Several candidates have raised big bucks in their races (much of it from the usual political suspects); also, a recap of the Campbell Theater candidates forum; and a shameful Facebook post
Craig, you got down to all of the nitty gritty in this post! I was absolutely amazed as to how much money has been raised by mayoral candidates. I mean, it’s really obscene. The bigger the signs, the better? I think not. I hope Martinez come out to vote and go with their gut. Just because a candidate hasn’t raised thousands of dollars does not mean we aren’t worthy of their representation.
Another great writeup Craig! Anyone else wanting to do their own research and write their own assessments of the local political races is welcome to do so! On a side note, Martinez has an exciting and hardworking task force dedicated to addressing the concerns of the Black Lives Matter movement. They have had two listening sessions in the past two weeks attended by around 20 people each time. Both Lara DeLaney and Brianne Zorn have been in attendance, no other city candidates however. Next Saturday there is another one at Taqueria y Carniceria, 3840 Pacheco Blvd neat to Las Juntas Elementary. All are invited and encouraged to attend. Please see link, https://www.cityofmartinez.org/government/commissions-and-committees/ardpie-task-force
Thank you. Point duly noted. Anytime I include opinion in my posts, it comes from a place of humility. My opinions are no more valid than anyone else’s (at least ones that are informed by facts) and people are always welcome to disagree. My goal is to offer food for thought, not to browbeat people into agreeing with me.
To be fair, the comment about Trambley not crediting the current city council for its progress on the homeless topic. He’s not a part of the city council “pack.” Him offering no praise in his timed statement is no indication to me that he possesses none. Noralea Gipner posted a long story in R&R about how he helped her with Measure C tax measures to help save City Hall when she hadn’t a clue on how to do it. That’s an act of a team player. City council can pat their own backs. This is still a competition.
Actually, I wasn't just referring to the homelessness issue; he didn't seem inclined to give the current council members credit for anything at all. I believe he stated at one point that basically any good stuff that has happened in the city in recent years happened in spite of them. I'm no fan of the current leadership, and don't give them credit for much, but that level of finger-pointing just struck me as over the top and political gamesmanship.
Appreciate your thoughts, Del, and support of the newsletter. I think we just have very different takes on this particular candidate.
And if he's going to take in over $10k in campaign funds from the folks at Velvet Cannabis, he has an obligation at some point to address his role in the controversial decision to locate them where the city did. No other candidate that I can find is taking any money at all from cannabis interests; yet Trambley won't even acknowledge on the endorsements page of his website the nature of Velvet's business.
Take into consideration that Trambley is representing his supporters and speaking to their frustrations and concerns. Current city council members can bounce praise and high five one another all day. There is still a lot of people in this community (like myself) who take an at-the-end-of-the-day approach — the status quo over the past few years under the same leadership leaves a ton to be desired.
As far as Velvet, it’s a legitimate business. Name a town, any nearby town, and there’s a dispensary. It’s listed on his campaign website with other endorsers that have no description of what kind of businesses they are.
His website endorsements say " Firehouse Brew and Grill," "States Coffee," "Zandonella's Catering," etc. (in all cases including the nature of the business). Velvet's official business name is "Velvet Cannabis."
And yes, while I agree it's a legitimate business and has the same rights to do business here as any other business, the fact of the matter is that Trambley was among the city leadership that purposely chose to place it and Embarc closer to places frequented by youths (schools and gyms) than in the Main Street/downtown business district, where they belong. And he's based his campaign on his support for those very same businesses that used their political clout to prevent dispensaries from being located near them. Of course, voters can and should make their own decisions about which candidates best reflect their values and priorities, but after 20 years of having a mayor who's always put the interests of downtown business interests first, I'm personally not interested in another who will do exactly the same.
While I consider myself a proud "woke" progressive on many issues, I differ strongly with many liberals when it comes to the potential impact and influence of cannabis dispensaries on our youth population, who are already under so many negative influences in their lives. And many medical professionals agree with me, including the former head of Planned Parenthood, who wrote the following op-ed recently in the Washington Post. Politicians who place business interests ahead of youth interests need to do some real soul searching, imho.
This statement of yours: “Trambley was among the city leadership that purposely chose to place it and Embarc closer to places frequented by youths (schools and gyms) than in the Main Street/downtown business district, where they belong.”
They “purposely” chose to place it near youths. That’s a loaded statement that I’m not sure you even believe.
The fact that you are trying to make it sound more than it is… Vic’s and Market & Main are listed too. It’s not obvious as to what business they are by name. People can Google what they are or look up their official licensing names and compare it to their signage at their business addresses — and try to make something out of that. ?? I have no issue with dispensaries because I personally know people who source them for pain relief from cancer, chronic pain and MS. Not once have I ever seen children or underage people loitering or entering a dispensary. I highly recommend that you visit one if you never have.
Trambley has business endorsements and community leader endorsements on his page. Saying that he puts the community second to business interests because you don’t like dispensaries is your opinion.
Yes, it is my opinion, and people are welcome to disagree (and I know many do).
The fact of the matter is that the city zoned the dispensaries so that they could be placed closer to schools and youth centers than to Main Street businesses, and dismissed significant community and school district concerns about their potential impact on youths. That's not an opinion. Trambley has only taken $10k in campaign contributions from one business, and it just happens to be the one that he helped approve over significant community opposition over concerns for youth welfare. Transparency is important in politics, and in my opinion, he's not being transparent, and taking that kind of money from an entity that directly benefited from his vote on a controversial matter is a BIG red flag for me as a voter. But everyone is free to make up their own mind, and I'm sure many will agree more with you than me. Generally speaking, the more special interest money a candidate raises in their campaign, the less likely I am to vote for them because I think they're already compromised in terms of whose interests come first. Voters deserve to know all the facts, and that's what I'm trying to do here.
You’re coming down quite hard on Trambley for not being transparent, and Velvet was your trigger. Why don’t you ASK him directly about all of these concerns and questions that you have. Message him.
Because if you’re going to lay it on thick with him about transparency, all of those same worries can be said about our current city council.
The adage always is, follow the money. Who's receiving their funds from organizations paying for influence and who is getting it from concerned Martinez citizens?
I can remember when opinion writers like Hamilton Fish and Guy Cooper would call into question objective governance when campaign contributions greater than $500 were received. How many rumors were spread about Rob being in the back pocket of developers for receiving much smaller sums? It will be interesting to see whether or not Martinez values true independence or it was just Rob's campaign contributions that were always suspect. https://martineztribune.com/2016/03/25/what-is-the-price-of-progress/?fbclid=IwAR0dMD-ILe_M1rernc65ofybXLCnrho85ZB9vsZmo20cngCLN7NvlsGh2bg
You mean Schroder never took in over $10k from a single entity that stood to benefit directly from his election (or has already benefited) the way Trambley has from the folks at Velvet?
Not that I can recall. What I remember of DeNova and Dave Sanson was they were very careful about staying under campaign contribution thresholds specifically to avoid speculations. Cumulatively, over 20 years, I'm sure the total amount raised far and above surpassed 10k. That 2016 letter to the editor mentions a Lisa P White article. The campaign contributions were far below 10k from a single entity https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2010/10/30/property-owners-labor-unions-shower-incumbents-with-campaign-cash-in-martinez/
Craig, do not use a news forum to punish First Amendment. "X Lives Matter" could also be seen as a realization that Black Lives DO matter; hence, iterations evolve from the concept. BTW, the National Trust for Historic Presentation about 12 years ago ran a contest called "This Place Matters".
"laying the blame on current council members for not solving the homelessness problem in Martinez is akin to blaming Joe Biden for not solving the inflation problem; in both cases, the solutions to these complex problems lie far outside the scope of powers for mayors or the president of the United States." Joe created this inflation with all his giveaways and halting as much drilling as he can but then buying oil from OPEC.
The council members could handle the homeless problem if they wanted to by shooing them all out of the amphitheater and sending them on their way. I'd support the city purchasing train tickets to send them back to their home cities/states. We can't make it comfy for them just hanging out at the park and selling dope and begging around town and stealing packages off porches.
Craig, you got down to all of the nitty gritty in this post! I was absolutely amazed as to how much money has been raised by mayoral candidates. I mean, it’s really obscene. The bigger the signs, the better? I think not. I hope Martinez come out to vote and go with their gut. Just because a candidate hasn’t raised thousands of dollars does not mean we aren’t worthy of their representation.
Another great writeup Craig! Anyone else wanting to do their own research and write their own assessments of the local political races is welcome to do so! On a side note, Martinez has an exciting and hardworking task force dedicated to addressing the concerns of the Black Lives Matter movement. They have had two listening sessions in the past two weeks attended by around 20 people each time. Both Lara DeLaney and Brianne Zorn have been in attendance, no other city candidates however. Next Saturday there is another one at Taqueria y Carniceria, 3840 Pacheco Blvd neat to Las Juntas Elementary. All are invited and encouraged to attend. Please see link, https://www.cityofmartinez.org/government/commissions-and-committees/ardpie-task-force
Good research on funding. Good description of forum, very good....maybe a section like "Final Note" would benefit from a preface such as IMHO.
Thank you. Point duly noted. Anytime I include opinion in my posts, it comes from a place of humility. My opinions are no more valid than anyone else’s (at least ones that are informed by facts) and people are always welcome to disagree. My goal is to offer food for thought, not to browbeat people into agreeing with me.
To be fair, the comment about Trambley not crediting the current city council for its progress on the homeless topic. He’s not a part of the city council “pack.” Him offering no praise in his timed statement is no indication to me that he possesses none. Noralea Gipner posted a long story in R&R about how he helped her with Measure C tax measures to help save City Hall when she hadn’t a clue on how to do it. That’s an act of a team player. City council can pat their own backs. This is still a competition.
Actually, I wasn't just referring to the homelessness issue; he didn't seem inclined to give the current council members credit for anything at all. I believe he stated at one point that basically any good stuff that has happened in the city in recent years happened in spite of them. I'm no fan of the current leadership, and don't give them credit for much, but that level of finger-pointing just struck me as over the top and political gamesmanship.
Appreciate your thoughts, Del, and support of the newsletter. I think we just have very different takes on this particular candidate.
And if he's going to take in over $10k in campaign funds from the folks at Velvet Cannabis, he has an obligation at some point to address his role in the controversial decision to locate them where the city did. No other candidate that I can find is taking any money at all from cannabis interests; yet Trambley won't even acknowledge on the endorsements page of his website the nature of Velvet's business.
Take into consideration that Trambley is representing his supporters and speaking to their frustrations and concerns. Current city council members can bounce praise and high five one another all day. There is still a lot of people in this community (like myself) who take an at-the-end-of-the-day approach — the status quo over the past few years under the same leadership leaves a ton to be desired.
As far as Velvet, it’s a legitimate business. Name a town, any nearby town, and there’s a dispensary. It’s listed on his campaign website with other endorsers that have no description of what kind of businesses they are.
His website endorsements say " Firehouse Brew and Grill," "States Coffee," "Zandonella's Catering," etc. (in all cases including the nature of the business). Velvet's official business name is "Velvet Cannabis."
And yes, while I agree it's a legitimate business and has the same rights to do business here as any other business, the fact of the matter is that Trambley was among the city leadership that purposely chose to place it and Embarc closer to places frequented by youths (schools and gyms) than in the Main Street/downtown business district, where they belong. And he's based his campaign on his support for those very same businesses that used their political clout to prevent dispensaries from being located near them. Of course, voters can and should make their own decisions about which candidates best reflect their values and priorities, but after 20 years of having a mayor who's always put the interests of downtown business interests first, I'm personally not interested in another who will do exactly the same.
While I consider myself a proud "woke" progressive on many issues, I differ strongly with many liberals when it comes to the potential impact and influence of cannabis dispensaries on our youth population, who are already under so many negative influences in their lives. And many medical professionals agree with me, including the former head of Planned Parenthood, who wrote the following op-ed recently in the Washington Post. Politicians who place business interests ahead of youth interests need to do some real soul searching, imho.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/10/10/marijuana-biden-pardon-harm-youth/
This statement of yours: “Trambley was among the city leadership that purposely chose to place it and Embarc closer to places frequented by youths (schools and gyms) than in the Main Street/downtown business district, where they belong.”
They “purposely” chose to place it near youths. That’s a loaded statement that I’m not sure you even believe.
The fact that you are trying to make it sound more than it is… Vic’s and Market & Main are listed too. It’s not obvious as to what business they are by name. People can Google what they are or look up their official licensing names and compare it to their signage at their business addresses — and try to make something out of that. ?? I have no issue with dispensaries because I personally know people who source them for pain relief from cancer, chronic pain and MS. Not once have I ever seen children or underage people loitering or entering a dispensary. I highly recommend that you visit one if you never have.
Trambley has business endorsements and community leader endorsements on his page. Saying that he puts the community second to business interests because you don’t like dispensaries is your opinion.
Yes, it is my opinion, and people are welcome to disagree (and I know many do).
The fact of the matter is that the city zoned the dispensaries so that they could be placed closer to schools and youth centers than to Main Street businesses, and dismissed significant community and school district concerns about their potential impact on youths. That's not an opinion. Trambley has only taken $10k in campaign contributions from one business, and it just happens to be the one that he helped approve over significant community opposition over concerns for youth welfare. Transparency is important in politics, and in my opinion, he's not being transparent, and taking that kind of money from an entity that directly benefited from his vote on a controversial matter is a BIG red flag for me as a voter. But everyone is free to make up their own mind, and I'm sure many will agree more with you than me. Generally speaking, the more special interest money a candidate raises in their campaign, the less likely I am to vote for them because I think they're already compromised in terms of whose interests come first. Voters deserve to know all the facts, and that's what I'm trying to do here.
You’re coming down quite hard on Trambley for not being transparent, and Velvet was your trigger. Why don’t you ASK him directly about all of these concerns and questions that you have. Message him.
Because if you’re going to lay it on thick with him about transparency, all of those same worries can be said about our current city council.
The adage always is, follow the money. Who's receiving their funds from organizations paying for influence and who is getting it from concerned Martinez citizens?
I can remember when opinion writers like Hamilton Fish and Guy Cooper would call into question objective governance when campaign contributions greater than $500 were received. How many rumors were spread about Rob being in the back pocket of developers for receiving much smaller sums? It will be interesting to see whether or not Martinez values true independence or it was just Rob's campaign contributions that were always suspect. https://martineztribune.com/2016/03/25/what-is-the-price-of-progress/?fbclid=IwAR0dMD-ILe_M1rernc65ofybXLCnrho85ZB9vsZmo20cngCLN7NvlsGh2bg
You mean Schroder never took in over $10k from a single entity that stood to benefit directly from his election (or has already benefited) the way Trambley has from the folks at Velvet?
Not that I can recall. What I remember of DeNova and Dave Sanson was they were very careful about staying under campaign contribution thresholds specifically to avoid speculations. Cumulatively, over 20 years, I'm sure the total amount raised far and above surpassed 10k. That 2016 letter to the editor mentions a Lisa P White article. The campaign contributions were far below 10k from a single entity https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2010/10/30/property-owners-labor-unions-shower-incumbents-with-campaign-cash-in-martinez/
Craig, do not use a news forum to punish First Amendment. "X Lives Matter" could also be seen as a realization that Black Lives DO matter; hence, iterations evolve from the concept. BTW, the National Trust for Historic Presentation about 12 years ago ran a contest called "This Place Matters".
"laying the blame on current council members for not solving the homelessness problem in Martinez is akin to blaming Joe Biden for not solving the inflation problem; in both cases, the solutions to these complex problems lie far outside the scope of powers for mayors or the president of the United States." Joe created this inflation with all his giveaways and halting as much drilling as he can but then buying oil from OPEC.
The council members could handle the homeless problem if they wanted to by shooing them all out of the amphitheater and sending them on their way. I'd support the city purchasing train tickets to send them back to their home cities/states. We can't make it comfy for them just hanging out at the park and selling dope and begging around town and stealing packages off porches.