|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
It’s official: Danville, San Ramon and Alamo have a new county supervisor to represent them.
After a public hearing Tusday, the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors adopted the redistricting plan it approved last month. Although Mary Piepho and Gayle Uilkema originally opposed the plan, Piepho changed her vote Tuesday, making Uilkema the sole dissenter in the 4-1 vote.
The vote moves San Ramon, Danville and Alamo into Gayle B. Uilkema’s district, District II, although Camino Tassajara, Blackhawk and Diablo will all remain in District III and will continue to be represented by Supervisor Mary N. Piepho.
Both Uilkema and Piepho originally backed Map 15, which would have kept city boundaries intact, although for slightly different reasons.
“It was less costly and it kept cities whole,” Uilkema said. “It would minimize expenses and staff relocation.”
Uilkema pointed out that with the redistricting plan, 50 percent of the residents of the county would be represented by a supervisor they never voted for.
“They don’t know who we are and we don’t know who they are,” she said.
Uilkema said she thinks the San Ramon Valley fits her district, however, pointing toward a number of projects the Valley is working on with the area known as Lamorinda, including transportation and the solid waste authority.
“I think there’s a great deal in common,” Uilkema said, adding, “The current map provides an excellent opportunity for a new approach.”
Her next step is to reach out to her new constituents.
“That is our primary goal,” she said. “There is an office in Danville. We have already contacted agents to see what facilities are available. I expect I will be attending as many functions as possible.”
Uilkema is still looking for office space in the Danville area. She’s philosophically opposed to spending any county money for office rent and noted to date, she hasn’t spent a nickle on office. She noted that she’s exploring the idea of having offices in a county-owned building.
Dear Glenn,
Let me be very personal in welcoming to Supervisor Gayle Uilkema and offer some thoughts.
Offices at Hap Magee cottage, previously SRV YMCA offices, are county-owned and convenient meeting rooms are available.
Reaching out to the Alamo region, Saranap to North Danville, is quite easy by joining the AIA in sponsoring a regional town hall meeting. The Alamo Women’s Club could do the same as reception for the corridor. Our corridor chambers can sponsor a gathering in Danville/San Ramon to engage our business districts and neighborhoods.
As has been a reality in the last six months, the 24/680 south corridor neighborhoods forums quickly built linkage and fully understand that they have communities, transportation corridor, economic development and political power in common.
Welcome Supervisor Uilkema, much is ready for your engagement.
Dear Editor,
The concept of final approval today has been challenged by a potential legal action to show cause for the lack of due process and public consideration of approval of 17D amended map and now the approval of the resulting ordinance. Released today was the documentation of multiple private meetings in violation of due process starting July 13 and proceeding to early this week. Key in the determination of such violations is the belief by supervisors and other officials that they have the right to meet privately to develop proposals to be approved in public meetings under constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and right to privacy.
Thus the use of the word “final” might be premature.
Dear Glenn,
I’ve alteady welcomed Gayle as my new Supervisor directly.
She already knows me.
A District office in downtown Walnut Creek on N California Blvd near YVR would seem a great location.
BTW Glenn, although they aren’t worth it, they’re still spelled nickels.
[removed], I have some infomation I’d testify to under oath if this challenge goes to Court that enabled me to know the outcome of the July 26 vote beforehand.
**news service alliance courtesy**
Dear Editor,
There are volumes of witnesses and documentation illustrating disregard for due process directly and by staff among Desaulnier, Bonilla, MICHOFF, Gioia and Glover. There is much discussion of whether such legal review should be done by CCC-DA, CCC Grand Jury, CCC County Counsel, by various state and federal investigations or by private counsels’ actions on behalf of communities and neighborhoods.
At present, supporters of machine politics that created the closed-door deal and resulting ordinance have engaged counsel to fully justify the constitutionality of politicians’ actions and the validity of the resulting ordinance. Such machine politics is daring anyone to politically challenge them with regulatory, legislative and legal actions.
In response, neighborhoods forums throughout Contra Costa County are considering leveraging evidence held by counsel in campaigns, including recalls, against the five politicians that privately engineered 17D Amended and its ordinance. At issue is, “how bad is the result?” District 2 is a politically powerful, wealthy and professionally capable population of very savvy professionals capable of gaining immediate compliance from the five politicians via their counsels with or without supervisor’s support. District 3 communities and neighborhoods know they can now end the political career of Mary and David Piepho in Contra Costa County. District 5 communities and neighborhoods are already selecting their candidates to defeat Federal Glover. District 4 neighborhoods are awakening voters to the opportunity to recall Karen Mitchoff. Both Mark DeSaulnier and Susan Bonilla can be defeated in their new districts by well-organized neighborhoods forums and e-viral campaigns based on the evidence to be released.
It is no secret that voters want a change in Contra Costa County and the seedy politics of redistricting is excellent evidence for such achievement.