Friday, August 20, 2010

Decision 2010: Alameda Mayoral and City Council Candidates

There are some true open government hopefuls in the Alameda Mayoral and City Council race. It’s a refreshing thought to know that the community can de-rail the stale train of thought of our current representatives by voting in the upcoming election. Although some politicians paint a pretty picture of the current state of affairs in Alameda, one doesn’t have to look past the Alameda housing slump, the hurting budgets of the schools, fire fighters and police (to name a few) to realize it’s a farce. It’s vital that the community is informed and casts their vote come November 2.


The race has attracted five candidates for Mayor and eight candidates for the two open City Council seats which are listed below followed by a brief commentary:

Mayoral Candidates:

Frank Matarrese, Councilmember

Marie Gilmore, Councilmember

Doug deHaan, Vice Mayor

Tony Daysog, former City Councilman

Kenneth Kahn, a professional clown who ran in 2006

Matarrese has been actively campaigning for the past 6 months at least, so most likely has a financial leg up on the competition. During their terms, Matarrese and deHaan have promised transparency, efficiency and public improvement. However, they seem to get caught up in the system and are not able to work with their fellow Councilmembers to make real improvements in Alameda. Matarrese followed the notoriously wishy-washy Beverly Johnson in her reverse decision on Alameda Point, stopping a deal that would have provided Alameda with new economic opportunities. DeHaan is old-fashioned and resistant to positive change on the island, once quoted as saying the architectural design for the now celebrated renovation of the Alameda Theatre was “butt ugly.” He’s not an agent of change, to say the least.

This leaves Gilmore and Daysog (sorry, Kenneth Kahn) as my open government hopefuls. Gilmore is a fresh-faced current Councilmember, with an impressive list of endorsements to date. In action, Gilmore is also impressive, frequently pushing forward visionary projects – sometimes in the face of strong opposition - that will benefit the city such as the Alameda Theatre, Towne Center, public library and Harbor Bay Business Park. Daysog is a fair-minded business man who knows the reality of the situation at Alameda. He sees the situation clearly through all the politicking in City Hall with an eye on a high quality of life for Alameda. It is refreshing to have his new ideas in this race. He can identify the small - but important - steps that will lead to larger positive change, such as the beginning of Park Street downtown renovation with a Peet’s Coffee lease.

City Council Candidates:

Mayor Beverly Johnson

Jean Sweeney, a local park and open space advocate, she sits on the Restoration Advisory Board

Lena Tam, incumbent Councilwoman

Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft, Planning Board president

Rob Bonta, Health Care District Board member

Tracy Jensen, Board of Education trustee

Jeff Mitchell, former Alameda Journal editor

Adam Gillitt, local businessman

These candidates fall in two groups in my eyes: candidates who are willing to challenge the status quo and candidates who want politics as usual. Based on my research, Tam, Ashcraft and Bonta are the former, and will stand up for an open, honest, responsible government for Alameda. The latter “politics as usual” group, in my opinion, includes Johnson and Sweeney. Johnson refuses to take a stance on most issues, and if she does, may detract it a few months later (i.e. Alameda Point). Sweeney doesn’t seem to understand the bigger picture and lacks the know-how to make the big changes Alameda needs in today’s City Council. For example, she is a fierce advocate of parks, open space, more community amenities, but does not define sources of funding. How will she add more parks when we’re seeing severe slashes to our school budgets? As of now, Gillitt and Jensen seem to fall towards the “politics as usual” camp, but I’ll be watching those two candidates closely as their campaigns continue.

Now, most importantly, what do you think?

7 comments:

  1. Anonymous8/20/2010

    You forgot yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous8/20/2010

    I am very concerned about the salaries of our elected officials, read this first
    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/07/bell-vicemayor-says-highlypaid-city-manager-will-resign-or-be-fired-.html

    Open Letter To All Candidates:

    I am wondering, if candidates studied salaries of city workers including police officers, firefighters, overtimes, retirement benefits etc.

    I would like to see candidates shed a light on the salaries of city workers,

    1- Does Alameda have any compensation issue
    2- If so, how they would address these issues.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jon Spangler8/26/2010

    What about Jeff Mitchell? You didn't discuss him at all...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Jon. Thanks for the comment... oversight indeed. Mitchell's editorial background positions him as a bi-partisan candidate who understands the issues. His local presence in Alameda gives him a well-informed perspective on Alameda leadership.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous8/26/2010

    And aren't you Jeff Mitchell?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Jon Spangler8/27/2010

    Last night at the community meeting on Alameda Point, I heard Ashley Jones telling one and all that Suncal and other developers were bankrolling the campaigns of Marie Gilmore, Lena Tam, Rob Bonta, and possibly other "progressive" candidate. These folks are apparently opposed by Action Alameda and their candidates (deHaan, Gillitt, Sweeney). He--and they--refused to talk to me when I inquired about this, however.

    (So much for "learning how to talk to each other again" after Measure B and Suncal's exit...)

    Do you or any of our readers know anything about who might be spreading such apparent disinformation, or whether there is any substantiation to support these claims? Truth may already have fallen victim to the campaign...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous8/30/2010

    Hopefully this election will get the City back on track. This division is not productive.

    ReplyDelete