Commentary: Who will be the next mayor of Albany?
The recent election results appear to reflect a surprising change in voter sentiment since 2006. As most of you know, candidate Peggy Thomsen received the most votes, followed by Farid Javandel, with incumbent mayor Robert Lieber coming in third. But a further analysis may tell us a bit more about the temper of Albany voters than we’ll learn by simply looking at individual results. I’ll try to address that here and also consider the question of who will be the next mayor of Albany when the new council is formed.
While there were no formal candidate “slates”, I think it’s fair to say, based on looking at endorsements and campaign fliers, that the six candidates formed up into two groupings:
Members of the Lieber/Panian/Toomey group relied heavily on endorsements from politicians and organizations representing issues and constituencies broader than those related specifically to Albany. Organizations such as the Sierra club, the California Democratic Party, and the Green Party of Alameda County, were some of these. Robert Lieber also chose to list endorsements from organizations that had no apparent relevance to the business of the Albany council, including the California Nurses Association, the California Labor Federation, and the Alameda County Central Labor Council. For campaign literature this group chose to use aggressive, full-color glossy fliers that spoke of big money and big time politics. PACS supporting them tended toward the same approach.
By contrast, members of the Thomsen/Javandel/Pilch group ran on a more individual basis and relied almost exclusively on endorsements from local people. Campaign literature reflected a far less costly approach and focused primarily on Albany issues.
As a result, the difference between the two groups in terms of endorsements, issues, and presentation techniques was striking and well defined. It is of interest, then, to total the number of votes received by each group, including the winners and losers:
TOTALS BY GROUP VOTES AND PERCENT
Thomsen*/Javandel*/Pilch 10,318 53.00% ; Lieber*/Panian/Toomey 9,147 46.90%
*Elected/re-elected to council
THINKING ABOUT IT
Going back to the 2006 election, two council seats were in contention, and the Caruso development controversy was the paramount issue. Candidates Marge Atkinson and Joanne Wile, who opposed the Caruso “mall” proposal and were endorsed by the Sierra Club and related groups, received close to 58% of the votes cast, and both were elected. This time, as we see above, the candidate group with generally similar backing received less than half of the votes cast (46.90%)–quite a swing from 2006.
What does it all mean? I did no exit polling, but will hazard a couple of guesses. First, when it comes to our city’s government, a number of Albany voters now appear to have shifted their support to candidates who look like they’ll focus their energies mainly on the issues that specifically affect the interests of Albany; rather than candidates whose allegiance lies with politicians, groups, and causes focused less directly on the needs of our city.
Second, candidates supported by the Sierra Club and allied organizations continued to emphasize the “Caruso mall” controversy, as if it were still a burning issue and uppermost in minds of voters. But with the waterfront issue now firmly in the hands of an established planning process, that issue has apparently lost some of its steam with a number of voters–who now appear ready to participate in the process and review the results, before taking a chiseled-in-stone position.
Results regarding measure Y and measure DD are also interesting. Measure Y (directly elected mayor) went down to defeat by a percentage which closely tracked the “group” vote percentages noted above-that is 53.18 % “no’, 46.82% “yes”. This seems to confirm that a majority of Albany voters are still ready put their faith in qualified local public service-oriented people, rather those who aspire to become professional politicians and look to backing from outside interests. There may also have been some dissatisfaction about the way this measure was placed on the ballot.
Measure DD (proposed increase in property transfer taxes), was defeated by a larger margin (56.01% “no”, 43.99% “yes”) and the results here suggest that Albany voters are starting to show some resistance to periodic fee (tax) increases, possibly in part because the city has historically made little effort to communicate its financial position in terms that voters can understand.
So, the election shoe has dropped. But there is a second shoe of interest that has yet to do so. Who will be the next mayor of Albany? After the 2006 election when the new council took office, Farid Javandel (as vice mayor under departing mayor Allan Maris) was in line for the job in accordance with Albany’s long-standing rotating mayor approach. However, with newly elected council members Marge Atkinson and Joanne Wile now in place, Robert Lieber declared that the voters of Albany “had spoken” and had, in effect, given him a mandate to press forward with his shoreline policies and his “progressive” agenda for Albany. After some discussion, the city attorney made it clear that the council was not legally bound by the rotating mayor convention, and simply had the power to select the mayor. As a result, supported by Atkinson and Wile, Lieber elected himself mayor. The same thing occurred when the council convened for 2008. After some discussion about past precedent relative to mayors serving two years in a row, Lieber again elected himself mayor.
This time, the voting results would indicate that whatever “mandate” Mayor Lieber may have had in 2006 no longer exists. But assuming the continued unwavering support of Atkinson and Wile, Mayor Lieber could, if he chose, elect himself mayor again. This question will be addressed in the council meeting scheduled for December 15, and surely all those interested in Albany politics won’t want to miss it, either in person or on channel 33.
Mac McCurdy,
Wow! You wrote a whole lot to say you do not like the past direction of the Albany City Council. As AHS PTSA President I had to go to a Albany PTA Council meeting, all the Albany schools PTA council, there was a guy names Roger there who spoke for 20 minutes about almost nothing! I had started out agreeing with him but ended up just because he would not shut up wanting the opposite position. I refused to go to further meetings by the way. I have better things to do than hear blah blah blah…
Mac, with you I can not even arrive at that since you seem to not take a position accept to cut someone down… Why don’t you get out and run for office? Perhaps people will like your ideas or not…
Mac, however, please don’t write so much about nothing again. It will make me skip what you have to say.
Did you ever stop to think Mr. L. is the mayor because Ms. A. and Ms. W. are too weak of persons to put up with some of the angry nasty comments some people make at the meetings and they left Mr. L. in the seat? Mr. L. can take pressure look at the high pressure job he does. A very fine person if you ask me. (Yes, they do have the right to not rotate as you pointed out and they are a voting block on the same interests.)
Mac, relax things are not that bad. If things get really bad some of the current lazy Albany school board members will get on the city council then you will have something to fear. Do you know they are now going to waste $10 million dollars not buildings the pools and classrooms because they can not say no to waste and over budget? They want to build something that costs more than a hospital cost per square foot. Mac, yes we could use you being a watchdog on the school district.
In Peace,
Andy
It appears Mr. McCurdy has hit the nail on the head. Welcome to the club, sir.
It is quite obvious Mr. Lieber’s crown hss become tarnished. One can only hope
Marge and/or Joanne will soon wake up and see the light. It is high time that we
escort the likes of Laforce and his crones out of Albany’s business. Mainly out
of our Council meetings
MR. LIEBER DOESN’T SPEAK FOR ME!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is to thank all of the City Council candidates (including those who were not selected in the last race). It is not easy to run for office, and to my perception, every candidate ran with the interests of all of Albany at heart, and all candidates have given time and energy to making life in Albany better.
We are not enemies. Many of us have watched or worked on city issues for years. Many of us appreciate the emphasis on a “green” environment that the Sierra Club and Green Party have put forth for decades. Running for office with Sierra Club endorsement did not make anyone in the thrall of an ‘outsider’ group, any more than my endorsement suggests that a candidate will support 100% of what I hope for.
I am especially appreciative that planning for future use of the waterfront is now the focus of an inclusive process directed by Fern Tiger and Associates. For many of us who were concerned by the Caruso plan and other efforts to commercialize the waterfront, this is an opportunity to see what a consensus of the citizens of Albany will look like.
I’d encourage that the Sierra Club is an “outside” organization that is not focused on the interests of Albany residents.
This is to thank all of the City Council candidates (including those who were not selected in the last race). It is not easy to run for office, and to my perception, every candidate ran with the interests of all of Albany at heart, and all candidates have given time and energy to making life in Albany better.
We are not enemies. Many of us have watched or worked on city issues for years. Many of us appreciate the emphasis on a “green” environment that the Sierra Club and Green Party have put forth for decades. Running for office with Sierra Club endorsement did not make anyone in the thrall of an ‘outsider’ group, any more than my endorsement suggests that a candidate will support 100% of what I hope for.
I am especially appreciative that planning for future use of the waterfront is now the focus of an inclusive process directed by Fern Tiger and Associates. For many of us who were concerned by the Caruso plan and other efforts to commercialize the waterfront, this is an opportunity to see what a consensus of the citizens of Albany will look like.
What is Mac McCurdy’s affiliation? Periodically he writes op eds (not articles) criticizing the progressive Albany council members, yet he is apparently not being asked to identify his affiliations.
I see the election quite differently. The voters re-elected the two incumbents and elected a former city official. All new candidates lost.
It is clear that the author is stretching when he brings in the elected mayor issue. That ballot measure was rushed through and undoubtedly lost many votes as a result of the process.
Ira Sharenow
Albany resident
There is something to be said for longstanding traditions such as rotating council members into the mayor’s position. It was a good way of avoiding unnecessary contention and uncertainty on the council. When shifting to any other method, it forces us to consider just what do we want a mayor to represent and what is a better formula for choosing a mayor. The idea of direct election was rejected by the voters and our current mayor was the weakest vote getter among the three winners. One approach could be to say that popularity among the voters is a good indication of who the people want as mayor. According to this approach Peggy Thomsen and Farid Javendal are the best candidats for Mayor and Vice Mayor. On the other hand we might consider going back to the rotation method where Farid Javendal, who was passed over two years ago, might be Mayor and Marge Atkinson, Vice Mayor.
Tony Caine
I think Ira’s comment accurately portrays the real problem that we have in Albany. Why does Mr. McCurdy need an affiliation? The cornerstone of our democracy is our ability not only to question our leaders but criticize them as well. One need no be affiliated with a party or group to speak ones mind on issues or causes that concern us, just as it is your right to support those causes.
As for the election there a many hundreds of ways to interrupt the results but in the end the results will stay the same. I share Mr. McCurdy’s concern over the upcoming council restructuring but we’ll see how that plays out.
As for Political Action Committees and their involvement in our election I have a little different take. As a member of a local PAC, Albany Kids First, we supported the candidates we believed in, just as the Sierra Club supported their candidates. That doesn’t concern me as much as groups like Citizens for Albany Shoreline who put out last minute negative campaign literature and have no financial campaign statements available for the public to see. Neither Albany Kids First nor the Sierra Club put out any negative campaign literature in our election and their financial statements are available on the city’s website.
I too applaud ALL the candidates in this election, as Merry says it is not easy running for office. Our city faces a very uncertain financial future and we have already had to make cuts in essential services like police and fire as well as recreation and street maintenance.
I believe the time has come to put away our “affiliations” and work together to better our entire community, and in doing so still holding our elected officials accountable. Isn’t that the real meaning of an open government?
Well Ira, after the election I waited for some analysis of the results from one with broader community recognition than I currently enjoy. However, I didn’t see or hear a peep. The Journal merely published the voting results, as did Albany Today, but no one stepped up and attempted to sort out what it all meant. So finally, affiliation challenged though I am, I decided to take a shot at it, based on what I had observed during the election and how the results turned out.
I think one of the good things my article/op ed/commentary/whatever accomplished was to motivate you to share your own succinct analysis with us. In that respect, my efforts were clearly not in vain.
Not to beat this affiliation thing to death, but I want to point out that currently I do have one such, and that is with my cat Sheba. Every time I sit down to write something, Sheba hops up on my (old style) computer monitor and watches me work. Cats are smarter than we think, and I believe she is trying to encourage me and show approval of my ideas. But my wife says Sheba just likes the heat coming out of the monitor. My wife says she sits on the hoods of cars for the same reason.
Robert Lieber, Marge Atkinson, and Joanne Wile were right all along: Golden Gate Fields is now up for sale. See front page story in the Berkeley Daily Planet, December 4-10 edition.
It’s a pity the electorate did not vote to pass the Albany property transfer tax. At least Albany would have received some financial benefit when the racetrack is sold.
The three progressives were also right to fight for Albany when Rick Caruso proposed to build a mall on the waterfront. The sister project at Santa Anita racetrack still has not gotten out of the planning stage 4 years later: Caruso recently lost in a lawsuit challenging the Environmental Impact Report for that mall. It’s back to the drawing board at Santa Anita–think of the fix Albany would be in if we did not have Lieber, Atkinson, & Wile on the council.
Finally, the voters in Albany have spoken. They want us to follow the past practice of moving the vice mayor into the mayor position.
The Dec. 4-10 Daily Planet is reporting that Golden Gate Field will be up for sale, as a condition of a reorganization Magna will soon be undergoing. To a semi-educated observer, I’d have to think that this would be somewhat sensitive time, vis-a-vis the waterfront, e.g., potential buyers of the track will be evaluating how comfortable they’d be working with the Albany government. So a smooth resumption of things might be nice; I can see arguments for having Mayor Javandel (having been “on deck” under the previous tradition) or Mayor Atkinson (as being “on deck” now), but I’m wondering if the City Council ought to also go slow on the “visioning the waterfront” process, in order to invite potential buyers of the track into the discussion, or shift its focus somewhat, to assume that those potential buyers are an importance audience to acknowledge?
Mac,
Thanks for letting us know about your cat and your opinions of cats.
Thanks also for stating that you are unaffiliated. I appreciate your opinions even if I might not agree with many of them. They do form the basis of discussion.
I believe that when someone writes an op ed the author’s affiliation or lack of affiliation should be required. That is why I wrote my comment.
Ira