As this blogger has written, The (yeah, capital "T") Oakland Mayor's Race is going to get even more interesting and today, Thursday, is proof. Pay attention to this blog post if you enjoy laughter and guffaws, and you know you do.
First, Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan phoned to say she called Kent Lewandowski, volunteer Chairperson for the Northern Alameda County Group of the Sierra Club, San Francisco Bay Chapter, and the author of what's still the most awful email in Oakland Politics ever seen by this blogger, to ask him to include all of the candidates.
 |
| I must admit, this is funny |
If you're just getting wind of this fart the Sierra Club broke, Kent Lewandowski
sent an email to almost every candidate in the Oakland Mayor's Race (except Arnie Fields), to inform them and by "cc" this blogger that because they were not "viable" candidates, they would not be part of the Wednesday, August 25th "Oakland Green Mayoral Forum."
That meant the only participants in the "Oakland Green Mayoral Forum" would be Former State Senator Don Perata, and Oakland Councilmembers Rebecca Kaplan and Jean Quan.
But that didn't last long because Perata's Campaign Manager
emailed to inform this blogger that Senator Perata would not be involved in any Forum that did not include every candidate running for Mayor (presumably, including Arnie Fields).
By that, we can say Perata means all forums that exclude candidates for booyah-boogie reasons, which includes the Oakland Chamber of Commerce event with the League of Women Voters.
So with the Sierra Club "Oakland Green Mayoral Forum" down to just two candidates, Kaplan and Quan, Councilmember Kaplan called Kent Lewandowski to ask the Sierra Club to open the Forum to all candidates. According to Councilmember Kaplan, Kent said he had to take the issue to "some people" but would "consider" doing that.
My response to Rebecca was that she should just drop out of the Forum, if only to teach the Sierra Club a lesson. But after further consideration, I think Councilmember Kaplan should be insulted that the Sierra Club would not just go-ahead and open the Wednesday Forum because she made the call. Why give the Sierra Club such power? I don't get it.
 |
| Rebecca Kaplan |
And on the matter of giving power to Oakland groups who don't deserve it in the Oakland Mayor's Race, we have the League of Women Voters (LVW) essentially getting its Forum-production marching orders from The Oakland Chamber of Commerce and The Bay Area Business Roundtable, but wanting to back away from them.
Pay attention.
Oakland Chamber bullies LWV
According to sources that will not be named, it was the Oakland Chamber of Commerce and The Bay Area Business Roundtable that approached the League of Women Voters with a desire to form what is a totally laugh-producing, belly-hurting set of criteria for their Oakland Mayor's Race Forum on September 23rd at Kaiser Center, 7 PM.
The basic criteria for the Oakland Chamber / League of Women Voters Forum are reasonable. First one has to be on the ballot. Second, they have to have what the Oakland Chamber / League of Women Voters defines to be a "viable campaign:"
1. Made a public announcement of an intention to run
2. Legally registered campaign committee with the California Secretary of State
3. Have filed appropriate financial reports with the City of Oakland and the California FPPC
4. Publicly accessible campaign headquarters
5. Telephone number, other than a personal or home number, listed under the campaign’s name
6. Campaign website and/or other campaign material with articulated views on issues
7. Campaign bank account and campaign treasurer
Ok, all of that is fine. But what's really hilarious comes next:
In addition, the candidate must meet at least one of the following criteria:
1. The candidate has received 5 percent or more of the vote, tested in a trial heat in a professionally conducted independent public opinion survey conducted by an experienced political pollster based on a scientific sample of the entire electorate with a margin of error of less than 5 percent (at a 95 percent level of confidence), if such a public opinion survey is available.
2. The candidate has reported in legal documents filed with state or city government entities the receipt, during the election campaign, of at least one campaign contribution per 1,000 residents of the constituency (based on the total number of persons enumerated in the last U.S. census), excluding contributions from the candidate himself or herself, the candidate’s spouse, or the candidate’s natural or adopted children. Contributions do not have to be residents of the constituency to be counted.
3. The candidate previously had been elected to or held, the office that he or she is seeking.
4. The candidate sought the same office during the previous eight years and received at least 20 percent of the vote in the general election.
Now, if you think about it and know Oakland Politics, the above criteria leaves the Oakland Chamber / League of Women Voters Forum with just one candidate: Arnie Fields.
First, there's no public survey done to fit #1, so that's out. And that's really a stupid idea because it doesn't say that every candidate has to be in the poll, thus, the poll could be rigged to help certain candidates.
Second, for the second criteria to be met, the candidate would need 401 donations. While there's an effort to help presumably
all of the candidates get to that number, it's not widespread or perfect, and because of that it will fall short. Maybe two or three candidates fall into this area, but that's it.
Third, not one of the candidates falls into criteria number three.
Fourth, the only person who falls into criteria number four is Arnie Fields, who ran in 2006. Seriously.
Here's Arnie stating his support to keep the A's in Oakland in 2006 during an Oakland Mayoral Forum called "Choose or Loose The A's:"
