The Daily Post is digging into the state senate candidates views with some panache — or is it just cheeky reporting? I like that they have sent out questionnaires to all five candidates and are writing articles based on the answers. Jerry Hill's seat is an important one and we need a strong rep for the Peninsula to sit in it. Here are two recent front page headlines

Stopping Scott Weiner's progressive fascist fantasy called SB50 is a top priority. Per the Post article, Lieber and Masur "were more accepting of SB50 than the other three, but would have some amendments". Masur has two "amendments" regarding some grace period for cities and getting rid of the sub-600,000 county population exemption. The latter should be obvious to anyone. Why exempt the counties with the cheapest land costs and hence the cheapest cost to build? Duh.
The other three, Annie Oliva of Millbrae, Michael Brownrigg of dear ole Burlingame and Josh Becker of Menlo Park apparently were less supportive of SB50 in their answers to the Post. They were also pretty clear in their answers to the last question in the survey, "Simply — do you identify as a YIMBY or a NIMBY?" Again, Leiber and Masur owned up to being YIMBY's while the other three walked down the middle line. So in my view this is a three horse race–the YIMBY's should run in SF since things are working so well up there.
A letter writer from Palo Alto took the Post to task for asking "such a reductive question that encourages lazy, black and white thinking about complex issues". I can sympathize a little with his concern, but we did get a clear "yes" on the YIMBY question, so we learned which candidates to give a clear "no" on. Thus the question had some value. Kudos to the Post for digging in. We have a couple of months to go before election day, so keep it up! Correction: Just VIsiting caught me confusing the timing of the Council race with the State Senate race. Primary in March, election next November (see his comments for good insight).


Leave a Reply