29 September Candidates Forum
for Royal Oak City Commissioner
The 29 September Candidates Forum for hopeful city commissioners was a bit of a letdown for campaign-watchers. Perhaps 75 people -- most of them families, friends, and campaign workers -- attended. (The audience thinned to about 25 for the School Board Trustee forum.) The standard League of Women Voters format doesn't lend itself to meaningful exchanges between candidates. The format serves mostly to let those voters who have never seen some of the candidates hear them speak as they answer questions and make opening and closing remarks.

This night, the information and opinions exchanged by attendees were as meaningful and interesting as what the candidates had to say.

from The Audience

* The notables I noticed were Jim Ellison (running unopposed for mayor), Carlo Ginotti (not seeking re-election), City Manager Don Johnson, and Commissioner Gary Lelito (see next paragraph).

* Lelito distributed two pieces of hard-hitting literature urging a no-vote on the liquor license moratorium. The headline on one piece: "Does Mr. B's Bar deserve a bailout at Your Expense?" Earlier, Gary had supplied VersagiVoice with his position paper on the matter. [See]

* Before the forum began, three people asked me to point out Dave Poulton, Andrew Androff, or both.

* In a discussion about why the other two women who had pulled petitions didn't run, we learned that one had a death in the family and the second just seemed to fade out after a good start getting signatures. I had speculated that former commissioner Pat Capello's late entry into the race scared them off.

* A couple of conversations concluded separately that Jim Rasor's attempt to challenge the legitimacy of the liquor license moratorium petition drive has gone nowhere. "It hurt him and makes him look petty," was one conclusion.

* "It hurt him" was also said of Poulton and Androff:  Poulton's slowness to sign a formal complaint after he had charged that at least one sitting sitting commissioner had attempted to influence his vote in the ZBA Bordine Affair. . . . . Androff's use of Semchena's and Andrzejak's "very words, like 'mega-bar' and 'bouncer' tells you how he's going vote."

* And I again encountered the residual anger from that ZBA/Bordine Affair which takes the form of irritation, from some, that both Rasor and now-former commissioner Stephen Miller were charged or suspected of any misbehavior in the first place. "Notice," I'm  repeatedly told, "that both Poulton and Rasor have endorsements from well-known members of both parties."

* Two candidates were mildly upset at my having labeled how I see their political philosophy. About that, conversations with others revealed the usual two mindsets: (1) "Hey, making decisions about fence boundaries isn't Democratic or Republican. (2) "No matter what the agenda item, you can't leave your values outside when you enter commission chambers, especially if there's money involved."

* Which led to: "The puzzling thing about the last couple of commissions is that the Republicans take a lot of anti-business, anti-freedom stands, and the Democrats ("center-left, as you say in VersagiVoice") seem to favor free enterprise."

from The Candidates

Conclusion:
Personality aside, Royal Oakers can't go far wrong electing any of the four candidates for commissioner.
Speaking style aside, they seem equally competent.
Liquor aside, they don't disagree about much.

§ What do we do about foreclosed homes?
Create partnerships with banks. . . .  Use neighborhood volunteers to cut lawns and keep up appearances. . . . Hold an Open House which includes neighborhoods, schools, banks, government. . . . Talk up schools and parks to attract home buyers.

§ Do you support an ethics ordinance?
Yes. . . . Establish and implement clear policies and practices. . . . Have rules to follow and measure performance.

§ Are you for a Pit Bull Ordinance?
No. . . . Breed Specific is not the way to go. . . . CITCOM's decision to strengthen the current Vicious Dog ordinance is the right way to go.

§ Which city services would you cut to maintain a balanced budget? Where do you stand on taxes?
No one was willing to name departments which should be downsized or outsourced. No one was meaningfully specific re taxes. There was consensus the employee benefits must be addressed, reduced. . . .  Explore the benefits problem with city employees. . . . Increase employment by attracting business to Royal Oak.

§ Financial support for your campaign?
No one has a Political Action Committee. . . . Kickoff parties, Fundraisers, families, neighbors. .. . . No contributions from developers or businesses. . . . Accepts donations from individuals.

§ Your opinion about the proposed liquor license moratorium?
Androff was the only candidate who favors the moratorium. Capello made the strongest case against the moratorium. She cited the 30-plus criteria in the alcohol ordinance which give CITCOM total power to grant or deny a license transfer on a case-by-case basis. . . . Calling for a moratorium is essentially a vote of no-confidence in elected officials.

Repeating:
Personality aside, Royal Oakers can't go far wrong electing any of the four candidates for commissioner.
Speaking style aside, they seem equally competent.
Liquor aside, they don't disagree about much.

WROK will run this forum on Comcast and WOW at 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, and at 10 a.. Monday, until the election. The city commissioner forum will be followed by the School District Trustee forum.

School Board Trustee Election
I do not follow Royal Oak School District activities enough to offer helpful observations about Board issues or candidates. In addition, I live in one of those 80 or so homes west of Woodward, between Lincoln and the Zoo, which many think of as part of Huntington Woods. And I pay school taxes to the Berkley District -- where I don't vote because I don't follow that Board either.

Nevertheless, I did sit through the Candidate Forum for Royal Oak School Board Trustee, and I have some impressions to pass along.

There are three candidates running for two 4-year openings: Carrie Beerer, Jeff A. Brinker, and Arthur Makarewicz. I have met only Makarewicz, who ran for city commissioner in 2007. Carrie has 5 children in Royal Oak Schools; Jeff has 2.

The questions asked of the candidates dealt with such matters as budget, special education, privacy concerns re security cameras, MEAP scores, and the advancement, or not, of Arts and Music. More general questions were, "Will your day job interfere with your ability to serve on the school board (which is a volunteer job)?" and "Should a school superintendent be paid more than a governor?"

The three candidates waffled on that last one, to which the correct answer is, "That is a stupid question."

With no detailed knowledge about school issues and only superficial familiarity with one of the three candidates, I would vote -- if I could -- based on how I reacted to this single exposure to them.

Beerer is my first choice. She is articulate, and integrates every answer into an obvious conceptual framework  formed from years of involvement in the education community. I know that school board members generally discount thinking of their service as a political stepping stone, but I see a future city commissioner in Carrie.

Neither Brinker nor Makarewicz has the inside knowledge that Beerer has, but Art seemed to have studied a bit more than Jeff, so he's my second choice. For whatever reason, Brinker's heart didn't seem to be into the event, and his soft speaking voice made him seem withdrawn.

Remember: WROK will run this forum on Comcast and WOW at 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, and at 10 a.. Monday, until the election. The School District Trustee forum will follow that for city commissioner.

The forums were cosponsored by the League of Women Voters Oakland Area and the Chamber of Commerce and conducted at Royal Oak High School