How long do we plan on living here in Alameda? That's the question that City Council effectively asked at its meeting last night. The specific topic was whether to place a bond for local infrastructure repairs and improvements for voters on the November ballot — but the broader topic is really that: Do we plan on living in Alameda past this year? Do we plan on living here for years and decades to come? And in response, Vice Mayor Daysog and Councilmember Trish Herrera Spencer effectively said nope, who cares, the Alameda of today is fine as-is and we'll just let it crumble around us.

Alameda has an estimated $800mm of deferred maintenance.

Alameda city staff and their consultants prepared a $150mm bond measure that could appear on the November ballot to provide funds to address the most important of this deferred maintenance.

The bond measure is designed to provide flexible funding for three different types of fixes and improvements:

1) Making our community safer by improving outdated police and fire stations and replacing aging infrastructure to prevent power outages, stormwater drainage, and sewer systems problems.

2) Repairing potholes, repaving and maintaining roads, and improving pedestrian and bicycle safety with safe sidewalks and crosswalks.

3) Protecting the shoreline including bridges, tunnels, homes, and wildlife that need protection from natural disasters such as flooding, rising sea and ground water levels, erosion, and earthquakes.

In preparing the proposed bond measure, Alameda's consultants conducted polls of representative samples of voters and found widespread support of "68% of respondents were supportive or leaning in that direction." Note that that measured support is based on just a pollsters questions — should the measure actually make it to a ballot, there would be an entire campaign and extended opportunities to engage more with voters.

But at Councilmember Trish Herrera Spencer's urging, Vice Mayor Daysog voted against all of that — and tanked the possibility of having more local funds to address these infrastructure problems.

It's not just that they opposed the bond — it's that they opposed adding it to the ballot. They both would have had the option to vote as councilmembers to add this to the ballot and to then campaign against it. That's what's so galling about this — instead of trying to persuade voters for or against in a public campaign, voting against letting this option even make it to voters on an actual ballot.

The overt reason for last night's opposition is that the bond measure doesn't provide a specific list of exact projects the $150mm would fund. But staff said that all projects would necessarily have to be approved using the normal steps of City Council hearings, public engagement, and City Council votes. This is not a slush fund that can be used for any purpose or going outside of normal process. The City Manager also spoke to the importance of flexibility within the defined scope of the bond — the defined boundaries of those 3 areas mentioned earlier. Staff don't know in advance which exact projects will be the highest priority in which exact year. Also important is using these local funds to leverage and secure even more federal/state/county dollars, so the exact project priorities should also be shaped by which grant opportunities become available. Some flexibility will be useful for delivering the maximum value to voters and residents of Alameda.

But the covert reason for this opposition — at least from Councilmember Herrera Spencer just sounds to me like an opposition to public services. An opposition to us each paying some more taxes to get more from our local governments. The fact that the "more" in this case may mean infrastructure to prevent Bay Farm and the edges of Alameda Island from flooding is... well, that's apparently beside the point.

Vice Mayor Daysog agreed with that overt reason to oppose the bond — that it provides too much flexibility to future City Councils — and he voted against the entire bond measure. Did he also share those more covert thoughts and would he oppose any and all bond measures, so matter how finely crafted they are? Unclear...

So, now is a prime time to express disappointment directly to Vice Mayor Daysog. Whether this bond measure can be advanced or it can turn into a future one, his vote is critical — and his vote may be persuadable. Please consider using one of these sample emails and write to him directly.

Sample email for auto drivers

To: tdaysog@alamedaca.gov
Re: Alameda needs to fix its infrastructure

Dear Vice Mayor Daysog,

As a resident of Alameda, I am disappointed by your vote to remove the infrastructure bond measure from November's ballot.

Alameda's infrastructure needs repairs. This would be a fiscally prudent way for us to pay for improvements and to secure even more funds from the state and federal government. The bond measure is already polling well and it could help the city fix so many potholes.

But you voted to stop it. So instead of having the opportunity to vote for a fix on the November ballot, we'll just have to think of this bad decision by the Vice Mayor when when we our cars next hit those potholes.

Please reconsider.

Sincerely,
[your name]
[optionally list your street or neighborhood; no need to list your address]

Sample email for a homeowner

To: tdaysog@alamedaca.gov
Re: Alameda needs to fix its infrastructure

Dear Vice Mayor Daysog,

As a homeowner here in Alameda, I am disappointed by your vote to remove the infrastructure bond measure from November's ballot.

Alameda's infrastructure needs repairs. This would be a fiscally prudent way for us to pay for improvements and to secure even more funds from the state and federal government. The bond measure is already polling well and it could help the city prepare shorelines and stormwater systems to handle sea and ground level rise.

But you voted to stop it. So instead of having the opportunity to vote for a fix on the November ballot, we'll just have to think of this bad decision by the Vice Mayor when the lagoons next flood or bay water gets uncomfortably close to our houses.

Please reconsider.

Sincerely,
[your name]
[optionally list your street or neighborhood; no need to list your address]

Sample email for a pedestrian, cyclist, parent, or senior

To: tdaysog@alamedaca.gov
Re: Alameda needs to fix its infrastructure

Dear Vice Mayor Daysog,

As a [pedestrian or cyclist or parent or senior] here in Alameda, I am disappointed by your vote to remove the infrastructure bond measure from November's ballot.

Alameda's infrastructure needs repairs. This would be a fiscally prudent way for us to pay for improvements and to secure even more funds from the state and federal government. The bond measure is already polling well and it could help the city to create streets that are safer for all of us.

But you voted to stop it. So instead of having the opportunity to vote for a fix on the November ballot, we'll just have to think of this bad decision by the Vice Mayor when [we trip on a public sidewalk OR hear that another street safety project has been deferred OR we don't feel save letting our kid bike to school].

Please reconsider.

Sincerely,
[your name]
[optionally list your street or neighborhood; no need to list your address]