This blog's post titled "Pick two for City Council" triggered a surprising amount of reactions from voters — all positive, all hoping for ways to help concentrate our votes on two mainstream, newcomer candidates for City Council.
I've watched as that blog post went further than I thought it might — referenced in a wide range of conversations online and in-person — but it also flew wide of its marks.
Voters: Pick your preferred two newcomers. No need to overthink it!
I can't imagine any voters are actually holding onto their empty ballots, awaiting this blog's advice. Still, it doesn't hurt to be explicit. Here's this blog's advice: Pick the two newcomer candidates for Alameda City Council who most resonate with you — and vote for them.
Vote for Michele Pyror and/or Greg Boller and/or Thushan Amarasiriwardena.
No need to play five-dimensional chess thinking about what other voters might do. Don't overthink it. Just look at the candidates websites or statements. Watch some of the City of Alameda Democratic Club forum or the LWV/Alameda Post candidate forum or the most recent Alameda Chamber of Commerce candidate forum. This blog also has posts describing when the three newcomer candidates have weighed in on actual matters in front of City Council over the last couple months (or when they've skipped the opportunity to do so). Make your own decision for which two you think are best equipped in terms of values and experience for Alameda City Council.
Also, to be clear: I was using the Morning Bun "challenge" as a way to figure out my own votes. A couple days after putting up the last Morning Bun challenge post, I reached out to ask Michele Pryor for a yard sign — to pair with the Thushan yard sign I already had. Those two are who I'll be voting for, based on their expressed values and demonstrated experience.
But as I wrote above, make up your own mind. If Greg Boller's values and experience resonate more with you, vote for him as one of your candidates instead.
Leaders: Talk more and think more next time!
I'm not trying to equivocate in order to sound more sage than I actually am.
I'm equivocating because it's not my place as a rando blogger to try to patch up a failure by Alameda's non-Republican governing coalition.
The candidates weren't the only audience for that "Pick two for City Council" blog post. Rather, the prime audience was the local organizations and leaders who recruit potential candidates, who lend their names to endorse them, who fund their campaigns, etc.
In this election cycle, has their goal been to work together to run exactly two candidates for the two seats — toward a shared goal of removing the chaos-creating incumbent from City Council, for all our collective benefit?
Or in this election cycle, have those orgs and leaders been concerned primarily just with who might fill outgoing-councilmember Malia Vella's seat next?
Who knows...
This blog post isn't intended as a "blame game," nor would this even be the time for a retrospective postmortem. (Perhaps the incumbent is drawing so much negative energy in this final stretch of the campaign season that two of the newcomers will be elected, even without strategic coordination?)
Still, this election cycle feels like a lost opportunity at the local level.
I began this blog in December 2022 with the following:
Most local-level decisions in Alameda are decided by the City Council of five members. Two seats will be open in the next election in 2024. One of those seats is currently held by a Councilmember who's very much engaged with a wide range of constituents and changes [that's Malia Vella]; the other is held by a reactionary who uses disorder and insults to preserve the status quo on behalf of her prefer constituents [that's Trish Herrera Spencer]. Let's aim to fill both of those seats with skilled and responsible councilmembers who aren't afraid to engage with change in 2024.
Here's to hoping for free and fair elections in two year's time across the United States — and to hoping that the progressive and mainstream leaders and organizations of Alameda are more collaborative, communicative, and coordinated at giving voters in 2026 the choices we're asking for on our ballots for City Council.