DAC

I pull, I nominate

 I pull, I nominate  ACDCC  No Responses »
Sep 092014
 

Democrat DonkeyList of Candidates I’ve Pulled and Nominated for the Alameda Democratic party endorsement

(Updated with Results)

As a member of the Alameda County Democratic Central Committee, I have the privilege of voting for the party’s endorsement in local, non-partisan races.  All registered Democrats running for office in Alameda county are eligible for the party endorsement.  Those who apply are interviewed by the Executive Committee, which can put candidates in the consent calendar.  Two members acting together can pull a candidate from the consent calendar and/or nominate a candidate for the endorsement.  All candidates nominated and pulled are then interviewed by the whole Committee (or whichever members show up to the endorsement meeting).  All members then vote on which candidate they want to get the endorsement.  The endorsement meeting for 2014 will be on Saturday, Sept. 13th.

The Committee has 49 members who are eligible to vote, including 16 ex-officio members.  These are Democrats who either represent a part of Alameda county in Congress or the Legislature, owho hold statewide office and live in Alameda county,  or who serve as regional directors for the party and represent parts of Alameda county.

To get the endorsement a candidate needs to get 60% of the cast votes.  Not all members vote, and most members don’t vote in most races.  So while my single vote may seem paltry, in some races it can really make a difference.

I take the whole nominating and voting process very seriously.  I was elected to the ACDCC by the people, and I feel I’m accountable to them.  Moreover, I believe that every right, and in particular those rights that are not universal, carries with it the responsibility of exercising it conscientiously.

For this reason, I make a solid effort to learn about all the Democratic candidates for office in Alameda county and nominate those whom I think hold the liberal principles I want the Democratic party to stand for.  As nominating a candidate often necessitates pulling others, I also pull perfectly acceptable candidates.

Now, this screening of candidates should be the job of the Executive Committee.  Unfortunately, the decisions of the Executive Committee are not always based on who is the best candidate.  Politics, petty rivalries and even profit (some members of the Executive Committee are paid campaign consultants/treasurers for candidates up for the endorsement) come into play.  So I feel it’s my responsibility to look at all candidates independently.

To judge which candidates I want to nominate and/or pull, I look at candidates’ websites, search for news about them and, in the case of Mayor/Council and School Board candidates, I send them a questionnaire.  I meet and speak on the phone with any candidate that is interested in doing so.  I won’t necessarily vote for the candidates that I nominate, in some cases where all candidates are equally good or bad I may vote “no endorsement”, but in all cases I think they are good Democrats that deserve to appear before the whole Committee.  That said, there are many Committee members who would be happier if they had to listen to fewer candidates, either because they trust the Executive Committee, they don’t believe they should vote in races outside their district, or vote for a candidate for reasons other than merit.

For this election, I pulled 9 candidates in 5 races, nominated 10 and would have pulled/nominated a number of others if I could have found someone to seconded me.

Candidates that I pulled and nominated

Berkeley City Council District 1: Pulled Linda Maio, nominated Alejandro Soto-Vigil

Reason: Alejandro’s political views and social justice values are very aligned with mine.  He is smart, committed and I think he has the passion to become a progressive leader at a time when we are in desperate need of them. I had a great conversation with him.  I was unable to find a non-city address for incumbent Linda Maio. Result: Linda Maio got the endorsement. She won re-election

Berkeley City Council District 8: Pulled Lori Droste, nominated Jacquelyn McCormick and George Beier

Reason: I met with Lori and was extremely impressed with her. I pulled her, however, because Angela Ramirez-Holmes is her campaign manager.  That made me doubt the integrity of Lori’s placement in the consent calendar.  Lori had been unaware of Angela’s influence in the Committee and had the integrity to agree to being pulled.  I nominated Jacquelyn and George because both of them responded to the questionnaire I sent and their political views also seem to reflect mine. Result: Lori Droste got the endorsement. She won the election.

Berkeley School Board: Pulled Joshua Daniels, Karen Hemphill and Julie Sinai and nominated Ty Alper.

Reason: A father of kids who attend BUSD, Alper has an impressive resume as a social justice lawyer and now director of the death penalty clinic at Boalt. He has been endorsed by liberal hero Robert Reich.  I think that he deserves a chance to make his case.  To nominate him I had to pull at least one person from consent, and it seemed most fair to pull them all. Result: the incumbents got the endorsement. Ty Alper was elected to the School Board, along with incumbents Daniels and Hemphill.

Oakland City Council District 6: nominated Desley Brooks

Reason: There were no candidates on consent for this race.  Brooks was the main voice at the Oakland City Council advocating that the Domain Awareness Center – a facility that would integrate mass surveillance throughout Oakland – be restricted to operating in the Port of Oakland.  She took the comments from the ACLU seriously.  Without her incisive questioning of staff, I think the vote would have been different and the DAC would include all of Oakland. Result: no endorsement was made on this race. Brooks won re-election.

Oakland School Board District 2: nominated Aimee Eng

Reason: Neither candidate had been nominated for the endorsement.  Eng responded to me when I reached out to her with my questionnaire, while her opponent didn’t. I’d like to hear her make a case for the endorsement. Result: Eng got the endorsement and won the election.

Oakland School Board District 4: nominated Karl Debro

Reason: Debro was a teacher at San Leandro High and co-founded a gay-straight alliance on campus. When a lesbian student couple was harassed, Debro and other teachers spoke about it to their classes.  While the white teachers weren’t disciplined for this, Debro, an African American, was.  He sued the district, settled for $1M, and as a result of his suit the district implemented a pretty successful pro-diversity/anti-bullying curriculum.  I respect his experience and his stands. Result: Debro got the endorsement. Debro lost the election.

Pleasanton Mayor: nominated Matt Morrison

Reason: I was impressed with Matt Morrison when we interviewed him last June, and I was also impressed by his answers to my questionnaire.  He is the only Democrat running in that race against a Republican incumbent. Result: no endorsement was made on this race. Morrison lost the election.

Pleasanton School Board: pulled Jeff Bowser and Joan Laursen, nominated Mark Miller

Reason: Miller reached out to me.  I was impressed by his qualifications, platform and commitment to transparency.  This contrasts with Jeff Bowser whom, as Board president, prevented parents to speak at a School Board meeting, in violation of the Brown act.   I don’t know Laursen well, but it seemed fair to pull both of them. Result: the incumbents got the endorsement. Miller won the election along with Laursen.

San Leandro City Council District 1: pulled Deborah Cox

Reason: Deborah Cox, who is running against my husband Mike Katz-Lacabe,  does not hold the progressive values that the Democratic party should spouse (e.g. she is a vocal opponent of marijuana dispensaries).  Cox is represented by Ramirez-Holmes and her candidacy has been pushed forward by ACDCC chair Robin Torello Result: no endorsement was made on this race. Cox won the election.

San Lorenzo School Board: nominated Steve Kirk

Reason: This district includes part of San Leandro.  There are two spots on this race and only one candidate, Janet Zamudio, was put on consent.  Kirk and Zamudio are running together. They have both received the endorsement of the teacher’s union. The current incumbents have been there for many years and do not reflect the diversity of the district. If elected, Kirk will be the first openly LGBT official in San Leandro. Result: Kirk got the endorsement. Kirk lost the election.

Peralta CCD Trustee District 5: pulled William Riley, nominated David Ralston

Reason: I looked at this race after a colleague suggested it.  The Democratic party has a tendency to endorse incumbents automatically which concerns me.  Ralston has been in office for 16 years now and I think it’s important for him to explain what he has to give the district that he hasn’t already given, and for the challenger to make a case as to what he wants to do differently.  That said, this is the only race for which I didn’t actually reach out to the candidates. Result: Riley got the endorsement and was re-elected.

Wanted to pull / nominate but couldn’t find a second

Alameda City Council: pull Stewart Chen.

Reason: Chen has shown a great insensitivity towards victims of human rights violations in China and Tibet by advocating the flying of the flag of the People’s Republic of Chinaat City Hall.  In addition, Chen’s unwillingness to own up to the insurance fraud charges to which he plead guilty years ago and his advocating in favor of California Waste Solutions in front of the Alameda City Council call into question his integrity. He also didn’t respond to my questionnaire. Stewart lost re-election.

Albany School Board: nominate Charles Blanchard

Blanchard responded to my questionnaire and I very much liked his answers.  I also researched him and he seems to have been very much liked when he was in the School Board before.  He had not been previously interviewed by the screening committee, as he had not seen the invitation to apply for the nomination. No other candidate has been  nominated in this race. Blanchard was elected.

Castro Valley School Board: pull Janice Friesen and/or Gary Howard, nominate Dorothy Theodore

Reason: I spoke at length with Theodore and she impressed me. She has young children in the district and thus has an inside view to what is working and what is not.  The Castro Valley School Board messed up big time last year when they tried to move a preschool into the grounds of an existing school, eliminating needed open space.  They did this without appropriate communication and buy-in from parents.  Theodore was recruited from the group of parents who organized to oppose it.  In our conversation, Theodore showed herself to be intelligent, concerned about issues of social inclusion and diversity, and aware of how the schools are working.  In order to nominate her, however, I would have to pull at least one incumbent.  I was able to get a second to nominate Theodore but not to pull the incumbents.  Dorothy Theodore was elected.

San Leandro School Board Area 4: nominate Latrina Dumas

Reason:  This race is for the School Board seat my husband will be vacating.  I would have let this race go, but someone else nominated Latrina’s opponent, Leo Sheridan.  Sheridan doesn’t have a platform to speak of, doesn’t understand how the district works, did not reach out to Mike – the current officeholder – and would not meet with me to speak about his candidacy.  I was predisposed to dislike Latrina because she ran against Mike in 2010 and because during the period where the School Board was considering firing Chris Lim, Latrina spoke out often and in very harsh terms to School Board members.  However, I met with her and found her to be intelligent, very committed to education, a fighter, and someone who respects and cherishes each child for what they have to offer.  All in all she is a very positive person, but also one that spouses very progressive values.  I think she’d be a good addition to the School Board. Dumas ended up not campaigning and Sheridan won the election.

Would have pulled / nominated if someone else asked me to:

Alameda Mayor pull Marie Gilmore to nominate Trish Spencer.

Reason: My main issue with Gilmore is that she has not shown much interest in curtailing the militarization of police in Alameda (e.g. she voted in favor of having the police department acquire an armored vehicle).   I spoke at length with Spencer when she was up for the Democratic endorsement in her race for School Board and again now, and her commitment to both social justice and civil liberties matches mine.  Spencer was elected Mayor.

Oakland School Board Dist. 4: nominate Nina Senn

Reason: This was a race in which no candidate had been nominated.  Senn reached out to me after I contacted her, and I would have seconded her nomination if another member who knew her well had asked me to.  However, she is running against Karl Debro, so I won’t be voting for her. Senn won the election.

Candidates on Consent

These are the candidates who remained in the consent calendar and who will automatically receive the Democratic endorsement on Saturday:

  • Karen Monroe, Alameda County Superintendent (won)
  • Mary Gilmore, Alameda Mayor (lost)
  • Jim Oddie and Stewart Chen, Alameda City Council (won)
  • Jesse Arreguin, Berkeley City Council Dist 4* (won)
  • Ann-Marie Hoggan, Berkeley Auditor* (won)
  • James Chang and Paola Laverde-Levand, Berkeley Rent Stabilization Board* (both won)
  • Kasie Hidenbrand, Dublin Mayor* (lost)
  • Don Biddle, Abe Gupta, Dublin City Council* (both won)
  • Scott Donahue, Diane Martinez, Emeryville City Council (both won)
  • Raj Salwan, Fremont City Council (lost)
  • John Marchand, Livermore Mayor* (won)
  • Alan Nagy, Newark Mayor (won)
  • Mike Bucci and Francisco Preciado, Newark City Council (won and lost)
  • Olivia Sanwong, Pleasanton City Council* (lost)
  • Victor Aguilar, San Leandro City Council District 3 (lost)
  • Corina Lopez, San Leandro City Council District 5 (won)
  • Emily Duncan, Pat Gacoscos and Kashmir Singh Shahi, Union City City Council* (won, won and lost)
  • Isabel Dvorsky, Chabot/Las Positas Community College District* (won)
  • Vivien Larsen, Ohlone CCD Area 1 (not on ballot)
  • Janet Giovannini-Hill, Ohlone CCD Area 2
  • Ishan Shah, Ohlone CCD Area 2 short term, *(not on ballot)
  • Linda Handy, Peralta CCD Dist. 3* (not on ballot)
  • Solana Henneberry, Alameda School Board (lost)
  • Janice Friesen and Gary Howard, Castro Valley School Board (lost and won)
  • John Affeldt, Miguel Dwin and Christian Patz, Emeryville School Board (won, lost and won)
  • Moina Shaq and Dax Choqsi, Fremont School Board (both lost)
  • Lisa Brunner, Hayward School Board (won)
  • Sarabjit Kaur Cheema and Lance Nishihira, New Haven School Board (won and lost)
  • Nancy Thomas and Christopher Wecks, Newark School Board (won and lost)
  • Shanthi Gonzales, Oakland School Board Dist 6 (won)
  • Lance James, San Leandro School Board Area 2 * (not on ballot)
  • Evelyn Gonzales, San Leandro School Board At-large (won)
  • Janet Zamudio, San Lorenzo School Board (won)
  • Elsa Ortiz, ACT  Ward 3 * (not on ballot)
  • Mark Williams, ACT Ward 4* (won)
  • Kewal Singh, ACT Ward 5* (lost)
  • Paul Sethy, Alameda County Water District* (won)
  • Lena Tam, BART Dist 4 (lost)
  • John Maher, Castro Valley Sanitary District (lost)
  • Tracy Jensen and Jim Meyers, Alameda Healthcare District* (won and lost)
  • Andy Katz, EBMUD Dist 4* (not on ballot)
  • Ayn Wieskamp, EBRP dist 5* (won)
  • Paul Hodges, Hayward Parks  (not on ballot)
  • Shelia Young, Oro Loma Sanitary district* (won)

 

Alameda Labor Council Unanimously Passes Resolution Against Surveillance / DAC

 Alameda Labor Council Unanimously Passes Resolution Against Surveillance / DAC  Short Notes  No Responses »
Mar 122014
 

ALAMEDA LABOR COUNCIL, AFL-CIO
Resolution In Support of Civil Liberties in Oakland and Alameda County

Adopted unanimously at the Mar. 10, 2014 Alameda Labor Council Delegates’ Meeting.

Whereas the Alameda Labor Council, AFL-CIO, supports and promotes American freedoms and constitutional civil liberties;

And, whereas the particular rights to peaceably assemble and speak freely are essential to the collective exercise by working families and their unions of their rights to organize and to bargain collectively;

And, whereas the Alameda Labor Council advances the struggles for justice by organized labor, and others seeking fairness and equality including previously expressing support for the movements for civil rights, against apartheid, and against police brutality;

And, whereas political surveillance and repression were historically used by both the federal and local governments against such labor and human rights leaders as Harry Bridges of the ILWU and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.;

And, whereas City of Oakland officials said under their proposal for the Domain Awareness Center (“DAC”) they intended to use its planned mass surveillance capacity to control the protected activity of Oakland residents and visitors to assemble and speak freely chilling the exercise of these First Amendment rights in Alameda County;

And, whereas, under an existing political surveillance program a worker in Alameda County was recently fired from his job after the police photographed him participating in a demonstration and then shared the photographs with his employer;

And, whereas, while we acknowledge the Oakland City Council’s vote last week to limit the DAC to the Port of Oakland only, the DAC proposal had contemplated warrantless surveillance to collect and stockpile comprehensive information about City residents and visitors who engaged in no wrongdoing whatsoever potentially violating the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable search and seizure;

Now therefore be it resolved, under the privacy protection provisions of the California State Constitution, and under the First and Fourth Amendments of the United States Constitution, the Alameda Labor Council, AFL-CIO urges the City of Oakland and its elected representatives to continue to protect the privacy and constitutional rights of working families and affected visitors to and residents of Oakland and Alameda County.

Josie Camacho
Executive-Secretary Treasurer

Open Letter to the Oakland City Council: Please Vote “No” on the DAC

 Open Letter to the Oakland City Council: Please Vote “No” on the DAC  Short Notes  No Responses »
Mar 042014
 

Tonight, the Oakland City Council will vote on whether to go ahead with the construction of the Domain Awareness Center.  The DAC is a fusion center that aims to congregate in one place the feeds from surveillance cameras and license plate cameras in the city and port of Oakland.  It will be the “eyes on the ground” for the NSA and other intelligence agencies, and will be primarily used against protesters.

The DAC is strongly opposed by the ACLU, the EFF, Wellstone Democratic Club and the Oakland Education Association, the union for Oakland teachers.  Several organizations and community leaders have also sent a group letter to the Oakland City Council asking them to oppose it:

Dear Honorable Members of the Oakland City Council:

We urge the Oakland City Council to vote against the award of the Domain Awareness Center
(“DAC”) Phase 2 contract to Schneider Electric at the March 4, 2014 council meeting.

The project’s proposed full time mass surveillance throughout Oakland has created grave
concerns about infringement upon our civil liberties, especially in light of the Snowden
revelations.

While we were encouraged by comments the City Council made at the February 18 meeting,
there are many unanswered questions regarding the data use and retention policy governing the
DAC. We believe it is improper to build the DAC prior to thorough vetting of the privacy and
data retention policies.

Proceeding with the DAC and its estimated $1.6 million annual operating cost makes no sense.
The City has spent the last few years making severe budget cuts, and it would be forced to make
even deeper cuts to comply with the balanced budget provision.

Please vote “No” on March 4, 2014.

Oakland Education Association
Access
Arab Resource and Organizing Center
Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus
Anakbayan East Bay
Berkeley Copwatch
Bill of Rights Defense Committee
CODEPINK
Council on American-Islamic Relations, San Francisco Bay Area
Fight for the Future
March 15 Organizing Committee
National Lawyers Guild
Oakland International Socialist Organization
Oakland Privacy Working Group
Phat Beets Produce
Prison Activist Resource Center
Stop Big Brother
Stop LAPD Spying Coalition
The Justice 4 Alan Blueford Coalition
Women for Genuine Security

Aisha Knowles, Alameda County Board of Education Member
Jesse Arreguin, Berkeley City Council, Alameda Democratic Central Committee Member
J Francisco Zermeno, Hayward City Council Member
Mike Katz-Lacabe, San Leandro USD School Board Trustee
Jason Toro, San Leandro USD School Board Trustee
Janet Arnold, Member County Council Green Party of Alameda County
Cat Brooks, ONYX Organizing Committee
Elaine Brown, former Chair Black Panther Party
Cynthia Chandler, co-founder Justice Now, Alameda Democratic Central Committee alternate
Malkia Cyril, Executive Director, Center for Media Justice
Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb, Freeman Fellow at The Fellowship of Reconciliation
Kazu Haga, East Point Peace Academy
Elliott Halpern, ACLU Berkeley/North East Bay Chapter Board Member
Tarak Kauff, Board of Directors, Veterans for Peace
David Keenan, Bay Area Public School Organizer
Margarita Lacabe, Alameda County Democratic Central Committee
Rev. Deborah Lee, Director of the Interfaith Coalition for Immigrant Rights (CLUE-CA)
Mary Madden, Organizer, Alameda County Against Drones
Normon Solomon, Co-Founder, RootsAction
Leonard Raphael
Wilson Riles, President Oakland Community Action Network, former Oakland Council Member
Tracy Rosenberg, Executive Director, Media Alliance
Michael Rubin, Member Oakland Greens
Igor Tregub, California Democratic Party AD15 Delegate; California Young Democrats VP
Rick Trullinger, Alternate Member, Alameda County Democratic Central Committee

In Oakland and San Leandro City Staff Lie and Councilmembers Look the Other Way

 In Oakland and San Leandro City Staff Lie and Councilmembers Look the Other Way  City Hall  1 Response »
Feb 062014
 
Emergency Services Director Renee Domingo speaking to the City Council

Emergency Services Director Renee Domingo speaking to the City Council

City employees in Oakland and San Leandro appear to live and work by the motto “it’s better to beg for forgiveness than to ask for permission.”  While most city councils rubber stamp whatever proposals city staff puts before them – an easier task than actually reading and analyzing long and boring reports -, some proposals are so clearly contrary to the public benefit that they are not politically tenable for council members to knowingly pass.  In those situations, staff – most assuredly with the blessing of the City Manager/Administrator – may give the Council an “edited” version of the facts behind it.   Whether the purpose is to deceive council members or provide them with plausible deniability can be discerned by how the member react once the true facts are uncovered.

Oakland city staff’s quest to build the Domain Awareness Center (DAC), a facility that would centralize the feeds from hundreds of cameras and license plate readers throughout the City, is a perfect example of how this works.  Internal e-mails obtained through the California Public Records Act make it clear that the actual purpose of the DAC is to track and subvert the activities of political protesters and labor activists in the city and port of Oakland. However, in public meetings, both staff and Councilmembers have only referred to the alleged crime-fighting uses of the DAC.   Finally, at the last meeting of the Council’s  Public Safety Committee,  Emergency Services Director Renee Domingo, who has spearheaded Oakland’s DAC project, was forced to admit that there is no data showing that existing DACs in other cities have helped to either reduce or solve crimes.

While there might be some room for argument about whether misleading the Council as to the purpose for the DAC is actually “lying”, it is absolutely clear that Ms Domingo deceived the Council about Science Applications International (SAIC), the company that was hired to build the DAC.    SAIC is a large military contractor which, among other things, works in the development, building and deployment of nuclear weapons.  Under Oakland’s 1988 anti-nuclear ordinance, the City cannot award contracts to any company that is involved with nuclear weapons.   Internal e-mails show that Domingo was aware that this was a problem in February 2013, but she didn’t mention anything about it to the City Council and the Council indeed went on and hired SAIC to build the first phrase of the project.  According to Domingo, she first heard about SAIC’s non-compliance in August,when activists brought it up – but that’s contradicted by the e-mails alluded to above.

Domingo is now proposing that the Council contract with called Schneider Electric to build phase II of the DAC. A simple google search of “Schneider Electric” and “nuclear weapons” leads to marketing materials from the company where it describes one of its main applications a being “nuclear weapons handling systems.”  It’s still unknown whether Domingo failed to do her due diligence or just hoped that activists wouldn’t find out.

No member of the Oakland City Council has held staff accountable for deceiving  them and for having the City knowingly enter into a contract that violated the City’s own laws.  Councilmember Dan Kalb campaigned on “restoring trust in City Hall“, and yet he has meekly accepted staff’s unethical behavior seemingly without a second thought.   While Kalb is not for re-election, his colleague Libby Schaaf, who has also failed to question staff over their duplicity, is running for Mayor of Oakland.  Her “no need for accountability” attitude is echoed by incumbent Mayor Jean Quan.

Things are no better in San Leandro.  Chief of Police Sandra Spagnoli routinely gives the City Council information that she knows to be false.  She has lied about things as easy to verify as the number of license plate scanners the Department has and the effects of realignment in the City.  But she also gave the Council false information about marijuana, the number of complaints they get about chickens and the dangers of overpollination.  A few months ago, the City had to settle a lawsuit brought by men after the Chief issued a press release falsely accusing them of attempting to engage in public homosexual sex.

Not only does the Chief routinely lie to the City Council, but she has also broken the law.  In 2012, the Chief was caught using Police Department staff and resources to get citizens to lobby the City Council against a proposed marijuana dispensary.  That violates both the San Leandro Municipal Code and the California Government Code.  Though City Council members are well aware of the Chief’s unlawful attempt to manipulate the democratic process, they have not called her on it.  This year, both Mayor Stephen Cassidy and Councilmember Pauline Cutter are running for re-election.

The Chief is not the only “truth impaired” member of staff in San Leandro.  When City staff decided to change the Zoning Code as a tactic in a pending lawsuit, city they explained the change as being a “routine update of the code” and only acknowledged the actual motive behind it after citizens like me brought it up repeatedly at public meetings.  After the acknowledgement, Mayor Stephen Cassidy made some noise about being more open with the community in the future, but did not take staff to task for their repeated attempts at deception.

It’s difficult to know what we can do to restore ethics and accountability in City Hall – both in San Leandro and in Oakland.  Electing the right people has to be part of the solution, but candidates with integrity are few and far between.   My strategy – exposing bad behavior at City Hall -, has seldom been an impetus for change.  Is local democracy just broken and, if so, can it be fixed?