Although it hasn’t gotten a lot of publicity, there is a Los Angeles Municipal Election on Tuesday. So I’ve decided that I should actually figure out who I’m voting for, in between studying and cleaning.
- Mayor of Los Angeles: I’ve written before about the candidates for this office. Based on that discussion, there are really only three viable candidates: the current mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa; Walter Moore; and Phil Jennerjahn. From his first term, I haven’t been too impressed with Mayor Tony: he seems to be chasing the political currents, hoping they will take him higher (i.e., governor). He also doesn’t seem to think much about the San Fernando Valley (we really should have seceded when we had the chance). More importantly, he hasn’t been bringing business back to Los Angeles, he hasn’t been proactive to stem foreclosures and the drop in property values (which goes hand in hand with growing the job base in Los Angeles). So that leaves Moore and Jennerjahn, neither of which have the financial strength to be running a campaign that is likely to succeed. Jennerjahn comes across as very conservative, and very partisan. His “Why I’m Running” page states: “That is an unfortunate side-effect of the dictatorship that the Democratic Party has on this City” and goes on to imply that the democrats in this city are non-thinking sheep. I’m sorry, but that’s dividing a city, not being post-partisan. Moore, on the other hand, puts up a coherent platform, which gets most things right (I don’t agree with it all). His bio doesn’t emphasize any partisan natures. That’s something I liked: it worked well for Richard Riorden when he was our mayor.
Conclusion: Walter Moore
- City Attorney: There are five candidates in this race: Michael Richard Amerian, David Berger, Carmen Trutanich, Noel Weiss, and Jack Weiss. All appear to have reasonable websites, and not be easily dismissable wackos. Jack Weiss seems to be the establishment candidate: supported by Democratic groups, unions, current city leaders, and current state leaders. Noel Weiss seems to have mostly individuals speaking for him. Trutanich has endorsements from the LA Times, the county Sheriff, the Singleton papers, the current DA, a number of police organizations, and a number of mayors. Berger is endorsed by Walter Moore. Amerian is endorsed by Laura Chick and a few former mayors. At least based on endorsements, it looks like the battle is between the Mayor’s man, Jack Weiss, and Trutanich. They both seem to have strong personalities, but I’ve heard of lots of problems with Weiss… plus he is clearly more in the political establishment — something I’m not sure I want in the city attorney.
Conclusion: Carmen Trutanich
- Controller: Three candidates here: Kathleen Evans, Wendy Greuel, and Nick Patsaouras. Patsaouras is an engineer and used to be involved with Metro, which would normally be a point in his favor, but this isn’t an engineering job. Then again, Gruel is part of Mayor Tony’s slate, but also has lots of other good endorsements. More significant to me, however, is Gruel seems to be strong Valley representative. As for Evans, she’s part of Walter Moore’s slate, and seems to have more of a business focus. Truly my gut speaking, but in this case, I’m inclined towards the valley girl.
Conclusion: Wendy Gruel
- LA Community College District: These are a collection of offices that mean nothing to me. Really. So, I’m inclinde to vote for the incumbants first, and existing community college trustees second. If there is a particular candidate who you think is strong, let me know.
- Charter Amendment A: Fire Department Independent Assessor. Yes. I’ve been studying for the CISSP, and if there is one thing that is emphasized, independent oversight is a good thing.
- Charter Amendment B: Solar Energy and Job Creation Program. No. This is a Mayor Tony pet project, rushed onto the ballot. Both of the remaining papers have said no to this. I agree.
- Charter Amendment C: Disabled Children Survivor Benefit, Fire and Police Pension Plan. Yes. Permits disabled children of deceased members of the LAFD and LAPD to marry or be adopted without losing their benefits. Seems reasonable.
- Charter Amendment D: Survivor Benefit Purchase Program for Retirees of Fire and Police. Yes. This is an “at their own expense” thing.
- Charter Amendment E: Economic Development Incentives for Business Development. Yes. This makes it clear in the charter that incentives that are in the interest of the city can be provided. This is something we sorely need to so we can recover business that has been lost to New York and Vancouver and other cities.
There you have it. Short ballot. I’m not going 100% party line, although I do think the Mayor’s slate will end up getting elected.
