So I instantly heard back from our mayor, Matt Appelbaum, re the confusing and what some of us think to be a bone-headed ruling by City Council re The University Hill and liquor licenses. Anyways, I’m therefore going to vote for him–his response was thoughtful and (though silly) I appreciate his attitude of dialogue. My final vote is:
Sam Weaver (strong on eco, dialogue), Matt Appelbaum (strong, experienced) Andrew Shoemaker (good business, dialogue) Macon Cowles (assuming I hear back from him), Ed Byrne (strong on dialogue).
I’d like to re-endorse Macon, assuming we hear something from him about this shoot-the-Hill-in-the-foot vote. If I don’t, I’ll go with Micah, who’s strong on environment and walks her talk and deserves our support.
I also like John Gerstle, just haven’t got to know him well enough. And Jonathan Dings is sharp and caring about social issues.
For more photos from last night’s Walk the Talk Show / elephant journal debate, here.
Andrew Shoemaker. He’s our kind of “conservative”—you know, liberal: strong on the environment, on access, and he’ll be a great and young (he’s a father) force for dialogue between business and environmental concerns, which Boulder needs more of. In my view, it’s wrong of my environmental community to push for all five seats—Andrew is strong eco-wise, but will help bring Boulder together, instead of building strong resentment in those left out of the process.
Sam Weaver. My favorite candidate: I’ve thought about running a few times, and having seen Sam, I now know I never will. He’s who I would like to be as a public servant: grounded, knowledgeable, a go-getter and do-gooder. He, like Andrew, is hip, young, together, and will help lead Boulder into the next phase of our unfolding legacy.
Matt Appelbaum. Our longtime Council member and Mayor, Matt hardly bothers to run anymore. He’s not on Facebook. He doesn’t attend debates. And he wins anyways. There’s a reason for that.
Macon Cowles. Macon has lots of enemies (
who’d love to see him have a come-to-Jesus moment about his past sins, which include doing things with his house that others can’t do***Update: we’ve got some facts to share on this, looks pretty clean and clear—a case of blogs and Daily Camera smearing what actually happened), in any case he’s sharp, cheerful, knowledgeable, and a powerful force for, dare I say it, good in Boulder. I know I can sleep easy at night, knowing Macon’s got our back.
The fifth slot, of course, is the tough one. Micah Walker Parkin thinks everything I think, only she knows far more, and walks her talk. At elephant journal’s Walk the Talk Show with Waylon Lewis debate (videos tk, photos here) last night Ed Byrne impressed me greatly with his humor and judgment. Kevin…I love, and I appreciate that he is brave enough to bring a new voice to the table. Mary Young is a daily cyclist and my kind of candidate and human being, but I found some organization lacking there, and if there’s anything a council member needs, it’s the ability to deal with a lot of balls in the air. Same goes for Ed and Micah, to lesser degrees, on that count. Jonathan Dings would get my vote—he’s experienced, and strong on social issues and the arts—and I like John Gerstle, who’s new to me, but a strong candidate and I’d love to see him win and serve.
So…for my fifth vote, I’ll likely go for Micah if you’re an environmentalist, first, or John if you’re an environmentalist, or Jonathan if social issues and arts are your thing, or Ed if business community needs more voice. Does that help? 😉 Let this fifth spot be a chance for you to do your homework: after all We the People, an educated public, are the only reason democracy can work. Cop out? Maybe. But I just don’t know, yet. ~ ed.
On #310, no. No surprise.
A few bullet points on why I’m voting no on 310:
Boulder is 80% fossil fueled–one of most carbon-intensive in the country.
Two years ago, We the People already voted for Municipalization but ONLY on the conditions that: 1) it’s cheaper, or as cheap 2) it’s as stable, or more stable 3) it’s greener.
We voted to municipalize despite, what, $1 million spent by Xcel fighting the bill
An independent third party study showed that we could reduce carbon emissions on by 50% & do so stably, affordably #bouldercolorado Xcel (an out of state corp) doesn’t love this: they’d lose $35 million in profits. Annually.
310 passing actually is the only way we wouldn’t know the final price tag: we can’t know the price tag until we enter the next phase, and we can only enter the next phase if 310 is rejected. Xcel’s no dummy. We don’t know the amount until we go to court and we can’t pay the amount if we don’t know it. Mainstream local Daily Camera is against 310. Those pushing this fake 310 group (exposed by Camera as formed and funded by Xcel) have well over 500K to push ads at their disposal, grassroots groups against 310 have spent 17K thus far.
hot on elephant
Elephant Journal’s Holiday Gift Guide 636 shares A letter to the Anger that refuses to Leave Me. 559 shares Waylon’s favorite Ethical Gifts. 11 shares Join: Elephant’s Winter 2017 Academy. 28 shares Trevor Noah just won my Respect. 2,558 shares Year of the Fire Rooster 2017: What to Expect. 854 shares December Forecast: Letting Go of 2016 & Leaning into 2017 with Love. 6,765 shares These Tweets (and Retweets) actually Happened. 1,384 share How to Say Goodbye to that almost-great Love. 1,591 share Why a Year of No Dating was the Best Thing I ever did for Myself. 4,333 shares