Blogging Bayport Alameda

October 31, 2016

Pay to play

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:01 am

The second set of campaign filings are in and West End resident Tony Daysog somehow pulled in ten donations of more than $100. Two of the ten were from Tony Daysog himself. But half of his other donations were from residents on Bay Farm (94502). Now Tony Daysog may frame this as representing all parts of Alameda, but here’s what is interesting about at least three of those donations. Three of the donation were given to him by people who had spoke out against the proposed senior facility on Harbor Bay.

Here are three of his most recent campaign contributions:

screen-shot-2016-10-28-at-5-06-37-pm

screen-shot-2016-10-28-at-5-06-46-pm

And here were their comments at the City Council meeting during public discussion about the Harbor Bay senior facility:

screen-shot-2016-10-28-at-5-06-15-pm

I guess we now know that “public interests” are those who give Tony Daysog campaign contributions.  “Special interests” are those who give campaign contributions to his opponents.  It all makes perfect sense now.

14720513_10154366190579230_7826282459245701678_n

Advertisements

30 Comments »

  1. Fascinating. Looking at the report, James Hager gave $1000 the same day. I know he lives right across the lagoon from the project site, down by VF Outdoor, and has spoken out against projects out there too. Surely that payoff was coordinated by the Queen of the NIMBYs as well.

    I guess we know the source of that tortured, one of a kind Daysog logic on the senior facility.

    Comment by BMac — October 31, 2016 @ 8:18 am

  2. At least these “special interests” are actually Alamedans, unlike Alamedans United, most of whose money comes from outside Alameda.

    But hey, Malia Vella is following Rob Bonta’s playbook: by the time the firefighters behind AU have bankrupted the city, she’ll be in Sacramento and won’t care.

    Comment by West Side Jim — October 31, 2016 @ 9:25 am

    • Does quid pro quo feel more righteous when it’s Alamedans with money paying for a vote in their favor?

      Comment by Lauren Do — October 31, 2016 @ 9:40 am

    • I disagree with the Malia cynical assessment. We’re looking at an entirely new political animal..the Millennial. In Sacto? Could just as well be at Standing Rock. You know Standing Rock? Ground Zero for every stand on principle we are facing in our nation: social, economic, racial and environmental Justice. We’ve turned a corner folks…where principles not politics matter…not just personal positioning but position where the greatest good can be done for the greatest number. Mark my words.

      Comment by Gabrielle "Gaby" Dolphin — October 31, 2016 @ 12:09 pm

      • Marked, they call it the tyranny of the majority. Exactly the opposite of what this country was based on.

        Comment by jack — October 31, 2016 @ 3:48 pm

  3. Tony looked at the zoning of that parcel for commercial use. He looked at the agreements the city of Alameda has about building near the airport; He concluded a No vote was required.

    Comment by A Neighbor — October 31, 2016 @ 9:28 am

    • Tony’s record of NIMBYism goes beyond this one issue, but the decibel issue seems right unless somebody can supply stats which indicate they are not an issue. I’m certain this was addressed when Ms. Graber spoke, but I wasn’t there. When I’ve walked there you have to hold conversation until planes have passed . It is worse than loud. Some residents in the area had triple glazed windows paid for by Port. Regardless of timing $1000 is a lot of money and Hager does live close to the site. You think the noise has rattled his cage so badly that he is emotional about this? For transparency I’m friendly with people on the planning board and this comment will surely piss them off, but I have to ask if your back yard was as close to the flight path, do you think you might have had a different perspective ? I haven’t followed this closely so if I’m ignorant but this is a chance to put huge emphasis on why the decision to approve was kosher.

      Comment by MI — October 31, 2016 @ 10:14 am

      • That is the hilariously disingenuous part. So many of these folks are retired senior citizens living a literal stone’s throw away from the site and they’re out there saying “you can’t put old people here, it’ll kill ’em.” I’m sure it had nothing to do with preserving their views of San Francisco Bay by stopping an approved use from moving forward on private property.

        Comment by BMac — October 31, 2016 @ 10:41 am

        • It IS hilariously disingenuous, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a kernel of truth. I went back and re-read David Burton’s op ed and he stated that the plan passed muster with local zoning and environmental standards. He also stated Tony “misstated facts” and used “irrelevant information” in his arguments against but was not specific, I suppose because of concerns for length of op ed. I’m certain that is true, but having the empirical evidence of standing out there, I kind of wonder about the details. It is noisy as hell.

          I live on Oak Street near Otis pretty far from the airports, but when we moved here the small planes sounded like they were flying right through our house when the bedroom window was open, and at 6 a.m.. NIMBYism be damned, after six months of complaining to the noise hot line they must have redirected flight path, though there was a low and noisy one just the other day.

          I was watching “news” this a.m. about Robbin Williams suffering Lewy Body Dementia which is often misdiagnosed as Alzheimer’s. An architect friend to whom I owe my career died after suffering from it just a few months ago. You don’t just have disorientation, you suffer from hallucinations. It’s not a case of “cover your ears grandma, here comes another plane!” Frankly, it’s easy to envision agitated seniors. It’s a mystery to me how the airport noise was mitigated for residential. OH, maybe it wasn’t, because people had to sue to get triple glazed windows installed in parts of Harbor Bay. Just wondering if this is a case of boiled frog syndrome.(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog). I often think about this as I lay awake at night listening to 880 and BART.

          We all dislike being second guessed, it’s human nature I suppose. In second guessing PB I was just being curious about details of decibel levels in particular. I make no excuses for not being better informed but expressing opinion based solely on empirics. I guess I’ll go search for transcripts of staff report to PB. Won’t surprise me if it isn’t specific either.

          Comment by MI — November 2, 2016 @ 10:12 am

    • Tony looked at the zoning for that parcel, then he did what he was told.

      Comment by dc — October 31, 2016 @ 1:55 pm

  4. 1. Just so that I am fair to everyone, I won’t comment on the Daysog thing having now gone into extra innings.

    2. This is more important: B1 – Yes. I don’t know how the campaign’s finances are doing as of today, but the B1 website has an easy way to make a small contribution online.

    Comment by MP — October 31, 2016 @ 11:45 am

  5. Go Tony! I’d take a few hundred from Alamedans who appreciate his independence from developers and fire union, and his considerate approach to issues, over $105,000 in developer and union money to Vella and Ashcraft any day!
    The developers who even Vella admits the city “does not get enough from” (Alameda hosp candidate forum night), and fire union that insists on 8 fire people and multiple fire vehicles and hook and ladder doing medical calls! Biggest joke in town for years. City has no money for anything else…

    Comment by Rob — October 31, 2016 @ 8:04 pm

  6. Funny thing union funding mailers calling Tony Daysog a Trump supporter. Can we poll how many of them are voting Trump? We all know Tony ain’t

    Comment by Rob — October 31, 2016 @ 8:09 pm

    • I think the mailer you are talking about was paid for by Daysog’s campaign not a union. Look at the “this was paid for by” statement on the mailer…. Look at the bulk mailing label ….

      Comment by Gerard L. — October 31, 2016 @ 11:36 pm

      • There was NO paid for on the mailer.

        Comment by frank — November 1, 2016 @ 1:08 pm

  7. I’m disappointed in Tony Daysog that he has aligned himself with the Nimbys – and if it’s true that he is a supporter of Donald Trump – that’s a deal breaker for me!

    More now than ever before, we need leaders on the Council who can lead and solve problems. True leaders come to table ready to be part of the solution. Tony, appears to spend more time talking about the problems than he does about solutions – which tells me that he will take us backwards not forward. And much of the time I’m unclear where Tony stands on some important issues. He seems to wait for others to vote before he casts his vote – which signals to me that he’s a follower not a leader.

    I am supporting Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft — while I have some differences with her on some issues, I always come back to her because she is a true leader. She’s positive, she’s solution oriented, and she knows how to work collaboratively to get things done.

    At this time in our history – we need strong leaders on the Council more than ever before. That is why I am supporting Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft for City Council on November 8th.

    Comment by Karen Bey — November 1, 2016 @ 6:55 am

  8. The attack mailer that came yesterday with Trump and Tony is NOT from Tony’s campaign. You did not see it if you think that. It is an all out hideous attack mailer, with no information and individually stamped addressed to me. It infuriates me!
    Far from being a Nimby republican, I will stack my liberal creds against anyone.
    Just sick of candidates and elected officials collecting big developer money for their campaigns, then approving any and all plans, getting nothing for the city, as Malian Vella even said, then requiring more city services. Nice cycle, then more of the already 79 cents on the dollar in Alameda going for the two public safety contracts.
    The new 7 million “command emergency” center on Grand st is already 5 million over budget.
    This liberal wants more of an Alameda dollar going for services people care for and need.

    Comment by Rob — November 1, 2016 @ 9:05 am

    • This liberal wants more of an Alameda dollar going for services people care for and need.

      I’m pretty sure Alamedans care about and need police and fire service. That’s what those two public safety contracts fund: police and fire service. The alternative, I suppose, is outsourcing or privatizing fire and safety services, but if you believe that then your “liberal creds” are already sub-optimal.

      Comment by Lauren Do — November 1, 2016 @ 9:11 am

  9. It is the inefficiencies of 8 fire people doing medical etc etc. As residential fires have decreased due to manufacturing quality and fire safety increasing, they have picked up medical calls to justify budgets. Look into it, fires are down fire spending is up, dramatically.
    Medical calls should be handled by light two man paramedic crews.
    My liberal creds are well intact, as using the police force only, instead of investing in communities health in other ways, is a well know liberal ideology, always has been mine. With 80 percent of municipal spending going to police and fire, not investing in communities in other ways, my liberal mind sees the problem.
    I guess that is why there is such a silly attempt to pretend there are closet republicans around. Nice try.

    Comment by Rob — November 1, 2016 @ 9:41 am

    • What jurisdiction sends 8 fire people to a medical call Rob? You may want to check your numbers.

      Comment by dc — November 1, 2016 @ 12:47 pm

      • ours. To my house.

        Comment by vigi — November 1, 2016 @ 3:56 pm

        • The correct number is 5 Vigi, but you knew that.

          Comment by dc — November 2, 2016 @ 7:55 am

      • I did check my numbers by counting who was there. A medical for a minor stroke possible not conclusive, patient still walking and talking. 8 fully uniformed fire people three fire vehicles including hook and ladder.

        Comment by Rob — November 2, 2016 @ 6:12 pm

  10. To break it down simple, some want bloated police dept budgets to protect them from people, I want communities invested in, in other ways. Job training, youth programs etc etc. Who is the republican now?

    Comment by Rob — November 1, 2016 @ 10:02 am

    • So you’re suggesting what then to cut “bloated” public safety budgets? Slash wages? Slash benefits? Slash retirement? Break up collective bargaining? Your “liberal cred” still intact?

      Comment by Lauren Do — November 1, 2016 @ 10:04 am

      • Yes, yes, yes, yes, no, and yes.

        Comment by West Side Jim — November 1, 2016 @ 9:59 pm

  11. Interesting the last Political Mailer slamming Daysog where he is pictured adjacent to Trump has no ‘Paid For By Disclaimer’ on it at all. This seems to be a Violation of the “California Political Reform Act”. http://www.fppc.ca.gov/content/dam/fppc/NS-Documents/TAD/Campaign%20Documents/CampaignAdvertisementDisclosure/Political%20Advertising%20Disclaimers.pdf

    Comment by frank — November 1, 2016 @ 10:22 am

  12. Of course now comes the union busting charge. Never heard anyone speak up for the really poorly paid, just the six figure salary full benefits crowd.
    How about addressing the actual inefficiencies in the systems myself and others have brought up. Every single city commission or employee that has tried to address it has ended up not being able to do so. Including one of Russo’s assistants who was going “to do something about that”, meaning so many firemen doing medical.
    Was laughing about that with a doctor friend of mine a few weeks ago. He said he was astounded when he calls 911 and so many firemen show up!

    Comment by Rob — November 1, 2016 @ 10:23 am


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Say what you want

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.