First off, many thanks to the Alameda Peeps Candidate Forum organizers without whom many of this week’s posts would not be possible. So if you are not a member of Alameda Peeps but would like to take a listen to the forum, you can find it here.
One of the final questions for the three candidates in attendance was to consider the last two years and talk about an issue that the candidate disagreed with the majority position taken by the City Council.
Malia Vella spoke about the disappointing outcome with regard to rent stabilization and the subsequent competing ordinances on November’s ballot.
Marilyn Ezzy-Ashcraft spoke about senior assisted living center on Harbor Bay.
And Jennifer Roloff? Well…she ended up going off into a tangent that should remind people of a certain presidential candidate who spawned a twitter hashtag starting with this tweet:
And culminating in many glorious Trump book reviews, but I digress.
Anyway Jennifer Roloff started off by signaling that she didn’t have any good examples from the last two years since, I think, people had started telling her that bringing up that pesky RFP probably wasn’t a really great idea. So she decided to go with a wider net and saying in general that the Council has “stopped listening” to “the people” and that they haven’t made decisions in the best interest of the citizens of Alameda and that they were only thinking about “the developers.” Then she decides to reach way into the basket of triggers and bring out, dun dun duuunnnaahhh: SunCal. Then she gave like a really wrong nutshell version of the whole SunCal situation. Like super wrong. And then it sounded like she was saying that Marie Gilmore was Mayor during that time, she wasn’t, that was Beverly Johnson.
Then Jennifer Roloff decided to say that Marie Gilmore supported the Crab Cove development, she didn’t. And that somehow the rezoning of a Commercial site with a Government overlay was “taking” of a beachfront. FFS. Add to the fact that Marie Gilmore was one of the first people to talk about some of the difficulties for any sale of the site, but that never stopped anyone in this city from framing ministerial City Council decisions as something more nefarious.
Then Jennifer Roloff decided to portray the Del Monte project as some “last ditch” backdoor push when it had been in the works for years. She kept saying that it has very little low income housing, but it has at least 25% that allowed for the project to earn a density bonus. When pressed as to why she didn’t like the Del Monte decision because that was the only issue that was sort of in that two year window since Trish Spencer has called it for review as one of her first acts but couldn’t get a majority to overturn the decision, Jennifer Roloff had no answer even when being handed several options from the moderator to select from. This was her response:
I can’t tell you that I’m familiar with the specifics of how it went down in the transition.
And that, in a nutshell, is the problem with Jennifer Roloff’s candidacy. Not familiar with the specifics and it’s unclear if she’s actually that interested in learning the specifics to better inform herself either.