be sold into slavery but either escaped or won his freedom in Spain and traveled to England where he learned English and worked as interpreter and shipbuilder. He returned to North America as interpreter on a trade mission and traveled with one Thomas Dermer back to his home village near present-day Cape Cod only to find his tribe had been wiped out by disease (probably smallpox) brought by European traders.

In 1621 CE, he [Squanto] was introduced to the settlers at Plymouth (who had founded their colony at the site of his old seasonal village) by the Abenaki chief Samoset (also known as Somerset, l.c. 1590-1653 CE) who also spoke English. Squanto quickly became indispensable to the colonists and, recognizing his own power, he secretly worked to undermine the authority of Massasoit and empower himself. Once discovered, Massasoit demanded he be turned over for execution, but Bradford refused, a decision which endangered the treaty between the Wampanoag Confederacy and Plymouth Colony if Massasoit had insisted or tried to take Squanto by force. "[3]

We express deep appreciating this Thanksgiving that the Pilgrims were able to compromise and work together to survive

The Pilgrims, and those traveling with them, left us something else of value: the Mayflower Compact[4]. See the full text below. They essentially agreed that they would: 

• remain loyal subjects to King James, the "dread Sovereign", despite their need for self-governance
• create and enact “laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions and offices…” and abide by those laws
• create one society and work together to further it, and
• live in accordance with the their faith

Agreement Between the Settlers at New Plymouth: 1620

IN THE NAME OF GOD, AMEN. We, whose names are underwritten, the Loyal Subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God, of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, &c. Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the first Colony in the northern Parts of Virginia; Do by these Presents, solemnly and mutually, in the Presence of God and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid: And by Virtue hereof do enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions, and Officers, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general Good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due Submission and Obedience.

IN WITNESS whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape-Cod the eleventh of November, in the Reign of our Sovereign Lord King James, of England, France, and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth, Anno Domini; 1620. [4]

We invite you to pause and consider examples of the Pilgrims and Wampanoags. Today our nation comprises many different peoples united in a common purpose and enjoying the rights boldly stated in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. Auspiciously, our Thanksgiving dinner tables provide abundance that will feed our bodies. Similarly, consider how this nation feeds and supports your deepest values: freedom of worship and conscience; freedom to gather and speak; freedom to assembly; freedom to travel; freedom to pursue happiness in your way, and so much more. Lastly, we express deep appreciation for this Thanksgiving, for Gods’ blessings, and for Squanto’s example of mutual support. Alike in our appreciation, we are more similar than different.

We hope the almighty of your choice bestows blessings on you and your family, today and always. To those without religion, we offer our best wishes. Express deep appreciation for this Thanksgiving, for sight, for sound, and the abundance in which you live and prosper in the U.S.A.

References
[1] Andy Andrews, The Traveler's Gift, Thomas Nelson Publishing; 1st edition (April 6, 2012), 240 pp.

[2] Squanto. https://www.worldhistory.org/Squanto/

[3] ibid

[4] The Mayflower Compact https://themayflowersociety.org/history/the-mayflower-compact/