Author: Margarita Lacabe

An Incomplete Progressive Guide to the November ’18 Berkeley Election

Berkeley has the reputation of being the most progressive city in the US, but impressions are not always reality.  Berkeley has particularly struggled with issues of homelessness and police militarization and brutality, which its City Council has not always been able to address adequately.

It’s a new election and a chance to install a fully progressive City Council.  Here are the best progressive choices.

Igor tregub
Igor Tregub

City Council District #1: 1) Igor Tregub, 2) Margo Shueler, 3) Mary Behm-Steinberg

There are three progressives running on this race. They all support rent control, holding the police accountable and ending police militarization, humane solutions to homelessness and smart growth.  I am ranking them in terms of their preparation for this office.

Igor Tregub is an engineer and long time community activist, currently in the Berkeley Rent Board.  I’ve known him for many years, as he is also a member of the Alameda County Democratic Central Committee.  He is a strong progressive, with the right values, who is committed to making Berkeley a better city.  He can be a little timid at times, but will vote the right way. He has the #1 endorsement from Our Revolution East Bay.

Margo Schueler has impressed me with her “can do” attitude, her willingness to take on sexist establishments and her straightforwardness.  However, her expertise seem more limited than Igor’s so I’m recommending her as a #2 choice, as has Our Revolution East Bay.

Mary Behm-Steinberg seems to mostly be a protest candidate, aiming to bring attention to disability issues.  She has overall progressive values, so I’m recommending her as number 3.

Rashi Kesarwani, the fourth candidate, is your run-of-the-mill elitist candidate, running to make it easier for developers to build luxury housing and to keep the status quo.

Igor's Life Partner, Maritessa, on Why She Supports Igor for Berkeley City Council

My amazing partner Maritessa has been with me through every step of this journey – from the moment I announced my candidacy, to attending community meetings and house parties, to knocking on doors to listen to the concerns of our neighbors. We care so deeply about this district. This is our home. This is where we will start a family. There is no one else I trust to tell my story than her. This election, I ask you to vote Igor #1 for Berkeley City Council District 1.

Posted by Igor Tregub for Berkeley City Council, District 1 on Tuesday, October 9, 2018

Related image
Kate Harrison

City Council District #4: Kate Harrison

Incumbent Kate Harrison is the epitome of a progressive politician, the sort we wish we could clone and put one of in every city council.  She is firm in her convictions that a city must be run for its citizens, she supports human rights and social/racial/gender/environmental justice.  She is well informed and has clear and intelligent solutions to the problems facing Berkeley.  She is not easily intimidated and is not afraid to stand up to the Berkeley police.  And she is a pleasant human being, without an ego and the ability to get along with everyone. She was endorsed by Our Revolution East Bay.

Her opponents are two pro-development guys in vanity campaigns.  Neither is worth a second choice vote.

Rigel Robinson
Rigel Robinson

City Council District #7: 1) Rigel Robinson, 2) Aidan Hill

City Council District 7 was created as a student district – with the express purpose of having student representation in the Berkeley City Council.   The current officeholder, Kriss Worthington. promised he’d step aside when a suitable student would step up to run for this seat.  Rigel Robinson, who graduated last spring from Cal, took that challenge.  Rigel is an extremely mature, intelligent and well spoken young man.  At Cal, he participated in student government and was a leader in the campus campaign for Bernie Sanders.  He has strong progressive values, including opposing the militarization of Berkeley police.  He is overall very impressive and will add a needed young voice to the Council.  Rigel has been endorsed by Our Revolution East Bay.

Aidan Hill,  our second choice, is currently a student at UC Berkeley.  A young gender non-binary person of color, he has struggled with discrimination and homelessness and is running to bring attention to those issues as well as push for an overall progressive agenda (one that seems less local than Rigel’s).

The last candidate in the race, Ces Rosales, is an older woman who seeks to represent the interests of the non-student residents and small businesses in the district.  She’s ran for City Council before and while she supported the creation of a student district, she harbors a lot of resentment to supports of Bernie Sanders.  She is also a supporter of police militarization. We cannot recommend her.

Alfred Twu

City Council District #8: 1) Alfred Twu, 2-3) TBD

Alfred Twu is an artist and designer, with brilliant innovative ideas on how to solve the housing crisis.  They are a passionate progressive, a volunteer for Bernie Sanders and many other progressive candidates and a key member of the progressive movement.  They are intelligent, capable, willing to stand up for what they believe and would be an amazing addition to the Berkeley City Council.  They have been endorsed by Our Revolution East Bay.

We are still awaiting more information on the other two challenger before making our second and third choices.  Incumbent Lori Droste, however, clearly does not represent Progressive values.  She has voted in favor of police militarization and is lukewarm on rent control.

School Board (vote for 3): TBD

We are still working out this race. Please leave us your comments below.

Rent Stabilization Board (vote for 5): Soli Alpert, James Chang, Paola LaVerde, Maria Poblet, John T. Selawsky

The pro-rent control slate is running against a few anti-rent control challengers.  Obviously, we want the progressives to win.

Jenny Wong
Jenny Wong

Auditor: Jenny Wong

Jenny Wong is a professional auditor who is running to take the place of the present one, who is retiring. She has the  support of basically everyone in Berkeley City government for what should not be a political position.  Her opponent seems both unqualified and unable to do the job – he would not even answer my questions.  She was endorsed by Our Revolution East Bay.

Measures

Measure O: Yes

This is a $135 bond measure to fund affordable housing.

Measure P: Yes

This would race the property transfer tax from 1.5% to 2.5% for properties that sell for over $1.5 million, with the proceeds going to to help homeless people.  It’s exactly the type of common-sense progressive taxation that we should get behind.

Measure Q: No

This measure was put in the ballot through the pressure of landlords who are afraid that if Prop 10 passes and Costa Hawkins is repealed, their units will fall under rent control.  It exempts accessory dwelling units from both rent control and just cause – allowing landlords to not only raise the rent as high as they want, but evict tenants for any reason.

Measure R: Yes

This measure advises the Mayor in the development of a 30-year infrastructure plan for Berkeley.  The Mayor supports it.

An Illustrated Guide to California Propositions

This Guide was prepared and illustrated by Alfred Twu.

No automatic alt text available.

Prop 1 would authorize $4 billion in affordable housing bonds – enough to fund 100,000 homes.
California Democratic Party, labor unions, and many community groups have endorsed Prop 1.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_1,_Housing_Programs_and_Veterans%27_Loans_Bond_(2018)

No automatic alt text available.

Back in 2004, California passed an extra 1% income tax on millionaires to fund mental health services. Prop 2 would allocate some funds from that tax to authorize a $2 billion bond to fund supportive housing.
California Democratic Party, labor unions, and many community groups have endorsed Prop 2.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_2,_Use_Millionaire%27s_Tax_Revenue_for_Homelessness_Prevention_Housing_Bonds_Measure_(2018)

No automatic alt text available.

Prop 3 would authorize an $8.877 billion bond for water projects. While there are some good projects in the mix, most of the funding is earmarked for projects benefiting those that helped pay to get this massive barrel of pork on the ballot, including big ag and dam interests. The Sierra Club recommends a No vote. We just passed a water bond in June 2018 – let’s reject Prop 3 and come back in 2020 with a better plan. The California Democratic Party did not take a position on Prop 3.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_3,_Water_Infrastructure_and_Watershed_Conservation_Bond_Initiative_(2018

No automatic alt text available.

Prop 4 would authorize a $1.5 billion bond for children’s hopsital expansions and retrofits.
California Democratic Party has endorsed Prop 4.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_4,_Children%27s_Hospital_Bonds_Initiative_(2018)

No automatic alt text available.

Currently, property taxes in California are based on price at time of purchase, with a below-inflation annual increase. However, when people move and buy a new home, usually they will have to pay full taxes. Currently, there are exemptions for people over 55. Realtors put Prop 5 on the ballot to expand the number of exemptions.
California Democratic Party and unions oppose Prop 5, as nearly all the benefit would go to the rich, and schools and local governments would lose up to $1 billion a year each.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_5,_Property_Tax_Transfer_Initiative_(2018)

No automatic alt text available.

Prop 6 would repeal the recent 12-cent/gallon gas tax. This would remove $3-5 billion a year in transportation funding from bridges, highways, and transit.
California Democratic Party and unions oppose Prop 6.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_6,_Voter_Approval_for_Future_Gas_and_Vehicle_Taxes_and_2017_Tax_Repeal_Initiative_(2018)

No automatic alt text available.

Prop 7 would allow the state to extend Daylight Savings Time to be year-round, eliminating the time changes. Sunrise and sunset would be later in the winter than currently.
California Democratic Party endorses Prop 7.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_7,_Permanent_Daylight_Saving_Time_Measure_(2018)

No automatic alt text available.

Currently, private clinics provide most kidney dialysis services. Prop 8 would limit their profits to 15%, and require any additional money to go back into services or lowered prices. Labor unions want clinics to address problems of understaffing. The California Democratic Party also endorses Prop 8.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_8,_Limits_on_Dialysis_Clinics%27_Revenue_and_Required_Refunds_Initiative_(2018)

No automatic alt text available.

Prop 9 is a *****ing dumpster fire that a billionaire paid to get on the ballot, only to have the courts declare it unconstitutional. Please don’t sign any more of his ballot measures to divide California into multiple states.

No automatic alt text available.

Prop 10 would repeal Costa-Hawkins, allowing cities to pass stronger forms of rent control, such as vacancy control (no rent increases between tenants), rent control on single family houses, and rent control on buildings built after 1995.
The California Democratic Party, tenant and community groups, and unions endorse Prop 10. East Bay for Everyone also endorses Prop 10, YIMBY Action was divided among Yes and No and did not reach a consensus.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_10,_Local_Rent_Control_Initiative_(2018)

No automatic alt text available.

Prop 11, funded by private ambulance corporation AMR, would give ambulance companies an exemption from labor laws, allowing them to require staff to be on call during their lunch breaks. What could possibly go wrong? Unions and the California Democratic Party oppose Prop 11.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_11,_Ambulance_Employees_Paid_On-Call_Breaks,_Training,_and_Mental_Health_Services_Initiative_(2018)

Image may contain: text

Prop 12 sets minimum cage sizes for chickens, cows, and pigs. The Humane Society and the California Democratic Party endorse Prop 12. Meat corporations oppose it, PETA also opposes it because they don’t think it goes far enough and are concerned it might give consumers a false sense that things are OK.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_12,_Farm_Animal_Confinement_Initiative_(2018)

 

Lesser of Two Evils: How Progressives in California Should Vote on Statewide Races

These are our recommendations for statewide offices (including Board of Equalization).  Unfortunately, no true progressive is running for any office. Our choices in most of these races are between a corrupt self-dealing politician and a more corrupt self-dealing politician.  We indicate “lesser evil” choices by the use of italics.   Note that because all of these races had a top-two primary, it’s not possible to do a write-in vote.  So it’s either vote for one of the two candidates in each race or not vote at all.  Please feel free to comment below with your views and choices.

Download PDF

Image result for kevin de leon
Kevin De Leon

US Senator: Kevin De Leon

We consider De Leon to be an establishment pay-to-play politician, with lots of skeletons in his closet, from potential me-too allegations, to involvement in shady and even corrupt political dealings.  As a Senator, he took lots of telecom money which he paid back by killing a bill that would prohibit telecoms from sharing customers’ data.  Moreover, he is completely ignorant of foreign policy.

However, he is running against Dianne Feinstein, one of the most warmongering, self-dealing, anti-human rights Senators.  Feinstein has supported every war we’ve ever been engaged in. She supports droning and opposes single payer healthcare.  Moreover, she has total contempt for voters and has barely held any town halls or agreed to debate her opponent.  She does not deserve to be in the Senate.

Image result for gavin newsom
Gavin Newsom

Governor: Gavin Newsom

There is much to dislike about Gavin Newsom.  He has no moral compass, he is dishonest, he is opportunistic, he makes promises (like supporting single payer) that he has no intentions to fulfill, he is an elitist which little concern for the common man, he is willing to sell out immigrants and children for political points.  The list goes on and on.  Still, he is better than his Trump-endorsed Republican opponent John Cox.  Please hold your nose and vote for Gavin.

Lieutenant Governor: Undecided

In this election we have a choice between a rich white woman with no qualifications and a history of supporting corrupt politicians or a corrupt  politician.   We spoke with Eleni Kounalakis at length and she is a nice woman,  with a measure of noblesse oblige that would have her support social justice issues, but only as long as these don’t interfere with the real financial interests of the oligarchy.  She was born with a silver spoon in her mouth, she bought herself an ambassadorship and if she’s elected now, it’ll be on the basis of her wealth and connections (made by her wealth).

Her opponent, Ed Hernandez, is a Latino optometrist-turned-politician who has risen by playing the old pay-to-play game (what you do when you can’t resort to a family fortune to fund your campaigns).  He earned the support of the California Nurses Association by supporting SB 562, the single payer bill, and letting it passed through committee – but it’s not clear he’d have done this if he wasn’t running for Lt Governor and wanted the nurses on his side.

In all, we’re not sure which one is the worse choice.

alex padilla
Alex Padilla

Secretary of State: Alex Padilla

There are no good candidates in this race.  Incumbent Alex Padilla made a mockery of the office, one which requires integrity and a perception of neutrality, by openly campaigning for Hillary Clinton during the primary.  Then, when thousands of voters throughout the state complained about voter irregularities, from having their party registration changed to having their names disappear altogether from the voter rolls, Padilla did nothing to investigate and fix whatever the problem was.  He definitely needs to go.

Unfortunately, his opponent, Republican Mark Meuser, is an alt-right conspiracy theorist who should not be elected to dog catcher.  As unlikely as it may seem that he could win, we can’t risk it and we must vote for Padilla.

betty yee
Betty Yee

Controller: Betty Yee

While  Betty Yee has been abandoning her progressive roots, she is a far better choice than her Republican opponent, who is running in anti-tax platform.

Fiona Ma
Fiona Ma

Treasurer: Fiona Ma

Ma is far more of a establishment politician than we’d like, but she she is a solid choice against a Republican opponent.  This editorial from the LA Times discusses their relative strengths.

 

xavier becerra
Xavier Becerra

Attorney General:  Xavier Becerra

Xavier Becerra is not as progressive as we’d like but his opponent, Republican Steven Bailey, is both corrupt and a proud supporter of mass incarceration.

 

ricardo lara
Ricardo Lara

Insurance Commissioner:  Ricardo Lara

Ricardo Lara is a problematic candidate.  While he was one of the authors of the single payer bill introduced in the State Senate last year, he did little to make sure that the bill was actually passed.  His seemingly corrupt past activities and his reliance on corporate donations also worry us.   Moreover, he does not seem to have any relevant experience that would prepare him for this job.

However, his opponent is Steve Poizner, a former Republican now running as No Party Preference, who was Insurance Commissioner from 2008-2012. Poizner quit the job to run for governor in a far-right platform that denounced immigration (which he now, conveniently, claims he regrets).  He is now running on a platform of opposing single-payer healthcare.

tony thurmond
Tony Thurmond

State Superintendent of Public Instruction: Tony Thurmond

Marshal Tuck is a charter school executive, seemingly aiming to privatize our educational system even more.  Tony Thurmond seems more interested in political climbing that he is in on the well being of students.  Alas, we can’t risk having Tuck be elected.

Board of Equalization District 1: Tom Hallinan

Tom Hallinan correctly states that the Board of Equalization is no longer necessary and he’ll work to shut it down.

 

Board of Equalization District 2: None

San Francisco supervisor Malia Cohen is a moderate Democrat who has taken developer and AirBnb money and voted against measures that would maintain and increase affordable housing in SF.    Her opponent, Mark Burns, is your run-of-the-mill right winger.    Malia is the lesser of two evils, though as she’s a shoe-in to win, this is a race one can just skip voting on.

Tony Vazquez

Board of Equalization District 3: Tony Vasquez

Vazquez is a progressive and supported Bernie Sanders but has been involved in shady self-dealing deals.  His opponent,  G. Rick Marshall, is an anti-tax Republican.  While this is a safe Democratic district, Vazquez neglected to include a ballot statement which will depress the vote for him.  We thus recommend that you vote for him.

Board of Equalization District 2: None

Here we have a situation where it’s not easy to discern who is the better of two evils.  The Democratic candidate, 80-year old Mike Schaefer, is a perennial candidate that was once disbarred for dishonesty, deceit and fraud.

His opponent is another typical no-tax, defend Prop 13 protections of commercial property type.

 

 

Progressive Endorsements for the City of Alameda

Every election, our sister blog San Leandro Talk publishes a voter guide with recommendations for what candidates progressives should vote for.  We are migrating that guide and those recommendations to this blog.  We are starting with the City of Alameda.

ashcraft-web-263x387.jpg
Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft

Mayor: Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft

We recommended Trish Spencer when she first ran for Mayor, but we have been disappointed by the anti-progressive positions she has taken since elected. She has opposed rent control and is now supporting Measure K, a measure that gives landlords the right to increase rents and evict tenants without cause. She voted against raising the minimum wage in Alameda to $15 by 2020 – even though the cities surrounding Alameda, Oakland and San Leandro, have successfully implemented similar ordinances. She has voted in favor of mass surveillance in Alameda and did not support the sanctuary city resolution. Moreover, Spencer has been a disruptive presence in the Council, both fellow Councilmembers and city staff members report having problems working with her.  Alameda is now looking to hire both a City Manager and a City Attorney, and it’s unlikely to attract strong talent with Spencer as a Mayor.

That leaves Councilmembers Frank Matarrese and Marilyn Ashcraft. Both of them have a more progressive record, oppose measure K, voted for sanctuary city and to raise the minimum wage but they both also support mass surveillance and oppose permitting recreational marijuana dispensaries in Alameda.  Neither is a real progressive choice.  Of the two, Matarrese was a late convert to rent-control, he is often wishy-washy and does not convey strong leadership qualities. Ashcraft, on the other hand, has been a strong champion for rent control and has firmly stood up to the landlords, while also being willing to stand up against the Firefighters Union, when they tried to force the City Manager to hire their chosen candidate as Fire Chief. In Alameda, having elected officials that are not easily intimidated is particularly important.  We recommend Ashcraft as the lesser evil choice.

City Council (vote for 2): Jim Oddie and John Knox White

Jim Oddie has been a solid progressive vote in the City Council. He has been a big leader on rent control, raising the minimum wage and keeping ICE out of Alameda. He has also been supportive of putting restrictions on mass surveillance. He is accessible and reasonable.

 

John Knox White promises to be another progressive voice in the Council, supports rent control and limiting mass surveillance. He has a history of community activism and attending City Council meetings, so he should be able to hit the ground running.

None of their opponents are acceptable choices for progressives. Matz and Daysog are both conservatives who oppose rent control. Chen is simply corrupt: he has yet to take responsibility for committing insurance fraud, even though he pled guilty to such charges years ago and has used his position to advocate for businesses that are friendly to him.

School Board (vote for 2): Mialisa Bonta

Mia Bonta has strong progressive values and a lot of professional experience on bringing racial equity to public educational institutions. I think her experience and knowledge would bring a level of professionalism and viewpoint diversity that is needed on any board. While Mialisa is married to Rob Bonta, our Assemblymember, who can be at times problematic and is definitely trying to build a political machine behind him, I don’t think it’s fair to hold this against her.

Both Gary Lym and Anne McKereghan are parents of former AUSD students who are clearly and inspiringly committed to Alameda schools. They both voted in favor of the non-dress code and support restorative justice. They are also both nice people. McKereghan is more conservative in general, but not in a way that affects the schools. Lym is very close to School Board member Gray Davis, which may make it harder for him to vote independently of her. They both bring personal experiences that are important, Lym as an Asian-American adoptive single father and McKereghan as the mother of a special needs child. I think either is a good choice.

Healthcare District Director, Short Term: Dennis Popalardo

Dennis Popalardo was appointed to fill out this term, and I see no reason to replace him. He is a progressive who supported Bernie Sanders, and I recommended him when he ran for School Board in 2016.

Measure F – Sales Tax: No

Cities are very limited on their sources for taxation, but as a matter of course we oppose sales taxes as they are regressive measures which hurt the poor far more than the rich.  We particularly decry taxes based on scaremongering tactics, such as this one which suggests that the money will go for “police response to violent crimes and burglaries.”   In reality, most of the money is and probably should go to pay for rising pension costs – a fact that the City should be transparent about.

Measure K – Anti-Rent Control: No

Measure K is a charter amendment which will preclude the city of Alameda from passing strong rent control protections.