Comments on: Clinton Killian v. Kerry Hamill v. Rebecca Kaplan v. Frank Rose v. Charles Pine: LWV At-Large Oakland City Council forum recap, Part 2

By: Joanna/OnTheGoJo

Joanna/OnTheGoJo — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 03:48:53 +0000

Just to clarify – the post above wasn’t the same Joanna that has been posting about height limits, Nancy Nadel, JLS, cabaret licenses, etc… This Joanna hasn’t decided who she’s voting for.

But the poster above has definately got a great name!

Cheers,
Joanna Adler aka “Joanna” and “OnTheGoJo”

By: Joanna

Joanna — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 18:10:20 +0000

Thank you so much for providing this information! I agree with several of your points.

For me, I think Frank Rose offers something very special. By far – he has the most experience successfully working with community agencies. Many candidates talk about working with nonprofits and faith agencies to partner with the City to make meaningful change and to improve the quality of life for the residents of Oakland, but Frank Rose actually does it. With budget cuts, longstanding problems and more staff turnover to come, we absolutely need Frank Rose’s ability mobilize community assets, and his willingness to seek and empower non-governmental solutions to the issues facing Oakland.

I also love the fact that Frank Rose’s devotion to youth, seniors and safety (and to the advancement of the City of Oakland) are so clearly NOT motivated by a desire for political gain or for career advancement. How refreshing is that!

Thanks again for all you do to keep us informed.

By: dto510

dto510 — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 22:43:21 +0000

I like a lot of what most of the candidates say, but I am supporting Clinton Killian because of his depth of experience. I find his performance on the AC Transit Board impressive, and Oakland needs strong voices on transportation. One of the biggest problems with Oakland’s governance is that the Planning Commission doesn’t settle development disputes and they end up at the Council. Clinton’s perspective having served on the Planning Commission could help the Council figure out how to move beyond these fights, and also he would bring a realistic (and hopefully detail-oriented) view to the zoning update. I know from talking to him about his work on the Paramount Board (which is also impressive) that he shares my goal of revitalizing downtown and supporting the arts.

Frank Rose is great but he’s doing such good work in the community now, and I don’t really see what he brings to the Council. I’m impressed with Rebecca Kaplan but I am also annoyed that she exaggerated her improvements to late-night service, and I am very unhappy with AC Transit’s failure to get the community on-board with BRT. I am also skeptical of her endorsement from the Central labor Council, putting her in the same company as Brunner and Nadel is no good (I realize that one endorsement is not necessarily reflective of a candidate in their entirety, and frankly the CLC had only reform-minded and pro-growth candidates to choose from, so they probably weren’t too thrilled). I am not considering Kerry Hammill because she chose to join an already crowded race when District One needs new leadership, especially on educational and affordable housing.

It’s great to read all of these endorsements coming from residents and volunteers. I’m very excited that people are paying attention to these important races.

By: Max Allstadt

Max Allstadt — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 22:09:09 +0000

I’m really with you on all of that, OP. The only reason I haven’t committed to vote for Rose yet is that I’m not sure he’ll be able to learn to bullshit and maneuver well enough to be potent on the council. I do think his extraordinary charisma will translate into political currency though. Still on the fence. Killian, Kaplan or Rose.

By: OP

OP — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 21:50:23 +0000

I’ve decided to support Frank Rose in this contest.

While many candidates talk about how they will address crime, education, disaster prepardeness, elderly issues, youth empowerment, etc., Frank Rose has actually been tackling these issues through his involvment in organizations, nonprofits, and city commissions. I was also impressed by the fact that, in the two debates I have attended, he was the candidate that seemed to have the best grasp of what the City was doing and could offer the most concrete examples of what programs should be enhanced or what policies could be implemented.

I think more than that though, I saw in him a very humble and selfless commitment to helping Oakland which I found inspiring and, frankly, that I wish we saw more of in Oakland.

Rose’s biggest disadvantage is that, while civic-minded, he doesn’t strike me as political and I think he would face an extremely steep learning curve on the Council.

By: Becks

Becks — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 04:57:48 +0000

As always, thanks for the thorough analysis. I had already decided to support Rebecca Kaplan before reading your recap of the debate, but now I feel both satisfied with my choice and that we’ll be ok if she doesn’t win.

Though Kaplan’s website isn’t as extensive as Sullivan’s, she too is concerned about food security and nutrition issues and mentions it in the “Healthy Neighborhoods” part of her platform: http://ccwidget.com/kaplan/issues.html

You can read my take on Kaplan here: http://oaklandliving.wordpress.com/2008/04/14/why-im-supporting-rebecca-kaplan-for-oakland-city-council/

By: Buddy Cushman

Buddy Cushman — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 01:32:08 +0000

V Smoothe — As I have said a couple of times before, I want to thank you so much for the effort and committment you make to provide people with all of this information, interesting opinions included. It’s a lot. I also feel very strongly about the Robert Kennedy quote, have since I heard Ted Kennedy say it at Robert’s funeral, 40 years ago. I really believe it separates the many from the few. Your point within your post about someone throwing out lots of new and different options/solutions bound to have some wacky ones in the mix is so on the point. You laugh at the wacky ones, roll your eyes, and then take a long look at the others. Albert Einstein said, “The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.” Amen. Thanks again.

By: V Smoothe

V Smoothe — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:52:00 +0000

scottpark –

What can I say? I’ve always had a soft spot for the underdog? Seriously, have little interest in politics or politicians and their personal history – my focus is on policy.

I strongly disagree with Killian’s contracting ideas (I think I covered that in part 1), but like I said, he’s on the same page as me on growth, development, and transportation, and those are my priorities.

You want to know something really sad? I’ve never had a chance to sit all the way through a Planning Commission meeting. I like to catch reruns or buy the DVDs, but I’ve worked Wednesday nights basically the entire time I’ve lived here. Sometimes if I get out early, I can rush over and catch something controversial if the meeting’s running long, but I’m always embarrassed cause in my work clothes, I’m not dressed appropriately.

By: scottpark

scottpark — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:29:04 +0000

Clinton Killian!?!? Wow! I would never think in a million years that someone like you, with your ear so close to the ground on what’s going on in Oakland, would choose a perennial nobody like Killian. This is a guy who simply cannot stop trying to become a politician, whether its Council, Assembly, City Attorney or AC Transit. I don;t know how many Planning Commission meetings you went to when he was Chair, but he was so idiotic and patently offensive to everyone in the process that it was an embarrassment. For his decade or more on the scene, there’s nothing he can show that is actually an accomplishment. I will also offer that Killian is part of the whole Oakland Black Caucus clique committed exclusively to getting black contractors city dollars.

Very very surprised by your choice. Very very impressed with your coverage and your commitment to informing everyone.