Rum, Romanism and Rebellion

I attended a forum for city council candidates organized by Casa María over at Guadalupe Chapel on 31st Street. I must give the Republican candidates some credit: all showed up. The only one of the seven candidates not to show up was Ward 3 Green Party candidate Mary DeCamp (yeah, I had to look up her name).

The program started with a dramatization of a passage from the Gospel of Mark where Jesus heals a blind man. The priest would read the gospel while several congregants in costume acted it out. Imagine a Bible pageant crossed with Teatro Campesino.

As for the more traditionally political part of the program, Brian Flagg served as timekeeper, but only had to cut a few people short. Many of them spoke in both Spanish and English. The first item was about widening of 22nd Street. Several citizens spoke on the matter. They didn’t just speak in NIMBY opposition, but had proposals about how the widening could be done to have the smallest impact on the neighborhood.

Two speakers on that issue stood out in my mind: one was Alberto Elías (listed on the agenda, appropriately, as “Don Alberto Elías”) who spoke about Santa Rita Park and the pool and how important they are to residents. Elías made his case in a way that many of us who respect him are used to: with dignity, humility and humor. The likely alignment of the expansion would take out a big chunk of the park, along with the only public pool in the area (Elías said that he used it himself when he was a kid, which would have been some time ago) as well as cutting off access to the park to residents south of 22nd, unless accomodations are made.

Jean Ramirez (if memory serves) was another speaker. She grew up in the area and was worried about the pollution levels that would occur if the street is widened (it is being widened, partially, to accomodate truck traffic). She was worried about cancer. Other speakers pointed out that there is evidence in other parts of the city of higher cancer rates along high traffic corridors.

It was then on to the candidates to respond. I have to single out Shaun McClusky as giving the worst possible response. He used the words “delicate balance” several times and pointed out that we must balance (delicately, no doubt) the needs of the city as a whole with local residents. That’s true, and it is true of any policy decision. But it wasn’t much of an answer. It was worse than a dodge, it demonstrated a total lack of knowledge about an issue that is very important to a large number of residents of the ward he hopes to represent. Organizers made it clear what topics would be discussed, and McClusky had notes. It makes me wonder, should lightning strike and the guy gets elected, how prepared he actually is to do the job.

Shouldn’t be suprising given how he was recruited, I guess.

The Democrats, not unexpectedly, gave strong “pro-neighborhood” answers. They called for letting residents see the impact studies that the city had done as well as specific measures to mitigate the impact of the project on the neighborhood and park. Both Steve Kozachik and Ben Buehler-García gave decent answers, but I hesitate to be reassured given who is backing their campaigns. Kozachik used the answer as an opportunity to talk about his work on third world poverty, an issue that is close to the hearts of many in that audience but the crowd definitely wanted him to focus on the issue at hand.

Kudos: both Nina Trasoff and Buehler-García responded in both English and Spanish.

Buehler-García had to leave before the next issue was discussed: Proposition 200. I heard a few grouse about his leaving early, but I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. He left a written statement that was summarized for the audience.

McClusky gave a strong pro-200 message. Unfortunately for him and his message, he relied on budget numbers that were plain wrong. Both Richard Fimbres and Trasoff pounced on him for this. McClusky was including funds that the city council couldn’t spend on police (such as transportation money from the state) in numbers to show that 200 spending would have negligible impact. It could be that McClusky was playing a game with the numbers (in a church, no less!), but given what I saw in his earlier answer, it could just be that he genuinely doesn’t have any idea how the city budget works.

Interestingly, both Kozachik and Buehler-García seemed to pull back on outright support for 200. Buehler-García’s written statement, for example, talked about budgeting for more officers and didn’t mention 200 at all. Kozachik also didn’t explicitly support 200, and even obliquely mentioned budget concerns. So, one of two things is happening here: either these guys are reconsidering their enthusiasm for Prop. 200, or they say different things about it to different audiences. Which is it, fellas?

The event was covered by two local television stations.