Reed said he will talk with community leaders and organizations in the San Lorenzo Valley, Scotts Valley and at the county level to “get a feel” for the climate and to find out if he’d be a good fit for the position.
“I have no idea what the response is going to be,” Reed said.
Reed jumped into the conversation after fellow Councilman Dene Bustichi, who announced his own bid for supervisor last month, was cut out of the 5th District when redistricting lines split Scotts Valley down Highway 17.
Reed, who grew up in Chicago and moved with his wife, Lea, to Santa Cruz County in 2000, has served on the Scotts Valley City Council since January 2007, including one year as mayor. The couple has four children, ages 4 through 11. Before joining the council, Reed spent 11 years in the technology industry, including six years with Nokia. He was the editor of the Press-Banner for a year the mid-2000s and now works in public relations and marketing.
Reed said part of his outreach will be a message of job creation.
“We need a supervisor focused all the time on creating well-paying jobs,” he said.
He says Santa Cruz County needs to use its coastline and temperate climate to drive year-round tourism, an area where it has underperformed in recent years. Reed, who stood behind the La Bahia project that was voted down by the California Coastal Commission this summer, said he worries that the vote will have a ripple effect on the county’s economy.
“I fear it will revive the stereotype that economic development and environmental protection are incompatible in Santa Cruz County,” Reed said.
“If I run, we’re not going to have a La Bahia (situation) anymore. That’s the last La Bahia that happens if I get elected supervisor.”
If he ran, Reed said, he would push for commonsense, centrist solutions to fix the government process. He suggests gathering the likes of Fred Keeley, John Laird and Bruce McPherson — all well-respected lawmakers who live in Santa Cruz — to develop policy that would usher local government into a new mindset of innovation, similar to the thinking of the organization California Forward.
Reed said he would like to see a supervisor reach out to the community more often — for example, calling on the two local chambers of commerce and three business associations in the 5th District to meet once a year to discuss job creation.
Reed also supports Senate Bill 14, which sets performance goals for the government rather than budgeting positions.
“If passed, it’s going to change the mindset, and the paradigm, of how government operates,” he said, noting that the planning department process in the county is a good example , although new Planning Director Kathy Previsich has begun to make positive changes.
Reed said he wants to see local government think differently about providing basic services, because of leaner budgets and fewer employees.
“If things aren’t working, we’ve got to change,” he said.
There is not always fire were there is smoke perhaps you should look at Eric Hammers past could be some very hot issues there.
Someone has got to step up and confirm that they are running. Someone with the intellectual capacity and strength of character to handle the job.
So 90% of you want to ruin the town? Does that somehow make it right?
"Founding fathers would be proud of Target"
This just shows how much idiots the 90% are. SV was a beautiful place back then, they'd more likly be turning in their gravse or puking at the sight of what you've done and still want to do.
There are some posts here that Google lists as being prior posts from this newspaper, and posed here like it was part of the conversation. Who knows where some of these comments came from. A reasonable reader would dig deeper and take information from a variety of sources.
The few things we know for sure, it's the policy of this paper to collect comments if they like. They claim the ability to do anything they like with in an editorial role. That is the first objection, I do not believe that the manner of moving and editing this particular discussion met this papers own policy, the effect changed the meaning and relied upon the sources as a measure of my meaning. Something they do not agree.
There there are some serious problems with the editorial standards if some of the comments came from the editor as part of the dialog. The criticism would go away if they adopted a log in system, updated their policy and included stronger disclosure at submission, that matched the level of their expected content.
It's a natural conclusion that inside access to the paper and the data it collects could use it for purposes like instant and easy reposting. Or finding information about a political opponent. It's clear this paper needs to update their policy to include wording that defines the level of access by any elected official. It would address what level of access is material government participation and qualifies as covered by open access laws for truth to power. We have the right to know what our government does.
In the past, one of the things that came out researching the Target experience showed, was that they had a policy of investigating all crimes in their stores, and their forensic facilities are so advanced the Federal government, among others, used the Target labs to investigate CSI style Capital Offenses. That was surprising. Good PR, maybe but it also had a darker implication less known.
The cooperation and access between the company and Government give the appearance that they have access to Information on anyone they need - despite their disclaimers of only working Capital offenses. The objection include the potential for identifying and learning about potential store opponents who might stand against the opening of a potential new store in a new community. I always found that interesting how far the deck was stacked against anyone before they even knew an application would begin. I also thought that is the kind of information that our media should have covered.
Don't get me wrong, I'm happy Target found it's way to the Mall where it belongs, and water under the bridge for me. But in the discussion about how PR is related to the practice of manufacturing consent, the practice of it effects us in the trusted sources of information. That happens at the local level, and that is through the media. This is the unfairness that we should all question.
When something is reposted, "..it starts to sound like it's the truth.." That's a two way standard, we rely upon local media to be fair and impartial.
The Political Reform Act of 1974 was a watershed moment for fairness. But the Internet has opened up all kinds of ways to take advantage of and abuse this system. Only by watching our individual rights, and electing fair representatives, to keep fairness in balance can both interests be served. Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press - both have rights and responsibilities.
Policies of this paper need to be supportive of a constructive environment or loose the trust needed to be an authoritative source of information.
Wouldn't it be nice if we could be sure about this discussion, so we would be able to focus about the candidates - where it belongs.
Oh wait.
love scotts valley wrote on Thursday, Oct 01 at 09:54 PM »
ya!!!!country rd........fire station traffic....Scotts Valley not peaceful.....get your 10% of the population to the City Council meeting and make a difference..I will be there to laugh at your mind games....great comedy..Founding fathers would be proud of Target....Scotts Valley is still going in the right direction!!!!!
Deleting in 3, 2, ..
The conversations you and I have had show that the paper has practiced differently than it's policy. This is misleading practice has led to censuring - it is exactly why I contacted you for clarification.
Under the conditions you condoned, inadvertently or not, you changed the meaning of my postings and did not place them back to the original condition - as you said you would. That is a written in the email. You bypassed the policy and made your editorial discretion.
Still, neither have you acted evenly in the application of your companies policies
"For the 6 people that read this crap you should realize that 90% of gets written here is from them they ran a very unsuccessful campaign against council members Lind Bustichi and Johnson in 2008 they lied like they do here Paul Bach tried to intimidate Lind on the street during the campaign"
Liars?
How can you justify removing derogatory comments against Mr Reed claiming policy, yet allow this libelous speech against me when it clearly is of the same violations of your policies?
You DO understand I was DEFENDING Mr Reed right?
As Editor agent for the paper and contact to the public, you should be aware of your own standards
Mr Burke, you still owe me a public apology.
Scotts Valley Family News
I have all this time, I might as well run a newspaper that will operate without censorship or online bullying. That would be refreshing.
First edition: Series - Part 1. Is the Press Banner too cozy?
There, I have a job.
Now an apology by Mr Burke.
Oh please get a job
Using measured comments to attempt to paint a false portrait. And for what personal gain? Maybe someone looking to stand on my back to gain political office?
Tell me it isn't so.
But what IS true, Mr Burke censored my comments and the thread. You wonder why the response is so vigorous?
Because if enough light is shed on the paper and it's political connections, maybe they will find what we ALL want to know that they DON'T.
So what are you afraid of?
Looking forward to hearing more about your candidacy, Mr. Reed.
Post something unpopular with the paper or its friends - out come the attack dogs.
That's a simple reflection of how they operate.
It was his way of protesting the Target project. I was never so emberessed to be on the same side of and issue as I was that night with Mr. Tempest this is fact and was video taped on community television . So for anyone who reads this blog keep that in mind when you read another rant from this man.
And Mr. Burke good luck with this one.