Candidate’s name: Tony Daysog
Candidate’s contact: email@example.com
1. Transportation: As a city council member or mayor, what specific early actions will you take to get people out of single occupancy vehicles?
First and foremost, it’s imperative that the City Council not guilt-trip or lookdown upon persons who drive on SOV-bases from their homes in Alameda to work outside of the city. At the end of the day, most people want to do what’s environmentally right, but they recognize that they must balance their desire for a better environment with the need to get to work in a timely fashion, so as to climb-up the career ladder and generate an income to pay for their respective rents or mortgages. As a past Council member, I initiated the city-wide transit strategy in 2015 that the City Council eventually adopted in early 2018. We must focus on implementing the key recommendations (“priority strategies”) from the strategy — that’s the first early actions I’d pursue. Of the “prioirity strategies”, I would focus first on what is already inplace, with an eye toward improving and maximizing the potential of existing services. For example, I would prioritize better coordinating the already-existing shuttles (free) operating in Alameda, such as the Target shuttle and the Marina Village Business Park shuttle, particularly with respect to improving their routes and scheduling, so that these shuttles complement each other to the benefit of the waiting customer. Second, I’d also coordinate car-pooling, providing incentives involving ARPD, AMP and regional agencies such as BAAQMD, to get people to double-up (plus) as much as possible. Then, I’d prioritize the bus rapid transit project slated for RAMP.
2. Sustainable Development: What does sustainable development mean to you as applied to Alameda? What are three specific measures that the City can undertake that you would endorse?
Sustainable development means first and foremost a City Hall that recognizes that we live in a world of physical and fiscal constraints, and the need to make informed decisions based on trade-offs in an effort to pursue any objectives in an era of profound and permanent climate change. Most people drive to work, so we need to meet people where they are at when it comes to alternative-forms of transit. Thus, City Hall’s emphasis should be on car-pooling, when it comes to seeking to reduce the number of SOV car trips. In addition, with respect to vehicles (SOV or car-pooling), the emphasis should be on renewable-based EVs as opposed to gas-powered vehicles. It’s not reasonable and not fiscally sound to create from the top-down an alternative mode of commuter-based transit culture (ie bicycle bridge across the estuary) that the bulk of people are not ready for in the immediate and medium-term, again because they have to get to work in an expeditious manner as possible to generate income and climb up their respective career ladders.
3. Resilience: What does resilience mean to you as applied to Alameda? What are three specific measures that the City can undertake that you would endorse?
In the line of work I am in, several projects involving funding from federal government require grantees to plan for both economic resilience and environmental resilience, as environmental catastrophes often have lasting economic consequences. What this means to me is that we need to continue to diversify the economic sectors in Alameda. In addition, we need to focus on industries that have a breadth of occupations at varying entry-points, that also have clear career pathways. I believe we’re giving-up too much valuable land along the northern waterfront for non-job generating uses. I would not have supported the allowance of housing on the Catellus wharf for example. Bay Ship expansion, yes; but not more housing. Simillarly along the northern waterfront: we’re ceding far too much land that ought to remain industrial. In terms of resilience with respect to immediate or long-term natural or man-made disaster planning, I think supporting like I did the modernizing of the Disaster Council was imperative, so that we have experts helping us out in times of imminent danger. In terms of long-term planning, frankly I think there’s too many well-meaning hobbyists who call themselves environmentalists but really aren’t, when, in fact, we have an abundance of trained professional working for outfits such as MTC or BAAQMD (or in the private sector) residing in town whose expertise and involvement we need to encourage.
4. Sea Level Rise: In order to protect Alameda from sea level rise, are you more in favor of further hardening or armoring the perimeter of Alameda or a soft living edges approach?
I am open to implementing the best science- and evidenced-based recommendation recognizing the fiscal trade-offs City Hall must make in doing so.
5. Energy: Would you support a city ordinance that requires new construction to include electric vehicle charging facilities or be EV ready, and comply with solar net Zero Building Standards? Would you support energy efficiency standards beyond those required by CalGreen? How would you address our existing buildings to reduce their carbon impact?
ANSWER: If elected, when it comes to electric vehicle charging stations my emphasis is not on getting new constructions sites to do so but rather doing so in Alameda generally. I am not in favor of over-building Alameda with more and more buildings because this is not sustainable given the inability of existing infrastructure to adequately handle additional loads of traffic. I am open to net Zero Building Standards but, in conjunction with environmental enthusiasts, will seek-out professional expert advice from AMP staff. In terms of reducing carbon footprint, I do not support new taxes or new fees to be added to our electric bill.
6. Zero Waste: How would you enforce the City of Alameda’s Mandatory Recycling Ordinance (Alameda Municipal Code Section 21-2.1(b)) ? Would you support siting a Center for Hard to Recycle Materials/Education Center in Alameda (similar to the El Cerrito Recycling Center)?
No I wouldn’t support a “Hard to Recycle Materials” center in Alameda.
7. SF Bay Ecosystem: Alameda may soon be designated as a HOPE spot by Mission Blue. What specific actions can Alameda take to protect and restore the life of our bay and waterways?
As a Councilmember, I’ve supported efforts to allow parts of Alameda Point to return to its natural state with respect to how water approaches that part of Alameda Point. If elected, I’ll still support that. In terms of residents living in South Shore or Bay Farm\Harbor bay, we must employ science- and evidenced-based approaches that preserve these residents’ quality of life in the face of sea-level rise recognizing fiscal trade-offs and fiscal limitations. In other words, unlike what Donald Trump is calling for, we can’t simply build a wall today.
8. Climate Action Plan: Given the recent California wildfires, extreme weather events and rising global temperatures how will you support the increasingly urgent funding and implementation of the measures identified in the Climate Action Plan update?
I wont support any new taxes or new fees — we live in a world of where City Hall and Alameda households are fiscally constrained. If you want to pursue the Climate Action Agenda, funding must come from cuts to existing City hall budget. There’s no magic wand where we can conjure up money at a snap of the wrist!