Last week saw two City Council candidates forums sponsored by neighborhood councils (see two stories from Richmond Confidential below), the latter of which was the scene of the biggest political news from Richmond this week involving Corky Booze.

The month of October starts off with yet another one Monday night at the Richmond City Council Chamber, which will also be televised live.

Event:               Live Television production of Richmond City Council Candidates’ Night

Sponsors:         League of Women Voters & Richmond Neighborhood
                        Coordinating Council

Date:                Monday, October 1, 2012

Place:               City Council Chambers
                        440 Civic Center Plaza

Time:                Richmond City Council Candidates Forum: 6:30PM to 8 PM.
           
Format:             The event will be moderated and timed by League of Women Voter representatives. Questions will come from a four (4) person panel made up of members of the Richmond Neighborhood Coordinating Council. Later in the evening questions will be asked by members of the chamber audience and from email, FAX, and phone calls submitted to KCRT prior to noon on the production day.

                        Moderator:        Cheryl Chambers, League of Women Voters
                        Panel:               George Schmidt, RNCC, and three RNCC members

                        E-mail:  info@kcrt.com
                        Phone:  510-620-6759
                        FAX:     510-620-6713

The televised forum sponsored by the Contra Costa Times and the Diablo Valley League of Women Voters can be seen at the following times on KCRT, Channel 28:

• 10/3 at 8:00 PM
• 10/5 at 1:00 PM
• 10/9 at 10:00 PM
• 10/13 at 9:00 PM
• 10/14 and 10:00 AM and 6:00 PM
• 10/16 at noon
• 10/22 at 10:00 AM
• 10/26 at 1:00 PM
• 10/29 at 9:00 PM
• 11/30 at  8:30 PM
• 11/3 at 10:00 PM
• 11/5 at 1:00 PM

As one might imagine with two incumbents and nine challengers, the candidates typically take one of two positions:

• Richmond is broken and needs to be fixed, and I am uniquely qualified to do it; or
• Richmond is actually moving in the right direction, and I helped to get it there.

As an incumbent who has enjoyed the support of the majority of the City Council for at least the last couple of years, I am of the latter persuasion. Some of the points I have been making in response to questions include:

• Richmond has a comprehensive plan for the future. It’s the new General Plan 2030 and it is bold, ambitious, optimistic and pro-growth. It has elements that address every aspect of municipal operation, including land use, economic development, education and human services, infrastructure, circulation, arts and culture, health and the environment. How well we implement it will be the measure of our future success. It passed on a 5-2 vote, with Bates and Booze opposing.
• Chevron must be held accountable, but at the same time, the City must collaborate with Chevron to get the refinery repairs and upgrades completed in order to make it safer and more efficient. That’s why I authored, and the City Council unanimously passed, a resolution in 2011 committing the City to expedite permits but with the condition that the process be transparent and conform to all environmental laws and regulations.
• The accomplishment of which I am most proud is hiring an outstanding city manager, who in turn, hired probably the best management team Richmond has ever known.
• Considering the impacts we in Richmond have both suffered and shared related to the nationwide great recession, we are much better off than we were four or even eight years ago. We are leaner, but we continue to deliver balanced budgets and have maintained the strength of our police force while other cities all around us are shedding cops. Crime continues to drop in Richmond, as does unemployment. Projects like rehabilitation of the Civic Center the Ford Plant and Craneway and the Plunge have all taken place in the last several years. Opening of the Rosie the Riveter Visitor Center happened this year, as did the selection of Richmond as the second campus of LNBL. Parks have been rehabilitated all over Richmond, and the Bay Trail continues to expand. While we still don’t have resources to fix all streets right now, the overall condition of Richmond streets is better than it has been in  decades. Next year will see construction start on the Marina Way underpass. Richmond is not broken at all; it is clearly on a roll.
• The City Council is not dysfunctional; it just has to work harder and longer. What we have are a few people who incessantly harass and harangue to the point that meetings become disruptive and go on far too long. Despite this, and to the City Council’s credit, an impressive amount of important business continues to get done, usually on 5-2 votes. Those who think all votes should be unanimous to show unity are likely to continue to be disappointed. What is important is that we have continued to make remarkable progress despite the culture of interruptions and  personal attacks that has marked the last couple of years.
• The Measure N question always comes up, with candidate divided 7-4 against. I voted to place Measures N and O on the ballot for the same reason I initiated placing Point Molate on the ballot, so that the people could decide. This is now out of the hands of the City Council.

Crowd gathers in Point Richmond for council candidate forum
By Rachel WittePosted September 28, 2012 3:15 pm
Richmond’s City Council candidates met for their second night in a row at Thursday evening’s Point Richmond Neighborhood Council’s Candidates Night forum.
Candidate Anthony Lamar Green was the only one not present at the Schooner Building in Point Richmond, which due to its size provided a more intimate setting than Wednesday’s forum at the Richmond Senior Center.
About 60 Richmond residents filled the seats as the candidates began the night with opening statements.
For the rest of the night, questions and comments were dominated by three subject areas: Chevron, Measure N, and Richmond’s youth and seniors.
The first question of the night was posed by the Point Richmond Neighborhood Council and dealt with the relationship between the city and Chevron. Gary Bell responded first, stressing the importance of Chevron to Richmond but also the role of the city in holding Chevron accountable.
“Chevron is a citizen, though they’re corporate, and they have responsibilities,” Bell said. “They should pay taxes and operate in a safe and sound matter. The city should make sure they do that in a preventative way.”
Richmond Progressive Alliance candidate Eduardo Martinez compared the city’s relationship with Chevron to a marriage, saying that when things go bad the relationship must be reevaluated.
“When you have a company that proposes that they care about Richmond, but they have headquarters elsewhere, end the leases of properties that provide income to Richmond and lie to citizens about explosions … then you have problems,” Martinez said. “When a company has to brand every donation they give, then we have a problem.”
Nat Bates supported the city’s relationship with the company, noting the positives it brings to the city during tough times.
“There needs to be neutral respect between the city and Chevron,” he said. He went on to emphasize the city’s need to work with the company to promote job growth and economic development.
Wednesday night the candidates just took an informal vote on Measure N, but Thursday offered more of a platform for discussion.
RPA candidate Marilyn Langlois said that passing the measure should be a priority for moving the health of the city forward and stopping the obesity pandemic. “If it passes, it will be effective,” she said. “Otherwise, why would the soda companies be spending millions of dollars in public relations to have it defeated?”
Both Jael Myrick and Bea Roberson said they were skeptical of the tax, citing the financial strain it would cause for the poor and working class people of the city, many of whom live paycheck to paycheck
“I don’t see a guarantee this this will stop obesity,” Myrick said, “but there is a guarantee that this will raise the cost of groceries.”
Roberson went on to say that the tax could also take away important revenue for the city. “Now when I go to buy a Dr. Pepper in El Cerrito, I’ll also stop and buy my groceries there, too,” she said.
Mark Wassburg agreed, saying that the measure would not stop obesity because of unhealthy food options that would still exist in the city.
All the candidates agreed that the city’s obesity problem needs to be addressed.
Perhaps the most agreed-upon issue of the night was the importance of services for seniors and youths.
Eleanor Thompson said that she was the only one of the candidates who has dedicated her life to helping reduce crime in Richmond and helping the city’s young people get jobs and seek the training they need to do so.
Mike Ali-Kinney had a similar response, touting his work with Stop the Gang Violence Moratorium in the early 1990s.
Tom Butt appealed to attendees’ understanding of the city’s economy as a means to address concerns for the city’s old and young people.
“Programs targeted to young people fight for funds just like programs for paving streets or hiring police,” he said. Therefore, a robust economy is necessary for the city to provide sufficient programs at the level it should for these groups, he said.
City Council candidates meet for candidate forum

The audience was quiet and attentive during the debate at the Richmond Senior Center. (Photo: Tawanda Kanhema)
By Stephen HobbsPosted September 27, 2012 3:00 pm
For the first time this election season, all of the City Council candidates gathered for a public forum on Wednesday night.
The Richmond Heights, North and East and the Richmore Village/Metropolitan Square Neighborhood Councils combined to put on the event at the Richmond Senior Center. And the forum, which was attended by roughly 80 people, gave many residents the opportunity to see the candidates up close and personal for the first time.
“It is my best way of finding out who the candidates are and what they are like,” said Susan Rattray, who has lived in Richmond for 10 years. “I took a lot of notes of what they said, and some of my impressions as well, and I generally make my decision about who to vote for based on what I hear.”
The candidates were amicable without any moments of major contention. The relaxed environment also carried over to the members of the audience, who reacted with polite applause, and sometimes silence, after the candidates spoke.
The only moment when the candidates clearly separated themselves on an issue came, not surprisingly, during a discussion of Measure N.
Moderator John Ziesenhenne, who ran for mayor in 2010, did not pose a question to the candidates, but simply asked for a show of hands to see who was for and against the measure.
Tom Butt, Anthony Lamar Green, Eduardo Martinez and Marilyn Langlois raised their hands in support of the soda tax, while Mike Ali-Kinney, Gary Bell, Jael Myrick, Bea Roberson, Eleanor Thompson and Mark Wassberg raised their hands in opposition. It was the final question of the night before the candidates gave their closing statements.
Councilmember Nat Bates was absent for the question. Midway through the meeting Bates apologized and said he had to leave because he had a prior appointment, made before he was invited to the forum. Bates has come out strongly against Measure N.
The relaxed setting was reflected by the intimacy of the forum. The candidates sat in alphabetical order, from left to right, in a long horizontal row of tables pushed together. A white tablecloth covered the table, and each candidate had a nametag in front of their seat. Five microphones were spread across the table.
At the beginning of the meeting, each candidate was given the opportunity to make an opening statement, in which they were asked to list their best civic accomplishment and what they would like to achieve in office. Following the opening statements were a round of six questions that the candidates had one minute to respond. The questions were asked randomly and in a rotating fashion.
The six question from Ziesenhenne dealt with proposed plans for the San Pablo Avenue business corridor, changing the image the city has with the outside community, bringing civility to the current council, the candidates’ top three reasons for running, responding to residents’ complaints about commercial activities allowed by zoning regulations, and a hypothetical question: “If Chevron left Richmond tomorrow, how would you find revenue for the city?”
Most of the candidates prefaced their responses with the fact that the oil company was not leaving tomorrow and how important the refinery, or another hypothetical refinery that would take its place, was to the community.
After a short break, Ziesenhenne selected questions from members of the audience to read to candidates. Four candidates were randomly selected to answer the questions from the audience and they were given one minute to respond. Finally, the candidates had 60 more seconds to make their final closing statements.
The 11 candidates will have another opportunity to meet with the public Thursday night at the Point Richmond Neighborhood Council candidate’s night, from 7-9 p.m. at the Brickyard Cove Marina, 110 Brickyard Cove Road, suite 202.
For Sandi Genser-Maack, a Richmond resident, the evening was simply about becoming more familiar with the candidates. “I think there are some candidates that I’m going to think about that I didn’t think I would,” she said.