Big turnout for Alamo Candidates' Faire

15 Town Council candidates meet residents, take questions

The Alamo Women's Club was jam packed Thursday night more than 200 Alamo residents turned out to meet with the 15 people who have thrown their hats into the ring to be on the newly formed Alamo Town Council.

Newly formed, that is, if the town should approve incorporation on March 3.

Many of the candidates on hand were doing double duty, attending the event to talk about their own campaigns, but also to continue stumping for incorporation. Tables lined the outside of room, one per candidate; when people entered, they were given a program with a list of candidates and their campaign statements.

The event was sponsored by the League of Women Voters, Alamo Chamber of Commerce and Alamo Community Foundation. Diablo Valley chapter of the League of Women voters Vice President Joyce Kingery said she was very excited by the large number of residents who came out Thursday night.

"I think it's a wonderful turnout," she enthused, "and everyone seems to be taking advantage of this event to talk to all the candidates." She added, "I like to see so many people engaged."

Kingery said the League does not endorse candidates and it has chosen not to take a stand on the issue of incorporation, citing incomplete information. "The time frame was not right. Our position on incorporation needed to be updated."

The group did a study on the issue 15 years ago, but Kingery said that report is outdated.

Residents who were both pro and con on the incorporation issue attended the candidate's fair and spent time discussing the issues with the council hopefuls. Kingery said that while they had definite rules as to decorum at the event, the one hard and fast rule being maintained was that the candidates were not allowed to debate the issue of incorporation among themselves.

"We wanted them to be talking to the residents, answering their questions, not getting into a debate on incorporation," she explained.

The candidates said they were hearing a lot of the same questions from residents. Karen McPherson said, "A lot asked me why I am running, why do I think Alamo should incorporate."

Karl Niyati echoed those comments, adding, "Many asked me about my vision. What I see happening for Alamo."

Resident Allen Makely, a strong advocate for incorporation, said that while some opponents have pointed to the economic downturn as a reason to avoid incorporation, he said he feels more in favor of it now than before.

"Initially I was wanting us to incorporate so we could run our own town, but now with the county's financial crisis getting worse, I think we are better off on our own," he said.

A dissenting opinion came from Bob Oliver. The retired airline pilot said he views the possibility of incorporation with mixed emotions, but when he looks around the area he isn't seeing any shining examples of what incorporation could do for the people of Alamo.

"I'm not impressed with how Danville turned out after it incorporated," he stated.

Having worked on Danville incorporation over the years and having been involved in earlier attempts at incorporation in Alamo, Oliver said Danville's growth as a town has been a disappointment.

If incorporation does pass though, Oliver was quick to say what his No. 1 issue will be for the new town council. "Straighten out the traffic on Danville Boulevard. It's total chaos. Across from the Safeway, it's a deathtrap," he said.

One surprise in the evening was the loss of a candidate. Brad Stribling, one of the 16 to take out nominating petitions for a post on the council, apparently decided to withdraw his name from the race, bringing the field of challengers down to 15.

Those still in the running are Diane Barley, Bob Connelly, Dennis Johnson, Vicki Koc, Karen McPherson, Steve Mick, Vishwas More, John Morrow, Kevin Morrow, Randy Nahas, Karl Niyati, Joe Rubay, Grace Schmidt, Roger Smith and Brad Waite.

Voters on March 3 will cast their ballots first to decide whether Alamo will become a town, by voting Yes or No on Measure A, then to choose five of the 15 candidates to sit on the new council.

The three candidates with the most votes would serve four-year terms; the next two would serve two-year terms. The candidate with the most votes would serve as mayor.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Steve Mick
a resident of Alamo
on Jan 23, 2009 at 4:50 am

I would like to extend my personal thanks to everyone involved in putting this excellent and educational event together. The League of Women Voters, Alamo Chamber of Commerce and Alamo Community Foundation did a highly commendable job of bringing the Town Council candidates to the people of Alamo.

Attendees were knowledgeable and asked probing and incisive questions. It was enjoyable to talk to the folks and learn some of their concerns about the new Town of Alamo.

Good show everyone!

Steve Mick,
Town Council Candidate

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jan Howe
a resident of San Ramon
on Jan 23, 2009 at 11:23 am

As a member of the League of Women Voters-Diablo Valley, I commend the Alamo Chamber of Commerce and the Alamo community Foundation for arranging a great chance for Alamo voters to meet the candidates running for a portential city council should the cityhood measure pass March 3rd. Mail ballots have been sent to voters and that the deadline for registering to vote (take note 18-year-olds) is February 17, 2009 (Correction made by editor. Also to be noted: Voters who register 29 days before the election - which is Monday, Feb. 2 - will receive a sample ballot in the mail for the Special Election. Those voters that register by the official registration deadline of Tuesday, Feb. 17, will only receive a polling place notice.) Registration in person occurs between 8 & 5 Mon. to Fri. in the Clerk-Recorder Office @ 555 Escobar St., Martinez, or registration forms may be mailed to the office before midnight 2/2/09.

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Concerned Alamo Person
a resident of Alamo
on Jan 23, 2009 at 3:01 pm

All you down to earth folks think about it real hard...we don not need Alamo to incorporate and fill the ego's of a few.

For you and your family's interest...VOTE NO on March 3rd.

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bob Connelly
a resident of Alamo
on Jan 25, 2009 at 11:36 am

I think the Candidates night was a big success for the citizens who took time to come and discuss concerns, or otherwise get to know the Candidates. If there was any issue, it was the noise from the enthusiastic group that made it difficult to hear.

My thanks to all of the Organizers and their sponsers.

Bob Connelly
Candidate for Alamo Town Council

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jerry Kaplan
a resident of Alamo
on Jan 30, 2009 at 8:56 am

Would someone please explain why nearly every comment or letter pro incorporation is signed by a "real" person, but nearly every anti-incorporation letter is signed "concerned person? Could it be that there is only a limited number of negative persons trying to influence others?

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Barbara
a resident of Alamo
on Jan 30, 2009 at 10:20 pm

Many people have decided the small rural nature of our area, with controlled growth and low crime, is where they want to be and raise their families.

Our school district is primarily funded through property taxes. An incorporated Alamo could increase property taxes and levy numerous sales taxes. People have a certain tolerance for paying higher and higher taxes. Unlike our school district, which needs to go to the voters for all secondary taxes, a town would have the ability to levy a tax on new goods or services by a town council vote alone.

These additional taxes could lead to "taxpayer burnout." That means sometime in the future when our schools are in dire need of more money, we could be turned down by voters who feel their taxes are already too high. That would be a shame.

There are many in Alamo that have worked hard to create a school system we are proud of. I have children in school here in Alamo. Please don't let an incorporated Alamo suck it dry of what it needs.

Incorporation will be a stepping-stone to unbridled growth, environmental degradation, and create a crime and population explosion, causing a burden on a population that currently has very few citizens to govern it all. Community improvements will take longer with incorporation.

Citizens will still pay ALL county taxes; they just won't get all the services. They will pay TWICE for roads, law enforcement, local etc., all because a few residents want control.

Future 'taxes' require voter approval, but 'fees' do not. To address miscalculations, that $10 business fee can become $50 or $250 without an election. The same is true for the franchise charge to be added to your utility bills. Instead of ?%, it can become 20% almost overnight. New fees for every government regulation and involuntary 'service' imaginable would be on tap. Don't believe me? Look at other incorporated cities where city council members label increases as fees to evade voter approval.

I counted 9 EMPTY store-fronts in Alamo Plaza and Yardbirds has closed so we cannot count on that tax revenue in the future. With the dour economic outlook how many other business' will close in the next few months.

I am part of the group opposing the incorporation of Alamo. We have asked that the issues surrounding this upcoming vote be aired in public. To that end, we challenged Vicki Koc, the President of AIM who is pushing for incorporation to a debate. Instead, the pro-incorporation group has ignored us and held one-sided "faires and open houses" telling only their side of things.

The mayor of a neighboring community told me that "you could go to bed tonight and tomorrow morning you could have a franchise fee on anything the town heads decided. You have nothing to say about it."

It's not fair that a handful of wantabe politicians want to dictate the irreversable fate of our Alamo. If they truely cared and felt like they were doing the right thing, more time and care would have been taken and more open public forums would have been held.

AIM is not interested in Alamo's majority of residents. The selfish and immediate goal is to continue the blind, self-designated leadership in a community they never lead or had majority support to achieve such leadership.

Methinks the person(s) espousing incorporation are pursuing the process of incorporation with a minimum of explanation and communication and a maximum of political campaigning and "pit bull" antics.

I like Alamo just the way it is. I don't feel it needs to grow a city or a city hall with employees that are going to require my taxes and tell me what to do with my property. I can't see how any services that a city might provide are going to give us more than we have now.

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Alamo Ron
a resident of Alamo
on Jan 31, 2009 at 7:38 pm

I love these flow-of-consciousness diatribes. The internal inconsistencies and contradictions do not reduce, but instead greatly enhance the genuine entertainment value.

More of the same, please. Or, in the words of our former commander-in-chief: "Bring it!"

Alamo Ron

 +   Like this comment
Posted by A resident of Alamo
a resident of Alamo
on Feb 1, 2009 at 10:44 pm

Lafco, Winzler and Kelley's 06-07 finacail viabilty study no longer holds water. We should not inncorperate on speculation, We need real numbers in this econmy and they are not available. In a down maket everyone in C.C. county can request a reavauation of thier property value including Alamo. Wich will brings down property tax revenue. ARM loans are still readjusting through 2010 causing termoyl for homeowners and could bring MORE forclosers. 39% of the studies budget is based on property tax revenue. We can not guess these variables. Not to mention the sales tax revenue so called ace in the whole, Home Depot, is gone in April or sooner also there is talk about Longs Drugs closing and nine or more empy spaces in the Alamo plasa. Give US a break. NO ON A. These items metioned are only the tip of the iceburg. Timing is everything. We can incorperate any time we choose, why would we do it now???????? There are No do overs. NO ON A.

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Tana Gummere, CPA
a resident of Alamo
on Feb 10, 2009 at 8:54 pm

I am happy to post my real name and the fact that my family has lived in Alamo since 1972 and that I am a CPA and that I strongly OPPOSE MEASEURE A. Let's take some time to look at current numbers before we go down a path that is irreversible.

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Public Ivy Schools for 2015--Going By the ‘Virginia Rule’
By Elizabeth LaScala | 7 comments | 1,390 views

Me and Ashley, sittin’ in a tweet …
By Tom Cushing | 6 comments | 1,291 views

Exchange Club Meeting on First Amendment
By Roz Rogoff | 0 comments | 513 views

Another bad idea from the air board
By Tim Hunt | 2 comments | 391 views