Hawthorne Street non-endorsements for City Council

The endorsement post was getting too long but I thought it was unfair to not discuss the other candidates for city council at all. Here, then, are the reasons I am not supporting Mr. Eugene or Mr. Hackshaw.

The incumbent, Mathieu Eugene, was horribly unimpressive two years ago when he ran for Yvette Clarke's open seat. He spoke exclusively in empty platitudes; he was evasive about providing proof of his residency in the district and medical education; Y.E.S. - a not-for-profit youth organization that was his claim to fame - had serious accounting issues, and, because he knew he had the backing of both the Clarke political apparatus and 1199, he seemed almost bothered that he had to run. His first term on the Council was not a particularly distinguished one. He was one of the worst council members at obtaining discretionary funds (read: pork) for his district and he was not an active legislator. He got fined for campaign finance violations and requests he made to direct discretionary funds to Y.E.S. and for the establishment of a Haitian community center were turned down.

All that said, he did show an ability to think more than parochially. Some of his discretionary funds went to help Maimonides improve their breast cancer treatment facility. He rightly believes that a top-flight regional destination for cancer treatment is more important to residents of the 40th district than making sure his discretionary funds are spent literally within the district borders. At the same time, he brought money in to update the ICU monitors at Kings County Hospital. He showed a far better command of the issues facing the city and the district, was the only candidate to unequivocally support same-sex marriage and voted against the extension of term limits. He also gets props for showing up at the Hawthorne Street block party and answering questions. He also should be forgiven for the residency flap; his not-for-profit operated within the district for years, and he has been active in community affairs for a long time. He is growing into his role and I expect that if he is reelected his second term will be better than his first - which is good for the district because he is certain to win again.

Rock Hackshaw was the real disappointment to me. He began his appearance at the candidates' forum by showing up 40 minutes late. The first thing he did was decline an opening statement in lieu of asking the 60 people who showed up to hear him speak to "go to his website" for his platform. The second thing he did was to yell at the timekeeper for not doing a good job of keeping his opponents on time. (For the record, the timekeeper did nothing wrong as far as I could tell.) He declined to answer certain questions, and actually told the crowd, which was getting restless about his antics, that he "didn't have to". He stated, refusing to make eye contact, that he was "undecided" about gay marriage (a change of position; he used to be opposed). His actual proposals ranged from the bad to the actually crazy. For education, he proposed that the Board of Education be broken down to 5 separate borough boards, each under the authority of the Borough Presidents. (How would a first term councilman would go about completely revamping the political structure of both the education system or the authority of borough presidents?) He proposed establishing an education commission to bring forth the best ideas for improving schools and said it would have "subpoena power." (Can you be compelled to tell the city what you think schools should do?) His proposal for transportation improvements was an elevated road over all of Flatbush Avenue to relieve traffic. (More roads instead of better public transportation?) He proposed a "renter's rebate" - a tax credit if housing costs take up to big a percentage of a person's income. (Wouldn't this encourage people to get a more expensive apartment and pass the costs on to the city?)

Hackshaw was rude, combative, defensive and generally unfit for office. I admired his reputation as a blogger and rabble-rouser but there is no way he should be, or would be effective as, a councilman.

Comments

[Ben]

Thank you.

[Ceelledee]

Ditto on the thanks to HS for bringing some focused attention to tomorrow's primary elections! The stakes for the 40th CD race are rather high: do we really want to send the message to Mathieu Eugene that we like the miserable job he's been doing in NOT representing our interests in the City Council? I hope not! As for Hockshaw, fuhgeddaboutit. As HS points out -- he ought to stick to blogging. No, the only sensible vote tomorrow for our councilmanic representation is L.Rickie Tulloch. HS makes a good case for telling us why we should do so.

As for the Comptroller's race, I respectfully disagree with HS's endorsement of David Yassky. IMO, Yassky is a classic opportunist who supported Bloomberg's outrageous reversal of the peoples' will on term limits and will run for any political office he can (Brooklyn DA --2005) even if it means he has to change his residence to do so ( 11th Congressional District (that's us) --2006). Now he wants to be a comptroller. Yeah, right. Although Yassky is way out ahead with old boys club endorsements, my vote will be with John Liu -- an experienced City Council member and a genuine finance professional with a well-demonstrated committment to grassroots communities. In these tough economic times, my guess is that John Liu will be the much safer bet for the people's interests than the party machine's choice of David Yassky.

Whatever your vote tomorrow, I'm hoping to see my fellow PLGers turn out in record numbers at the polls. To do so says we care!