Blogging Bayport Alameda

October 21, 2008

Money for nothing and endorsements for free

Filed under: Alameda, City Council, Election — Tags: — Lauren Do @ 7:33 am

As of the first campaign disclosures statement filings, here is how the expenditures stand.  This is only for City Council and only three of the four candidates filed.   This is only the initial round of campaign disclosures, but as a reminder, all groups are supposed to file these statements even if they haven’t collected any money so there are a few organizations out there (and candidates) that missed this deadline.

And without further ado, here are the council candidate breakdowns:

Doug deHaan

  • Total Contributions Received: $9201
  • Monetary Contributions: $7201
  • Loans: $2000 (from himself)
  • Non monetary contributions: $0
  • Total Expenditures: $4273.31
  • Contributions less than $300
    • Nancy McKinley
    • John Thompson
    • Stewart Chen
    • Paul Anders
    • Frank Ghiglione
    • Richard Sherratt
    • Jim Tham
    • Patricia Gannon
    • Jane Burgelin
    • Ernest Poggi
    • Mark Posner
    • Thomas Hunt
    • Roxanne LeBlanc
    • Joseph Oram
    • Nita White
  • Contributions greater than $300
    • Claire Risely ($500)
    • Barbara Baack ($500)
    • Sam Moriana ($300)
    • Bob Houchins ($300)

Marie Gilmore

  • Total Contributions Received: $4828
  • Monetary Contributions: $4828
  • Loans: $0
  • Non monetary contributions: $0
  • Total Expenditures: $2495.71
  • Contributions less than $300
    • Kenneth and Kathy Rosenblum
    • James Davis
    • Rob & Catherine Bierwith
    • Chris Seelenbacher (sp?)
    • Nancy and Michael Torres
    • Ronald Valentine
    • Bill and Peggy Withrow
    • Wilma Chan
    • Jean Gaskill
    • Gail and Maryann Wetzork
    • Stuart and Stephanie Engle
    • Jon Ishibashi
    • Dick Berman
    • David and Cathy Wada
  • Contributions greater than $300
    • Rich and Susan Sherratt ($500)
    • Anthony and Angela Harris ($500)

Tracy Jensen

  • Total Contributions Received: $2340
  • Monetary Contributions: $1340
  • Loans: $1000 (from David Sayen)
  • Non monetary contributions: $100
  • Total Expenditures: $1213
  • Contributions less than $300
    • Jessica Lillie
    • Deborah and Doug Mitchell
  • Contributions greater than $300
    • John Russo Officeholder Account ($500)
    • Alameda Firefighters Association PAC ($500)

So, a few reflections about the campaign filings, the majority of the expenses for Doug deHaan were paid to non-Alameda vendors.  For example, his campaign purchased a photocopier from this vendor out of Georgia, and the toner for the copier from this vendor out of the City of Industry.  Now I realize that everyone is running a shoestring campaign, it’s actually refreshing to see that, so far, the expenditures have been relatively low compared to other elections, but seriously, how much more would it have cost the campaign to purchase their copy machine and toner (about $400) in Alameda to “buy local.”

Also, I believe that Tracy Jensen’s campaign forgot to turn in a few pages, which includes the itemization of expenditures, as her campaign has reported a little over $1000 in expenditures but the itemization pages are missing.

Advertisements

37 Comments

  1. It is imperative that we squash the lone dissenter on the City Council. Way to go Lauren! Squash him from every angle.

    Comment by Dweezil Zappa — October 21, 2008 @ 7:43 am

  2. Funny but the “lone dissenter” has racked up a similiar list of endorsements from around Alameda as Marie Gilmore. I don’t know how much out of the mainstream he really is.

    Comment by Lauren Do — October 21, 2008 @ 7:46 am

  3. Is the 4th candidate(I can’t even remember his name) even showing up for events, or has this come down to a 3 candidate race?

    Comment by notadave — October 21, 2008 @ 7:49 am

  4. Fiscally responsible vs. get gouged locally? Tough call.

    Comment by Andy Currid — October 21, 2008 @ 9:01 am

  5. Zappa, are you suggesting deHaan is Alameda’s maverick?

    Speaking of mavericks (I’ve come to hate that word), I read this someplace: John McCain, putting the ‘ick’ back in Maverick.

    Comment by alameda — October 21, 2008 @ 9:41 am

  6. Relatively speaking, yes.

    Better squash him quick! How dare he represent his citizen constituents’ wishes.

    Comment by Dweezil Zappa — October 21, 2008 @ 10:31 am

  7. Justin Harrison is still appearing at the City Council candidate forums. Perhaps he is running a campaign with expenditures under $1000 and does not need to file campaign disclosures.

    Comment by Mike McMahon — October 21, 2008 @ 11:44 am

  8. DZ, question…out of thousands of votes since joining the council. deHaan has dissented against the majority vote 17 times (through July ’08). since his consituents are the entire island (unless you’re suggesting that he represents only certain people) I’m curious how that translates to representing people differently than Marie Gilmore.

    Specifics in their different actions would be appreciated for clarification.

    Comment by Johnknoxwhite — October 21, 2008 @ 11:46 am

  9. ??? I’m with you. Let’s squash him and wash him. This town needs to be 100% lib-tard.

    Comment by Dweezil Zappa — October 21, 2008 @ 12:00 pm

  10. 6. In Doug’s ballot statement his resume includes development at Bridgeside, Towne Centre and Alameda Theater. I believe he has dissented on votes related to the latter two, but he has also substantially voted with the majority.

    He has the advantage of being able to dissent for show, and avoiding taking hits for some of the less popular decisions. In my opinion Barbra Keer took similar advantage of her minority position a time or three. Did Doug vote to put prop P on the ballot?

    Doug has even gone so far as to abstain in situations which didn’t warrant it, which to me is worst of all.

    I am not out to quash the guy from being elected, but I don’t think that means I can’t be critical.

    Comment by Mark Irons — October 21, 2008 @ 12:16 pm

  11. #8 – What is the point of your question? Why don’t you just say what is on your mind, rather than merely press others prove their point?

    Comment by E T — October 21, 2008 @ 12:17 pm

  12. I’m confused, where did I mentioned squashing deHaan, my question was to ask you for clarification on how deHaan and Gilmore have acted significantly differently while on the council. Hardly an attack on deHaan.

    Comment by Johnknoxwhite — October 21, 2008 @ 12:19 pm

  13. ET:

    I don’t think that JKW is making a point necessarily, but rather asking Dweezil Z. to explain what he means when he calls Doug deHaan, the “lone dissenter.”

    On the majority of issues that come before the Council, he votes with the majority, so I’m not really sure how that translates into “maverick” status.

    Comment by Lauren Do — October 21, 2008 @ 12:28 pm

  14. My point in asking is that there seems to be this narrative starting that somehow deHaan is outside the mainstream or some such idea. I’m curious what it is that is driving that perception?

    I happen to think that being able to “prove a point” is important when making public statements about things. I’m not a big fan of speaking from one’s gut (though I am a fan of Stephen Colbert).

    Comment by Johnknoxwhite — October 21, 2008 @ 12:44 pm

  15. Please, call me The Dweez, and I will try to appease.

    Mr. White, it may be easier to ask you (since you know everything) if there are any other dissenters? Or is DeHaan the only one? If there are, we must squash them also.

    Comment by Dweezil Zappa — October 21, 2008 @ 1:16 pm

  16. Really, you guys are trying to have a rational conversation with the son of a guy who became famous for warning of the dangers of yellow snow?

    Comment by notadave — October 21, 2008 @ 3:13 pm

  17. Dweez, your answers are as disappointing as your music.

    Comment by Johnknoxwhite — October 21, 2008 @ 4:35 pm

  18. Frank Zappa on the election.
    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsW2DTr2TnU

    Comment by AlamedaNayTiff — October 21, 2008 @ 4:52 pm

  19. Mr. White, I have just revised one of my father’s classics in your honor.

    John Knox White (to the tune of Bobby Brown, by Frank Zappa)

    Hey there, people, I’m John Knox White
    They say I’m the cutest boy in sight
    My bike is fast, my teeth is shiney
    I tell all the drivers they can kiss my heinie
    Here I am with my own commish
    Remakin’ this town as I wish
    I got a developer here wants to build it all dense
    Yuppify the shopping and drive up the rents

    Oh God I am the American dream
    I do not think I’m too extreme
    And I’m a clever sonofabitch
    Throw those old-timers into the ditch

    in the ditch
    in the ditch
    in the ditch
    throw dem fogies in the ditch

    So I went out ‘n’ bought me a leisure suit
    I’m a policy wonk, but I’m still kinda cute
    Got a job funded by regional taxes
    And I know exactly what the facts is
    I look at you, and know right away
    Improvement is just a policy away
    While you spend your whole day at work
    I’m submitting plans to the city clerk

    Oh God I am the American dream
    With a spindle up my butt till it makes me scream
    An’ I’ll do anything to get ahead
    I lay awake nights sayin’, “Thank you, Bev!”
    Oh God, oh God, I’m so fantastic!
    Thanks to Bev, I’m a wonkified spastic
    And my name is John Knox White
    Watch me now, I’m rebuilding your town,
    And my name is John Knox White
    Watch me now, I’m rebuilding your town, etc.

    Comment by Dweezil Zappa — October 21, 2008 @ 5:28 pm

  20. Clearly, the man has way too much time on his hands … 🙂

    Comment by alameda — October 21, 2008 @ 5:54 pm

  21. No matter how you feel about the candidates they are at least trying to make their community better. Much more productive than the above display of maturity. Oh did I mention that they use their real names. By the way the 80’s are over.

    Comment by Victoria — October 21, 2008 @ 6:16 pm

  22. Is it possible that Doug DeHaan is considered by some Alameda voters to be outside of the mainstream because he ran against the mainstream mayor, a member of the party to which Mr. DeHaan also belongs? While it may be appropriate for elected officials to dissent on certain issues, last I heard it was not politically correct to challenge one’s partisan colleague. And as I recall the 2006 challenge cost much money (not all of it paid by Pat Bail).

    Comment by greenleaf — October 21, 2008 @ 6:18 pm

  23. #8 – ‘What were the 17 items for which deHaan cast a dissenting vote? While a small % of votes I imagine they were extremely critical decisions.

    #19 – While indeed does look like you have too much time on tour hands, thanks for the belly laugh before tonight’s meeting – I needed it. You have the comedic ability of a squirrel, you don’t have a noose in your tree, do you?

    #22 It is always respectable to do what you feel is the right thing to do. People’s behavior does not get a pass on the basis of which political party they join in America.

    Comment by David Kirwin — October 21, 2008 @ 7:11 pm

  24. deHaan is a dissenting vote on the council. At maximum, there can only be two dissenting voices as if there were a third, the dissenters would be in the majority and the other two would be the dissenters.

    I’m voting for deHaan and Gilmore as the other two seem inspire even less confidence. We’re at the point where declaring bankruptcy seems almost irrelevant. If outsourcing police and fire is on the table, that means that we are essentially dis-incorporating and having the county take us over much like Castro Valley. All that would be left would be a city council that contracts out city services to the county or private business.

    Comment by AlamedaNayTiff — October 21, 2008 @ 8:37 pm

  25. “People’s behavior does not get a pass on the basis of which political party they join in America.”

    Obviously, you haven’t spent much time in Alameda …

    Comment by Jeff R. Thomason — October 21, 2008 @ 10:38 pm

  26. # 25
    Make that, “Obviously, you haven’t spent much time in reality …”

    Comment by Jack Richard — October 22, 2008 @ 12:21 pm

  27. For #25 & #26

    Correction – for conscientious and concerned voters people’s behavior does not get a pass on the basis of which political party they join in America.”

    Comment by David Kirwin — October 22, 2008 @ 2:49 pm

  28. NayTiff, Your right on target, I believe DeHaan and Gilmore will be re-elected. We do need a dissenting voice on the council. I can live with Doug and Marie they will do just fine.
    I don’t care where he buy’s his equipment.

    Comment by John Pizaili — October 22, 2008 @ 5:09 pm

  29. Mr. Pizaili, you are a breath of fresh air.

    Comment by Susan — October 22, 2008 @ 8:07 pm

  30. What happens to the loans if you lose and don’t raise anymore money. And why would you give a loan to yourself is it because of your conviction or because you hope overspend and hope someone bails you out. Maybe Doug will have Pat Bail, bail him out? Doug doesn’t descent as much as he is confused, not prepared or abstains or just throws in because of lack of understanding?

    I really like Gilmore, and will probably vote for Tracy, but if Justin had a chance it could be a toss up who the second person I would vote for. Doug needs to retire after the slate campaign I find him as old and tired…Although I am not saying I wouldn’t vote for someone his age for this office.

    Comment by Gunter — October 22, 2008 @ 8:42 pm

  31. Mr. Gunter, you are an air of fresh descent.

    Comment by sycophant — October 23, 2008 @ 8:15 am

  32. While I will not comment on local elections, I would urge strong consideration for Prop WW. This is NOT a new tax but continuation of a worthy investment for parks, waterways and open space. Alameda city stands to receive millions of dollars for local projects (like Alameda Point trail expansion) in addition to numerous projects in Alameda and Contra Costa county.

    For more information, see Smart Voter guide for this measure:

    http://www.smartvoter.org/2008/11/04/ca/alm/meas/WW/

    Comment by Mike McMahon — October 23, 2008 @ 11:44 am

  33. As an avid bicycle rider I’m not so sure about measure ww.

    http://www.noonmeasureww.org

    Comment by Lance — October 23, 2008 @ 12:25 pm

  34. Mr. White,

    Now I am curious.

    In post #24, a respected contributor to this blog regards deHaan as a dissenter.

    In post #28, a respected member of the community also agrees that deHaan is a dissenter on the council.

    Why don’t you ask them for “specifics” for clarification? Why just pick on me, a flighty touring musician?

    Regards, The Dweez

    Comment by Dweezil Zappa — October 23, 2008 @ 6:29 pm

  35. 33. WOW on WW – That was an eye opener, especially the pictorial.

    Obviously you are, or know, some pissed off bike riders. I know a lot of mountain unicyclists who have been told the same thing, and as a result EBRParks must be avoided because they say a unicycle will damage the trails. (More than bulldozers and cattle!)

    I often skip the scout hikes with my boys at EBR parks because the grazing by the cattle allowed has left much of the parks barren, boring, and dusty and the landmines of meadow muffins make those areas very unattractive. However I still enjoy some of the trails at certain times of the year. French Trail in a winter rain with fog is refreshing for a local “wilderness” experience.

    What will happen if EBRPD doesn’t get the money? (Please address this)

    I know our schools will need more money, and I don’t have a lot to spread around.

    I know transportation for both auto, and public transit need more money, but is seems like the more we tax ourselves for those and other important efforts, the more the state reduces the budget for those things. It really seems like the state is trying to cover so many special interests that they keep raiding the funds of the core needs and services. I’ve learned a pretty negative attitude to the continued bonds and special taxes.

    Thanks for you input on WW.

    Comment by David Kirwin — October 23, 2008 @ 7:21 pm

  36. Sorry Dweez, you won, I lost interest in the conversation before either of them posted.

    Comment by John Knox White — October 23, 2008 @ 9:38 pm

  37. Some links from the Berkeley Daily Planet re developer-financing in the mayoral campaign and re high density transit corridors. Yes, it’s far away across the water, but it might be of interest.

    Bates Leads Dean in Developer Funding [check out the number of developers contributing to Bates, the incumbent]
    http://tinyurl.com/5nhsme

    Climate Action Plan Mandates Transit Corridor-Based Growth [Berkeley’s version of the battle over high density — check out the role of Erin and Mark Rhoades]
    http://tinyurl.com/6bhs2d

    Comment by DL Morrison — October 24, 2008 @ 10:03 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.