In the June 2005 Special Election, nine candidates (including Pat Kernighan and Aimee Allison) wrapped up a spirited race to fill the remainder of Danny Wan’s term as the District 2 Council representative. Five of those candidates (versus none for Ms. Allison) have endorsed Pat’s re-election. At a campaign rally on October 14, David Kakishiba, Pamela Drake, Shirley Gee, Justin Horner and Paul Garrison all talked about their reasons for doing so. They cited Pat’s integrity; her thoughtfulness; her willingness to admit mistakes and learn from them; her ability to listen to what people say and incorporate that input into rational decisions, as well as her ability to get things done.
While I agree with their shared analysis, for me there are other compelling, though less tangible, issues that I’d like to explore beginning with an inanimate object capable apparently of inspiring antipathy or possessiveness depending on the beholder: the campaign lawn sign.
What I call the “Lawn Sign Skirmishes” had its beginnings in the June primary as Kernighan supporters repeatedly complained about the loss of their lawn signs—although I suspect Allison supporters voiced some of the very same complaints. With less than three weeks until the election, it’s now become a full-scale “Lawn Sign War” with the Aimee Allison camp the clear aggressor. One of their most prominent victims has been the Chevron Station on the corner of Lakeshore and Mandana. On a well-manicured patch of grass, the owner posted a Pat Kernighan sign. Overnight, someone replaced it with Aimee’s, beginning a process that was repeated four or five times. Finally, thoroughly exasperated, the owner posted not one, but six Kernighan signs and instructed his staff to store them inside overnight.
A similar battle is being waged on Haddon Hill along MacArthur where half a dozen Aimee Allison signs were illegally posted on the freeway fence. Across the street, an abandoned construction site has been repeatedly inundated with Allison signs prompting neighbors to again and again complain to the City. This past Tuesday morning, the signs on the freeway fence were still there, but those at the construction site had been removed by a City crew prompted by a call from Russell Gates, a long-time, Haddon Hill neighbor who summarized the reasons for his chagrin in a letter that he’s mailed to Ms. Allison. When I talked to Russell this morning, he mentioned yesterday’s Matier and Ross column in the San Francisco Chronicle that noted Ms. Allison’s failure to pay business taxes. Obviously bemused, he quoted Ms. Allison’s response: “I believe in following the rules.”
A related, but less public battle, is being fought in store-front windows where apparently some of Ms. Allison’s volunteers do not like to take “No” for an answer.
I do, however, have to confess that what really upsets me personally is the extension of the “Lawn Sign War” to the Saturday Grand Lake Farmers’ Market. Ms. Allison and the volunteers who staff her table were not involved in the creation of the new Splash Pad Park. Perhaps as a result, they don’t recognize that what makes the Market truly special is that it provides a community gathering place, free of strife, where people of all colors bask in the sun, search for the perfect tomato and watch toddlers splash in the fountain.
Now with an election in full swing, what I’m witnessing instead is a war of creeping attrition and intimidation with Allison signs migrating continuously outwards to claim new territory. What is particularly galling is the disrespect her volunteers continue to shower on the Farmers’ Market management by repeatedly ignoring their requests to not cover the Market’s sandwich boards with their own signs.
By this point, I’m guessing you’ve begun to ask, yourself, “Who cares about campaign signs when there are so many really important, big-ticket issues? The reason I think the Lawn Sign War is important is because it exemplifies, in a concrete fashion, a state of mind that is terribly relevant. It’s a mind-set that seems to have two components. One is that Allison and her most ardent backers are convinced they occupy the moral high ground. I’m always leery of people on the right or left who are overly zealous, since it justifies in their minds disregard for inconvenient facts and legislation. A second, more important, factor is the extent to which Ms. Allison has surrounded herself with advisers and backers from the Green Party, the anti-war movement and the anti-globalization campaigns in which protest and confrontation are the typical recourse to bring about change.
While confrontation and disregard for the law may be warranted in opposing the war in Iraq, they hardly seem appropriate in the context of our City Council race. Ms. Allison and her supporters would better serve the long-term interests of District 2 by toning down their efforts to demonize Ms. Kernighan. They need to recognize that Oakland, for all its problems, is a wonderfully diverse city that has always welcomed dialogue—minus the kind of confrontational politics that divide us as a community.
My own concern is that Ms. Allison wants this job so very badly—whether out of personal ambition or a commitment to change—that she has lost her ethical compass and is willing to do whatever it takes to get elected. One result is her unwillingness to rein in the combatants of the Lawn Sign Wars. Another is to engage in blatant opportunism and take credit where credit really isn’t deserved. The ultimate example of the latter is the memorial service she scheduled immediately after the tragic murder of the young restaurant manager on Grand Avenue. In one of her campaign mailers, Ms. Allison claims to have “spearheaded the effort” to replace our walking beat police officer. In point of fact, Pat Kernighan with the support of the Grand Lake Neighborhood Crime Prevention Council and local merchants had been lobbying Chief Tucker to do so for at least a year. Unfortunately, it took a murder to change his mind. Ms. Allison’s sole contribution to this effort was a one-time, self-serving gathering with extensive media coverage. When Ms. Allison phoned me the morning after the murder to ask my help in publicizing the memorial service through our Splash Pad Newsletter, I literally begged her not to turn this into an opportunity for political advantage. Inviting Ms. Kernighan to participate would have removed any hint of impropriety, but that obviously was not in her own personal interests and she did not do so.
As a final aside, let me note that I’ve become increasingly pessimistic about the state of politics in this country. All you have to do is to look at the idiot sitting in the White House to know that we are in deep shit. On the other hand, the Bay area, particularly Oakland, has again and again proven its mettle as a model of enlightenment. I am hopeful that in this election, District 2 voters will be able and willing to look beyond empty rhetoric and vote for Pat Kernighan, the candidate who has a proven track record—listening to her constituents and getting things done.
Comments
I'm prompted to reply to some of the above comments—particularly those from "Laney Student." From everything I've heard and read about this "debate," it was obviously a set-up packed with Aimee Allison supporters and exemplifies the very same confrontational tactics that I deplored in my column. In addition, on the whole, his or her comments totally distort or ignore facts. Particularly glaring was the observation that Pat Kernighan's "volunteers are mostly white." A picture is worth a thousand words and this picture taken at a volunteer mobilization on October 14 speaks volumes.
I'd also note that I'm perplexed as to why the comments critical of my column and Pamela Drake's column are, with only one exception, being posted by contributors who choose to remain anonymous. I was particularly intrigued that one submission was signed "Oakland Resident"--what I've assumed is code for someone who lives in Oakland, but not in District 2. Just out of curiosity, I went to the Aimee Allison website and reviewed her extensive list of Endorsers. Only about 15% are clearly identified as District 2 residents. The overwhelming majority of the balance are identified as "Oakland Residents." I checked twelve of those names picked at random against the voter roles for District 2 and only two (about 15%) turned up.
This is vitally important to people like me in the Grand Lake, Bella Vista, San Antonio and Chinatown neighborhoods who have been most active in improving our communities and making them safer. If she is elected, whose concerns will she address--those of her District 2 constituents or those of her supporters from outside the District including the Green Party, anti-globalization and anti-war movements?
Despite Naina's efforts to discredit it, "Where was Aimee" is not a frivolous question. A case in point: when MacDonalds was on the verge of leasing the Kwik Way, eight different community groups formed a coalition to block them. Thirty-two hundred people signed our petitions over a ten day period. Over 600 residents attended a community meeting at Lakeshore Baptist Church in passionate opposition. Ms. Allison lives six blocks from the proposed site, but was not involved. I understand that her focus is on bigger and broader issues, but the job of a council member as I see it, is to make our agenda, her agenda--not vice versa. Our Grand Lake Neighborhood is blessed to the point we can fight to keep out a MacDonalds and lobby for a Trader Joe's in the vacant Albertsons. In the Bella Vista neighborhood, one big concern is dilapidated public housing; on International Blvd., it's childhood prostitution; in Chinatown, it's loss of the BART plaza where residents have long practiced Tai Chi. What makes Pat Kernighan such a marvelous public servant is that she respects these differences and is currently addressing all of these issues. More importantly, as everyone active in these diverse neighborhoods knows, she has an impressive track record for getting things done.
Ms. Allison, by comparison, has shown by word and by deed (as a candidate and a Grand Lake neighbor) no inclination to offer us her support. Naina argues that we fear that Aimee can win this time. This is the one point on which we do agree. Fear is a powerful motivator and it does help explain why twenty-five individuals were motivated to distribute 3,500 "Where's Aimee" flyers door-to-door over a five day period. Our fear is that we could lose a thoughtful representative who has integrity, who listens and who achieves real results in favor of a three-year resident of the district who is basically a blank slate for whom rhetoric substitutes for experience and community involvement.
Finally, I have to respond to Naina's assertion that this "site is turning into a front for the Kernighan campaign". In actuality, the pro-Kernighan slant is a natural byproduct of the Grand Lake Guardian's make-up. It was intended as a voice for the community activists involved in improving the quality of life in the neighborhoods surrounding Lake Merritt. The people who are contributors are members of Crime Prevention Councils, block groups and neighborhood associations. They are the people who are restoring the Cleveland Cascade and beautifying our neighborhoods. Surprisingly enough, many of us also supported the Oak to Ninth referendum. Nevertheless, almost without exception, these are the people who are supporting Pat Kernighan and asking most vociferously, "Where was Aimee?"
The blog is a forum to discuss substantive issues facing our city, with a specific focus on the policy and actions of Mayor-Elect Dellums. However, since he has made himself absent for the summer and early fall, much of the discussion has centered around Aimee Allison's Council bid, relevant because she has promised repeatedly to vote in lockstep with the Mayor-Elect.
Nancy -
Huh? I have no idea what you're talking about. Our blogs are the same as they've always been, so it seems you are the one making things up.
Furthermore, I guess you must be new to the internet, since you are apparently unfamiliar with the near-universal practice of adopting handles. I am not anonymous - I am V Smoothe. That's standard practice here in the blogosphere.
I'm curious as to why you think we're in the practice of posting "unsubstantiated facts." We are, in fact, extremely careful with our fact checking and always post links for further reference to our readers. And we have certainly never claimed to be part of the "inner political circle."
Leonard -
Please enlighten us - what is Allison's brilliant explanation for the crime spike? Mid-sized cities all over the country are waiting with baited breath for the answer!
Nancy -
I'd love to help clarify the issue, but I still honestly don't understand what you're talking about. What is this page that are you alleging was changed?
Thank you for raising a red flag with regard to anonymous postings. Thank you also for acknowledging that you are not a District 2 resident. This is becoming a particularly sensitive subject since so many outside influences are in play in this election.
Regarding Measure DD, Danny Wan initiated the process, but Pat Kernighan co-authored the bond measure and more importantly, she carried the process through to its conclusion. You complain about how little has been done thus far, but ignore two important considerations. Number one, an essential and very time-consuming component of the planning process was public input. You attended even more of those meetings than I did. Number 2, it's more than a bit disingenuous for you to complain about delays when you are one of the principals in the lawsuit against the City that has brought at least some of the construction to a halt. Moreover, you belittle what is being undertaken and ignore the true extent of the improvements that are to be included. I personally am most excited by the expansion of the park perimeter to create bicycle lanes and improved pedestrian/jogging trails and particularly so, at the south end of the lake where the mini-freeway that exists now will be eliminated and direct links established to the Estuary.
Regarding the Where's Aimee flyers , you cherry-picked one bullet-point--dismissing neighborhood beautification as "volunteerism" and conveniently ignored the other seven which include crime prevention efforts and improving retail. The fifteen community activists who drafted and distributed this flyer are simply astounded that Aimee could be so totally uninvolved in her own neighborhood and then come to us at the last minute asking for our votes--particularly, since Pat has always been there helping us to get things done.
James -
I think that a comment Ken made on NovoMetro should clear up your confusion regarding Allison's involvement in the Harvest Festival. Here is the post in entirety:
I have to confess that I did, in fact, get played big time by Ms. Allison in conjunction with the aforementioned Harvest Festival. Just over a year ago, (not knowing that she was again running for Council and would use it to fill a gaping hole in her resume, I outlined for her my concept for this event as an expansion of the Pumpkin Patch fundraiser for Lakeview School I’d organized the year before. I then bemoaned the fact that with all my other volunteer commitments (including Project Homeless Connect, Splash Pad maintenance and the Pumpkin Patch), I didn’t have the time to organize it. Ironically, I was weeding a traffic island as we talked.
Ms. Allison had absolutely no such commitments and leapt at the opportunity to chair this effort. The event was actually coordinated by a four-person committee of which I was a part. When push came to shove, Ms. Allison did perhaps a third of the actual organizing and outreach and none of the real grunt work–but takes all of the credit. Under the best of circumstances, listing this one-day event as the illustration of her community involvement should be an embarrassment. In the context of all the other opportunities she’s had to become involved, but didn’t, it is appalling. I’m one of fifteen Grand Lake community leaders who, over the past week, have taken it upon ourselves to point out this disparity with a Where’s Aimee flyer that we are distributing door-to-door.
I didn't respond immediately to your personal email because I needed time to marshall my thoughts. I value your friendship and when we initially agreed to disagree on the District 2 council race, I thought that was the best solution. Since you've now posted your questions on this forum, I'm responding publicly as well.
The circumstances surrounding the Fall Festival were clearly outlined in the message I posted to the NovoMetro website which is quoted above. You ask why I praised Ms. Allison in the late 2005 Splash Pad Newsletter and now criticize her for the same activity. I could have chosen to ignore her efforts or could have said that she coordinated the event but only did so for political advantage. Instead, when I sent the Newsletter last year, I did the gracious thing. I thanked Ms. Allison and everyone else involved with one exception--me! Mr. Vincent, I'm hoping you specifically take note of this. I've gotten more recognition in my lifetime that I would ever have expected. I don't crave more.)
Fast-forward nearly a year and you now hear me voicing the resentment I felt at the time, but chose not to share publicly. Why am I resentful? Ms. Allison's latest incarnation is as a "community activist". For me a community activist is someone who works on projects that benefit their community. I'm a community activist. I can rattle off the names of a dozen more who are quietly and without reward doing good work. Ms. Allison is not a community activist. She is a candidate for public office who used the festival as an opportunity to get some recognition and gain some votes . Joseph Vincent correctly points out that most people volunteer to make the world a better place. I only wish that were the case in this instance.
My resentment wouldn't be quite so acute if this were not Ms. Allison's sole foray into community service in the three years she's lived in District 2. There have certainly been plenty of other opportunities to get involved during this period. The "Where's Aimee" flyer recites chapter and verse and, as Jerome Peters points out, there really isn't a lot of room for argument. Either she got involved or didn't. If you need more examples, take another look at the very same Splash Pad Newsletter and take note of all the various issues that were being addressed during this period--some of consequence to the entire city--not just District 2. High on that list was the first of two meetings to discuss the expected $6 million shortfall in the parks maintenance budget. Ms. Allison didn't attend and I don't believe she voiced an opinion one way or the other about the proposed LLAD tax assessment. The only meeting she did attend was the community forum on Homelessness, but that was just weeks before the June 2005 Special Election and hardly counts--especially since she didn't participate in any of the subsequent task force meetings or the two Homeless Connect events that have been held thus far.
You asked me to explain why I think what we as a community have accomplished falls below her radar. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding. Aside from the Fall Festival, Ms. Allison hasn't been involved and has given little indication of wanting to do so. In addition, from what I've heard through the grapevine, her reaction to the charges in the "Where's Aimee" flyer is to denigrate the importance of the Grime Busters beautification projects and to dismiss the efforts of our Crime Prevention Council as irrelevant.
As important as I consider the above considerations to be, I'm actually far more concerned about the ethical lapses I described in the "Sign Wars" article that inspired this long string of commentary. In the twelve days since it was published, the same hi-jinks seem to be continuing with lawn signs disappearing and campaign literature being removed. Ms. Allison has privately disavowed the "push-pull" poll conducted on her behalf, but has not done so publicly. The same can be said for the equally egregious independent campaign mailer that blamed Pat Kernighan for a 300% increase in the murder rate.
Six months ago, I was still on good terms with Ms. Allison and even opened my home to her and a Japanese film crew that was shooting a video about conscientious objectors. As the campaign has progressed, I have, however, become increasingly disillusioned with her apparent willingness to do whatever it takes to get elected. The more I've seen, the more I've felt a need to speak out in opposition and the less inclined I am to speak with her or her with me.
In answer to your appeal for me to continue to pursue my volunteer efforts, I'm very appreciative of your kind words, but I've been doing this for too many years. If Ms. Allison wins, my heart just won't be in it anymore.
Give me a break! If you want to disagree with me, so be it, but please don't question my honesty. I stand 100% by the accuracy and credibility of the assertion regarding Ms. Allison's reply to the "Where's Aimee" piece and, as any student of journalism will point out, it's perfectly acceptable to cite unnamed sources. Besides, what exactly has Ms. Allison done (or said) that would indicate that she doesn't consider the Grime Busters unimportant and her own neighborhood NCPC irrelevant. In the three years she has lived here, she has never participated in a single Grime Buster's activity--nor has she ever had occasion to acknowledge the contributions of the hundreds of volunteers who have worked tirelessly to make our neighborhood cleaner and safer. In addition, she has only attended one NCPC meeting and that was a very brief cameo appearance last month where she was introduced as a council candidate. I should also add that my own comments focus on the Grand Lake neighborhood because I can speak from personal experience. If Ms. Allison has been involved in any of the NCPC's or any of the many other volunteer-driven projects in other District 2 neighborhoods, the Grand Lake Guardian is the perfect forum in which to present such information. The many endorsements Pat Kernighan has received from such groups in the Brooklyn and San Antonio neighborhoods would seem to indicate otherwise.
I'd already been accused of dishonesty, elitism, racism, juvenile behavior and now you're saying that I only claim to be an active leader in the community. My record over the past seven years speaks for itself. Having said that, it would be helpful if this discussion returned to the candidates and to the substance of the questions that I raised in the "Sign Wars" article and to the allegations made in the "Where's Aimee" flyer.
I appreciate that, to some extent, you've done just that. None of the approximately twenty people who cosigned and/or contributed to the content of the "Where's Aimee" flyer remembered her being at the MacDonalds community meeting. Since the church was packed with some 600 very vocal residents, that would be understandable--particularly since she had not yet declared her candidacy and not been involved in any of the various community groups that we represented. Nonetheless, this particular allegation is apparently in error and, on behalf of all the people involved in putting the flyer together, I apologize.
A qualified apology is also due for including Measure DD meetings on the list of issues that Ms. Allison ignored. Jim Ratliff notes that Ms. Allison did attend the two meetings earlier this year at the Lakeview Library, but they were both specifically related to the Cleveland Cascade--a late addition to the Measure DD project list. No one recalled her attending any of the earlier meetings at the Sailboat House or the Kaiser Convention Center and from what I'm told, she has not contributed to the deliberations of the Measure DD Advisory Group.
Having apologized for the above two inaccuracies, I'd appreciate the same consideration from you. I popped the video of the Splash Pad Park opening ceremonies into my computer and captured this photo. Not only was Pat there, she spoke briefly, but quite eloquently after Danny Wan acknowledged the crucial role she played in facilitating completion of the project.
Regarding Pat's role in the MacDonalds dispute, she played a minor role on this as it quickly became a volatile community issue and all our discussions were directly with Danny. As for the Hahn family, it is true that one son, Charles, volunteers for Pat's campaign on a regular basis. I would trace his commitment to a long series of meetings last year at which Pat brought the proposed developer, community stake holders and the Hahns to the same table to talk about a proposed mixed-use development on the Kwik Way site. Charles was extremely impressed (as were all the participants) with Pat's abilities as an arbiter. Also, as I've said many times previously, this model should be pursued throughout the City of Oakland since it required the developer to establish a community consensus well before plans were submitted to the City.
Your argument about Pat's involvement in community concerns being part of her job description is valid. Nonetheless, I would note that for her, it's always been more than a job. She has put in incredible hours as a staff member and now as our District 2 Councilmember and she is always focused on surmounting obstacles and getting things done. The Trader Joe's is one example. If you want more examples, read Dawn Hawk's letter about what Pat has done in the Brooklyn neighborhood.
As for Pat not knocking on your door previous to the campaign, I'd point out that there are more than 20,000 registered voters in District 2. For the past year and a half, she has been working full-time on council business. Between council and subcommittee meetings--not to mention all her various commitments to her constituents, she has been hard-pressed to find the time to do as much outreach as she'd like, but she does get out and knock on doors as often as possible.
As for an alleged lack of responsiveness from Pat or her staff, that certainly doesn't correspond with my own experience or that of other constituents with whom I've spoken. I'd also note that all of her current staff has been brought on board since her election in June 2005 and each is very professional and extremely competent. Her most recent hire, Joanne Karchmer, comes to Pat's office from Boalt Hall where, as Director of Career Development, she supervised seven employees.
With regard to Oak to Ninth, I did support the Referendum and believe it or not, I supported Ron Dellums, as well. Nevertheless, when you criticize Oak to Ninth, please do remember that Pat was instrumental in negotiating jobs, job training and 450 units of low cost housing--a big part of her rationale for approving the project. The good folks in the San-Antonio based Community Benefits Coalition haven't forgotten.
Finally, about the trees. Nobody is happy about having to remove them, but the critics such as yourself ignore facts. When the project is completed, there will a very large gain in net numbers. In addition, I went on the guided tour of the trees slated for removal along Lakeshore. Most were on the chopping block because they are already half dead, nearing the end of their life expectancy or leaning and ready to fall. The few that were then on the cusp, have been removed from the list due to the intercession of Pat Kernighan and Nancy Nadel. I don't think people grasp the extent to which Measure DD improvements are going to transform the Lake and make it and its immediate surroundings far more attractive and user-friendly. Instead of criticizing Pat on the basis of the regrettable loss of 200+ trees, she should be applauded for the role she's played in helping to write the bond measure, assure community input and shepherd the project through the bureaucratic maze.