neonvincent

Posted by cahwyguy

https://cahighways.org/wordpress/?p=17606

Here in California (and in Los Angeles in particular), we have an election coming up. You know what that means: Every election, I do a detailed ballot analysis of my sample ballot. This is where I examine each candidate and share my conclusions, and invite you to convince me to vote for the other jerk.  Because this is a long ballot, I’m splitting this analysis into a few chunks (note: links may not be available until all segments are posted – unposted segments are marked [PENDING]):

1. Governor of California
2. Other State and National Offices (excluding judges)
3. County and City (Los Angeles) Local Offices (excluding judges)
4. Measures (nee Propositions)
5. Judicial Offices (County and State)
6. Summary

Note: This analysis is NOT presented in the same order as the Sample Ballot (the ballot order makes no sense). I’ve attempted instead to present things in more logical order.

This part covers the Local Offices (excluding US Congress and State Assembly)

• County of Los Angeles: Board of Supervisors, 3^rd District ❦ County Assessor ❦ County Sheriff
• City of Los Angeles: Mayor of Los Angeles ❦ City Attorney ❦ City Controller

County of Los Angeles

Board of Supervisors, 3^rd District

The County Supervisors are the folks that govern the county — and exert a lot of power. The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors serves as the governing body for LA County, acting as the executive, legislative, and quasi-judicial authority for over 10 million residents. Five elected members manage the county’s $36B+ budget, oversee major departments (health, public safety), set local laws/ordinances, and provide municipal services to unincorporated areas. There was recently an election that started the process to expand the Board of Supervisors and to add a County Mayor, but no changes have been made yet.

The current incumbent, Lindsey Horvath, was first elected during the last election cycle in 2022. If I recall correctly, she was a councilwomen in West Hollywood before the election. In general, I like how she has represented the district and led the board. From her opponents, I want an argument about why she needs to be replaced that resonates and is strong.

◯ Tonia Arey (NP/Leans )

According to her LinkedIn profile, Tonia Arey is a real estate agent in Agoura, CA. She has a BS in Kinesiology from San Francisco State. It appears her primary reason for running was the response to the Malibu and Pacific Palisades wildfires: She believes Calabasas has been turned into a dumping ground for toxic and hazardous waste. She blames that on Supe Horvath. A lot of this comes from her active involvement in Protect Calabasas, a grassroots organization committed to preserving the health and safety of our neighborhoods.

Her website details her disputes with Horvath and why she feels Horvath is out of touch with the district. First, she’s upset that Lindsey Horvath endorsed George Gascon’s failed re-election campaign despite the fact that voters in District 3 went the other way by a roughly 60–40 margin. Second, she’s upset that Lindsey Horvath endorsed Marissa Roy, a hardline, DSA-aligned anti-prosecution candidate who believes in imposing a 100-day moratorium on the prosecution of misdemeanors, and has made repealing Los Angeles’s anti-encampment law a central part of her platform. This is primarily because of Marissa Roy’s alignment with the Democratic Socialists of America, a progressive group that has strong anti-zionist leanings (she does repeat the stronger MAGA opinion of DSA on her website — i.e., that they openly support Hamas and foment antisemitism on a daily basis and that Zohran Mamdani is an antisemite and a threat to Jews, but I beleive that’s an exaggeration).

In terms of issues, she has the following areas of emphasis: (1) Public Safety, in particular supporting law enforcement; (2) Fire Safety; (3) Environmental Safety; (4) Public Health; (5) Addressing Homelessness; (6) Combating Antisemitism; (7) Supporting Animal Shelters and Abuse Prevention; and (8) Supporting Small Business. I’ve read through her issues, and there’s a lot of emphasis on accountability and transparency. With respect to the homeless, she believes in mental health treatment first. She wants to protect Jewish institutions and educate about antisemitism. However, the sense I get reading her issues is that she’s got a very suburban view of the issues (which isn’t a surprise, as she’s from Calabasas and sells property in Agoura). She doesn’t get the broader urban issues that impact the county.

Her broader agenda is revealed through her endorsements. She’s endorsed by the California Republican Assembly and the LA County Republican Party. She’s endorsed by a lot of retired law enforcement and Israeli groups. She’s endorsed by the former Sheriff, who was kicked out for doing a bad job. For all of her push on antisemitism, however, she’s not endorsed by Jewish groups (likely, because Republican values clash with Jewish values, and Horvath has actually supported the Jewish community). She also has no major group endorsements, and no labor or current elected official endorsements.

Lindsey Horvath (NP/Leans ) INC

Lindsey P. Horvath was sworn into the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on December 5, 2022. One year later, she became the youngest-ever Chair. She is the first millennial, and currently the only renter to serve on the all-women Board. Before being elected to the Board, she was a City Councilmember and the longest consecutively serving Mayor for the City of West Hollywood. She received her Bachelor of Arts from the University of Notre Dame and a Certificate in Nonprofit Management & Fundraising from UCLA Extension.
(Source: LA County Supervisor Page)

According to her campaign website, she has a number of accomplishments: “She declared homelessness a local emergency and led major reforms, including moving funding away from the failed Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority and into a new department to deliver real accountability and results. Following the 2025 wildfires, she championed the fastest cleanup in U.S. history, and ensured more than $55 million in relief reached residents, small businesses, and workers. With constant attacks from the federal government, she stood up for Angelenos, creating ICE-free zones and a $30 million rent relief program. To bring the County into the 21st century, she led once-in-a-generation governance and ethics reforms to ensure the government is truly accountable to taxpayers.”

She has a large list of issues and priorities, which is far too long to summarize without the use of AI (and I won’t do that). I’ve read through them. It does appear that she is fighting the Trump agenda, and is working to implement Proposition G — the measure that is restructuring county governance. I think she’s bringing a strong progressive energy to the Supes, and is working to protect the interests of all the residents of the district, of all income levels, ethnicities, and orientations.

I asked the Google AI for a summary of her negatives. They indicated the primary negative viewpoints and controversies associated with her are: (1) Opposition to the Armory Project: Critics, including local homeowners, residents, and veterans, have accused Horvath of “callously” pushing forward with a homeless housing project at the Westside LA Armory. This project is opposed by local neighborhood associations and some veteran advocates, who argue it would create “dangerous” conditions for those living on the nearby VA campus; (2) Strained Relations with City Leadership: Texts revealed tension between Horvath and LA Mayor Karen Bass during the 2025 Palisades Fire recovery. Horvath expressed frustration over a lack of communication from the Mayor’s office and questioned the coordination of the response, indicating a rocky relationship between the county and city leadership; (3) Accusations of “Old School” Politics: Despite branding herself as a “fresh voice,” some critics in editorials have labeled her a “conniving, arrogant and dishonest” politician who focuses on pet projects, particularly regarding her handling of homeless initiatives; (4) Allegations of Mismanaging West Hollywood: Some critics argue that her time in West Hollywood leadership was ineffective, claiming she “ruined” the city, according to a 2022 review of a statement regarding her, though this is a subjective viewpoint; (5) Intense Political Ambition: Some political observers noted her intense focus on ascending to higher office, such as her weighing a 2026 run for LA Mayor shortly after being elected as a supervisor, suggesting a potential misalignment with her commitment to the Supervisor seat; and (6) LAHSA Management Challenges: While she has taken steps to reform the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) due to financial mismanagement, the ongoing crisis and failure of the agency to properly pay service providers, which occurred during her oversight, have been points of criticism, although she is actively taking steps to fix them. None of these appear to be dealbreakers for me.

She has a wide set of endorsements, including (surprisingly) the Daily News, which doesn’t usually support Democratic candidates. She has the backing of labor, Democratic organizations, and loads and loads of elected leaders.

◯ Carmenlina Minasova (NP/Leans )

Minasova rans for AD 43 in 2024 and LA CD 6 in 2023. She did not win or place in the top two in those elections. Her X Page states that she is a “Medical Doctor, Journalist, Respiratory Care Practitioner, Animal Rescue and Reforms advocate.” It also shows she supports Spencer Pratt for mayor. Otherwise, her X page is a bit incoherent and all over the place.

Her campaign website is a single large image, and the text in that image is all over the place. It gives the impression of a bunch of random ideas and complaints, with a few buried advertisements. She also has some extremely odd statements on the site, such as “Democracy is not I want, but is what majority needs.” She seems to conflate city responsibilities with county responsibilities, and implies she is also running for LA City Mayor (she isn’t).

Unsurprisingly, she has no endorsements.

◯ Tomás Sidenfaden (NP/Leans )

According to his LinkedIn page, Sidenfaden is technical founder and full-stack engineer focused on building and operating production systems at the intersection of applied AI, backend infrastructure, and user-facing products. He is the Founder & CEO of Nuprizm, where I designed and shipped an AI-powered platform that analyzes media bias using LLM-based pipelines and large-scale data ingestion. He has served as a senior engineer on high-traffic consumer platforms, building distributed backend services, trust and safety systems, and compliance-critical features in regulated environments. Earlier in his career, he was responsible for full life-cycle product management, leading cross-functional teams and a global supply chain to consistently bring hardware products to market, shaping his strong bias toward execution, correctness, and ownership. He has a BA in Creative Writing from USC.

Sidenfaden has an extensive policy page. I read through it to get a sense of what this candidate was standing for. The sense comes off as a Conservative one. This is based on complaints about excessive fees and regulations, a push for transparency and accountability, complaints that crime goes unpunished, and a desire to enforce nudity laws. He also has a detailed interview on Citywatch. It appears that his primary focus is dealing with the homeless (at least that’s the impression that comes from reading his X posts).

He does not have any endorsements.

Conclusion

Reading through the candidates, two can be dismissed relatively quickly. Minasova is disjointed, doesn’t seem to understand politics, and is all over the place. Sidenfaden is a bit more serious and coherent, but doesn’t really have the background for government and his positions seem a bit off. That leaves Arey and Horvath. Arey has that suburban mom vibe, and her disputes against Horvath fall flat. Horvath does have her problems (no politician is perfect), but her alignment on issues is much closer to my alignment than is Arey’s alignment. Horvath is not perfect, but she’s good enough and the best of the set of candidates we have.

Conclusion: Lindsey Horvath (NP/Leans ) INC

◊

County Assessor

The Los Angeles County Assessor is responsible for locating, identifying ownership of, and establishing the taxable value of all real estate and business property within the county. As the largest assessment office in the U.S., they create the annual assessment roll—over 2.6 million assessments—used to fund public services like schools and infrastructure.

I tend not to hold a strong opinion on this office, as it is hard to hold the office executive responsible for specific assessments. However, there are a couple of things of relevance. First, Prop 13. Some folks, especially Conservatives, hold it up as this magical things because it was a significant lowering of taxes. As someone who was around in that era, however, that’s a rosy incorrect view. Prop 13 is the underlying cause of most of California’s problems, having started our schools and our infrastructure. More importantly, it has made the housing problem WORSE in many ways. At this point, Prop 13 really only helps seniors who have been in their houses since they first purchased them in the 1980s or 1990s, those with generational wealth that have passed down a house without a step-up in assessed values due to various exemptions, and those owning business property that has stayed with the same owner for years. For those that have purchased in the last 25 years, they’ve faced full assessed values and significant property tax bills that make it harder to own property. Prop 13 especially impacts newer and younger folks looking to buy homes, as they face very expensive property taxes, every year. Preserving Prop 13 is not the answer, but that’s unacceptable as Prop 13 is the third-rail of California politics. Reforming it is necessary, especially with respect to commercial properties, but that would be fought tooth and nail by powerful groups such as the realtors.  Lastly, increasing the Homeowners Exemption is intriguing, but it comes with a number of prices: Lower tax revenue for the county, and disproportionate impact for those with lower valuations.

Useful resources:

• LA Times: “Your guide to the L.A. County assessor race: Incumbent Jeff Prang faces four challengers“
• LAist “Voter Guide: LA County Assessor“

◯ Stephen Adamus (NP)

Adamus is a property assessment specialist and a 14-year veteran of the L.A. county assessor’s office. During that time, he worked on changes to Proposition 13’s ownership provisions and conducted assessment appeal hearings.

Adamus claims the role of assessor should be apolitical and claimed the current administration gives favorable treatment to taxpayers with wealth or influence. His campaign is built around removing “waste and mismanagement of public funds.” He wants to protect Proposition 13 and advocate to increase the homeowner exemption and for a new ballot initiative to revive Proposition 58, the tax law that allowed parents to pass properties on to their children with no reassessment.

Adamus has a specific beef with the Prang administration of the office. He writes that one of the reasons he is running for office is “the unscrupulousness and deceitfulness of the current administration needs to stop. The waste and mismanagement of public money needs to stop. I’ve seen how the sausage is made and its as revolting as you’d expect. I tried to fix things, got punished, and ended up suing this Administration for whistleblower retaliation (Labor Code 1102.5). I won. The jury concluded this Administration retaliated against me for raising concerns about violations of Proposition 13, violations of the Revenue and Taxation Code, and misappropriations public funds, costing the County millions of dollars year over year. There is a different set of rules for the connected and influential. Decisions are made by this Administration based on how helpful or harmful they could be to their careers.”

His issue page has “Puppies, kittens, and capybara”. Why?

He does not list any endorsements.

Rob Newland (NP)

Rob Newland is an appraiser who has been valuing real estate property since 1998.

According to his website, his top priorities are (1) Transparency in property valuations; (2) Modernizing the assessor’s office; and (3) Fairness and consistency. With respect to Prop 13, he believes the assessor’s job is not to rewrite Proposition 13, but to administer it fairly and accurately according to the law and ensure taxpayers understand their rights under it.

According to the LA Times, Newland envisions a new responsibility for the assessor’s office: data analysis. He said the office holds one of the largest property datasets in the country, and the information can reveal patterns about land use, vacancy and redevelopment opportunities. His main priority is making private aggregated data public. One example would be using vacancy maps to identify areas to redevelop. Another would be using homeowner exemption records to reveal who is using their home as a primary residence and who isn’t, which could crack down on illegal short-term rentals and bring them back to the market. These sound like reasonable approaches. Given the data-driven nature of the Assessor’s office, use of AI and Machine Learning could be useful tools; however, they must not be the sole tools and human judgement must be the overriding factor.

He does not list any endorsements.

◯ Steven Palty (NP)

According to the LA Times, Steven B. Palty has 45 years of experience as a tax consultant and regularly speaks to homeowners, renters and small business owners about inflation, rising property values and the effects they have on property taxes. He does not have a website.

Again, according to the LA Times, Palty says his campaign is built around reducing the tax burden for residents and eliminating waste and fraud in the assessor’s office. There are no more specifics.

Jeffrey Prang (NP) INC

Prang is the incument Assessor. He has served as L.A. County assessor since 2014. He modernized the office during that time, digitizing millions of paper records and creating a portal to help residents search for assessment records. He replaced county assessor John Noguez, who in 2012 was charged with accepting bribes in return for lower property assessments, leading to a court battle that’s still ongoing.

Prang’s website summarizes his achievements to date: (1) early and aggressive support for the victims of the recent wildfires; (2) updating the technology in the assessors office; (3) aggressive promotion of property tax savings programs for disabled veterans, homeowners, seniors, nonprofit and religious institutions; and (4) a workforce development program.  It also provides a more detailed summary of what has been done to improve the office.

According to the LA Times, Prang plans to continue his efforts, replacing outdated systems, improving efficiency and simplifying the assessment process for property owners. Prang said fairness is a top priority: closing loopholes to make every property owner pay their fair share while also expanding access to tax relief programs to help seniors, veterans and nonprofits.

Prang has a large number of endorsements, from elected officials to unions to significant organizations.

◯ Sandy Sun (NP)

Sun is a certified appraiser and a 26-year veteran of the L.A. county assessor’s office, and is cross-trained as an assessor for both real property (houses, land, etc.) and personal property (vehicles, jewelry, etc.). She has a bachelor of science degree in business administration from California State Polytechnic University, Pomona; associate in science degree in business administration, from Cypress College. She ran for assessor in 2022, receiving 22.5% of the vote. She does not appear to have a campaign website.

According to the LA Times, Sun is prioritizing tax savings for homeowners and wants to stop the efforts to reform Proposition 13; she wants to preserve the law in order to protect homeowners and seniors from being excessively taxed and forced out of their homes. She also wants to push legislators to increase the amount of the homeowner exemption. Lastly, she wants to reduce the backload of assessment appeals by fully staffing the assessor’s office and providing proper training to employees.

Conclusion

First, I think we can dismiss those candidates who haven’t had the wherewithall to set up a campaign website to present their case as to why voters should support them. Given it could be done for little to no cost on WordPress, there really is no excuse. That eliminates Palty and Sun. I’m also eliminating Adamus for his attitude on Prop 13.

That leaves us with two: the incumbent Prang, and the challenger Newland. Prang has all the endorsements and has been doing a relatively good job. Newland has some good ideas. The question is: Is now the right time for a change, or should Prang get one more term. Newland’s ideas intrigue me, and periodic change in this office is good. However, we won’t be in a bad place if Prang is retained.

Conclusion: Toss Up: (1^st: New Blood) Rob Newland (NP) | (2^nd: Keep Experience) Jeffrey Prang (NP) INC.

◊

County Sheriff

The LA County Sheriff is the top law enforcement officer in the County and the executive head of the Sheriff’s Department. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD) serves as the primary law enforcement agency for unincorporated areas and 42 contracted cities, overseeing the nation’s largest jail system, providing courthouse security for the Superior Court, and patrolling county facilities, parks, and transit systems. Key duties include crime prevention, investigations, and emergency response. After years and years of having the same sheriff (Peter Pitchess, who served from 1958 to 1981), the County has had a series of poor Sheriffs.

My take: Remember that perfection is the enemy of good enough. We’ve had a series of bad and corrupt sheriffs—and in this election, one is even trying to get his office back. The best way to improve the department is steady, sound, leadership, with continual improvements over time. Unless there is evidence of corruption, malfeasance, aggressive misbehavior, or a pattern of civil rights violations, as there was with Villanueva, continually changing leads because “I have a better idea” just introduces churn and creates work for business card printers and door sign painters.

Useful resources:

• LA Times, “Your guide to the L.A. County sheriff’s race: Robert Luna faces seven challengers“

◯ Mike Bornman (NP/Leans )

Bornman retired from the Sheriff’s Department after 36 years and worked on a wide range of assignments including custody, patrol, operations, criminal and administrative investigations, federal task forces, and created bureaus in the department. Bornman’s career with the Sheriff’s Department began in January of 1980. After graduating from the sheriff’s Training Academy as a Deputy Sheriff (Class #199), he was assigned to Men’s Central Jail, Santa Clarita Valley Station and Firestone Station. Upon his promotion to Sergeant in 1988, Captain Bornman was assigned to Lennox Station, Detective Division, Internal Affairs Bureau, and in the Executive Offices as an aide to an Assistant Sheriff. After being promoted to Lieutenent in 1995, Captain Bornman was assigned to Inmate Reception Center, Pitchess Detention Center, South Facility, Santa Clarita Valley Station, Cresenta Valley Station, Pitchess Detention Center, North Facility, Custody Support Services, Altadena Station, and Men’s Central Jail. Captain Bornman holds a Master’s Degree in Orgainizational Leadership from Woodbury University, a Bachelor of Arts Degree in English (writing) from California State University Northridge, and an Associates of Arts Degree in Police Science from College of the Canyons. He also completed an Executive Development course at Cornell University, located in Ithaca, New York.
(Source: Department Bio)

Bornman believes that the sheriff’s department is facing significant challenges, including deteriorating infrastructure, declining morale, and decreasing public support. If elected sheriff, one of his first tasks would be to initiate a complete forensic audit of every dollar spent by the department and determine not only how much is being spent, but where money is going and why. He believes there are things in that budget that made sense two, three, five years ago that make no sense today, and that there are things that do make sense that aren’t funded or are underfunded. His second priority focuses on deputy morale, recruitment and retention. He said many deputies are overworked, with some working triple double shifts. He believes that leads to officer suicides. (ref)

He thinks that the three public safety challenges facing the LASD are (1) Regaining of trust of the community and within our own department. (2) Doing a better job of keeping people safe in LA County. (3) Homelessness, substance abuse, and mental health issues. He thinks the LASD has become the largest de-facto emergency response unit in the county, and is not necessarily the best option for this responsibility. He believes that the use of force policies currently in place with the LASD are appropriate for today’s realities, but must always be reevaluated and improved as circumstances dictate. (ref)

With respect to the Mens Central Jail, he believes it is antiquated and to be demolished, as it has outlived its usefulness. However, that can happen only after a new location is obtained. He also proposes the creation of a new, state of the art women’s housing and treatment center, specifically built to the needs of our female inmate population. Once the women occupy that facility, they would transfer the male inmates out of MCJ and into the Century Regional Detention Facility, as it was originally built to house medium- and high-security male inmates. He would consider increasing the number of custody assistants into the division, replacing the deputy sheriffs who are there now. He wants to ensure that body cameras are worn by all staff, and would expand the Custody Canine program, which incorporates trained dogs to search out illicit drugs and jail made alcohol. (ref)

He prefers not to focus on “deputy gangs, cliques or other formal or informal groups”, but on specific officer behavior. He wants to ensure they act and perform professionally at all times, but will not, however, attempt to paint everyone associated with them with the same broad brush. (ref)

He said that if elected, he would conduct a “top to bottom” review of operations to focus on what he said are the three core responsibilities: patrol, court operations and custody. He also would look to work with trade schools to help inmates acquire skills to prevent recidivism. He doesn’t appear to be a fan of oversight: he will approach oversight bodies “with an open mind” but believes it is the sheriff who should be making the decisions on policy and bringing accountability to the department. He believes people want to work for the Sheriff’s Department, they just don’t want to work under Luna (LA Times)

He has a detailed priorities list on his website. With respect to immigration, he says “While the federal government is responsible for immigration enforcement, we will focus on individuals illegally in the country who are charged with violent felonies or serious misdemeanors.”

He has a fair number of endorsements. They all look to be retired LASD or LAPD personnel, with a few other random folk thrown in. There is perhaps one elected official, a city commissioner. There are no union or group endorsements.

Karla Carranza (NP/Leans )

Carranza attended and graduated from East Los Angeles Community College with an Associate’s Degree and later transferred to California State University, Long Beach where she earned her Bachelor’s Degree. She began her career with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department in 2005. She attended the LASD Academy and graduated, becoming a Deputy Sheriff. She was first assigned to work in the LA County jails. She later worked at the Century Station where she patrolled various areas to include the city of Lynwood, and unincorporated areas of Florence / Firestone / Walnut Park and the Willowbrook areas. She was later promoted to Sargent. She has a Basic, Intermediate, Advance and Supervisory Peace Officer Standard in Training (POST) Certificate, with approximately twenty-one years of Law Enforcement Experience.

She feels the three public safety challenges are: (1) Restoring public confidence in public safety by being a strong and decisive leader who will bring real accountability and a clear commitment to protecting our residents through community policing; (2) Rebuilding the ranks with the right people to fill the massive personnel gaps left by the prior administrations. (3) Modernization in almost everything. Men’s Central Jail needs to be replaced with a modern jail. Technology requires modification across the department: upgrading vehicles, equipment, and computer systems, and implementing automation in jails, staff scheduling, and emergency response. Deputies have require access to appropriate less-lethal tools to protect both themselves and the public. (Patch)

She believes in be zero tolerance for excessive force or abuse of authority. Use of force must be objectively reasonable, necessary and proportionate to the circumstances. All use-of-force incidents will be reviewed to ensure compliance with department policies and procedures, and the law. Deputies will prioritize de-escalation whenever it is safe and feasible, with force employed only as a last resort when all other options have been exhausted or are unsafe. Supervisory oversight will be immediate in such incidents and investigated. She believes in the use of Mental Health Teams (MET) that comprise of a deputy and licensed clinical social worker. She will uphold a zero-tolerance stance on deputy gangs. Existing laws and policies are clear. Unlawful or unethical group conduct incompatible with our mission, their values, and the public trust they are sworn to protect, will not be  acceptable. (Patch)

She has an issues page that highlights some key issues for her. According to the LA Times, she supports transparency but sees the oversight bodies as having more of an advisory role.

She does not appear to have any endorsements.

◯ Brendan Corbett (NP/Leans )

He graduated from Whittier High School. While studying at Rio Hondo Community College, he worked delivering auto parts for Whittier Auto Supply. In my early twenties, he was employed as a Teamster, working as a warehouseman and delivery driver. He pursued a path in law enforcement, and in 1985, joined the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department as a member of Academy Class 228. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree and numerous specialized law enforcement training certifications. He served as assistant sheriff during Villanueva’s tenure.

The BradyList site has a citizen report that Corbett, acting as LASD division chief, provided false statements to the press and public.  He lied about aggressive actions by a victim in the LA county jail. He claimed the victim pulled his arm away from his deputy and attempt to strike back to assault the deputy.  He also claimed the victim pulled the deputy to the floor, injuring him. The victim was handcuffed in front, and at no time does he reach to pull the deputy.  Furthermore, Corbett claimed the video evidence is wrong and the officers statements are accurate even if they contradict the obvious facts and evidence.   The deputy did NOT show up to court for fear the video evidence would perjure his statement, All charges were dropped.

Corbett plans to help reduce crime and provide better services to homeless people who go through jails and struggle with mental health. He states “My platform for running for sheriff is 99 percent based on community safety. Nobody feels safe in the community nowadays.” During his brief retirement, Corbett was in disbelief at how the current department handled things; employees were being overworked, and staffing had decreased, along with a lack of experience from those in positions of leadership. “I was retired and watching this man from the Long Beach police, whose leadership is suspected to begin with, and then his experience is nonexistent with a department the size of ours,” Corbett explained. “He doesn’t know the jails, the courts, or anything. He is a police officer with very limited experience.” (LMU)

His campaign website identifies five priorities: (1) community safety; (2) building confidence with the community; (3) utilizing technology; (4) reducing homelessness; and (5) accountability.

He does not appear to have any endorsements.

Robert Luna (NP/Leans , but until 2022) INC

Robert G. Luna was elected as the 34p Los Angeles County Sheriff on November 8, 2022.  In 2021, Sheriff Luna completed his service as Long Beach Chief of Police, capping a 36-year career at the Long Beach Police Department, Los Angeles County’s second largest police department. Sheriff Luna started as a Long Beach Police Department reserve officer in 1985 and was promoted within every rank of the Police Department. He was appointed Chief of Police in 2014. During his time as Chief of Police, he served on the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA) executive board and Homeland Security Committee, and on the Police Executive Leadership Institute (PELI) mentorship program. He also received various awards from organizations in Long Beach for his civic leadership and community engagement. Sheriff Luna is a graduate of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) National Executive Institute and National Academy, Harvard University’s program for senior executives in state and local government, and the University of Southern California’s (USC) Delinquency Control Institute. In addition, Sheriff Luna holds a Master’s in Public Administration from California State University Long Beach.
(Source: Sheriff Staff Bios)

The LA Times notes that there has been a reduction in crime for the county during Luna’s term. In 2025, deputy-patrolled areas of the county experienced a 12.5% drop in serious crimes from the previous year, including a drop of 12% in murders and 20% in auto thefts.

Luna’s campaign webpage indicates the following five priorities: (1) Reduce Violent Crime; (2) Increase Public Trust; (3) Modernize the Department; (4) Address Homelessness; and (5) Improve Deputy and Employee Wellness. These are reasonable priorities.

According to the LA Times article, Luna has been working to improve county jail conditions. More than 1,200 body cameras are being used, use-of-force incidents are down, and he created a unit within custody operations to review such incidents faster. A new mental health assessment area has been added to the inmate reception center downtown, and he’s proposing the county build a correctional health center modeled after the state hospital system to secure inmates but also provide better medical service. Luna has also rebuilt relationships with other county agencies and oversight bodies. He believes in oversight, and has worked to share information unless advised by the county counsel not to share because of confidentiality and labor laws. He has refreshed marketing to bring in new deputies, and has seen incremental improvements.

His campaign website describes the improvements he has made to the department. (1) violent crime has fallen every year in the areas patrolled by LASD, and homicides are down 25% since 2023; (2) creation of a new Crime Strategy Unit, leveraging data and community involvement to reduce crime; (3) working with Metro to adopt new policies and surge law enforcement staffing, enforcing fare evasion and targeting narcotics, which led to fewer incidents of violent crime; (4) increasing the Department’s clearance rates, or the percentage of reported crimes that are solved, each year for both violent and property crimes; (5) decreasing use of fouce issues each year during his tenure, with the overall count down 25% since 2023; (6) creating the Office of Constitutional Policing and instituting a policy banning law enforcement gangs; (7) increased transparency at LASD, including outfitting deputies in LA County jails with body-worn cameras for the first time, timely releases of body-camera video, creating a new public dashboard with crime stats, and posting data on uses of force, taser usage, stops, and personnel complaints, all on the Department’s website.

According to Google AI, internal department criticisms of Luna include the (1) the Staffing and Morale Crisis, with department vacancies causing severe understaffing forcing deputies into relentless mandatory overtime, leading to plummeting morale; (2) a Perceived Lack of Support, with some deputies argue that Luna prioritizes public image and political standing over supporting his rank-and-file officers during high-scrutiny incidents; and (3) Alleged Cronyism, where insiders and critical reports have alleged favoritism in top-level promotions and ignoring standard nepotism policies. There are also concerns about Deputy Gangs and Transparency, which was a concern during Villanueva’s administration Specifically, while Luna campaigned on eradicating the department’s notorious “deputy gangs,” some oversight groups and critics argue his actions have been too slow or represent “smoke and mirrors”.

He has a large number of endorsements. These include labor unions, elected officials, and community organizations. Notable in the organizations is the Los Angeles County Police Chiefs Association.

◯ Oscar Martinez (NP/Leans )

Oscar Martinez is a Lt. in the LASD. He started with LASD in October 2008, and retired in March 2025 to run for Sheriff. Before the LASD, he was a Staff Sergeant in the USMC for 8 years. He has a Masters in Organizational Leadership from Woodbury University, and a Masters in Criminal Justice from the American Military University. A registered Republican, he is running on a conservative, “no politics, just public safety” platform as a 17-year department veteran from the Palmdale Station.

He does not have a high opinion of Luna, telling Fox 11: “He’s not doing anything, so anyone can do a better job than him. He’s been there for three years. There’s no solid policy changes in the department. We have not had any innovation in the last three years. The last technology advancement that we had was five years ago, the body-worn cameras. Our deputies in the age of artificial intelligence are still handwriting reports. Our deputies are working multiple shifts, back-to-back doubles, as we call them. That’s 16 hours, eight hours off, 16 hours. Something needs to be changed and I don’t see Robert Luna making any changes. He hasn’t done so in three years” (Fox11)   He has criticized Luna for fostering relationships with the county board of supervisors and oversight bodies, saying his focus should be on law enforcement, not politics. (LATimes)

His priorities as sheriff are defending and supporting law enforcement officers, modernizing the sheriff’s department, and balancing the department’s budget. He said on day one on the job he would establish a commander’s intent, give a new mission to the sheriff’s department, and communicate and work with the County Board of Supervisors. (Fox11)

He decided to run for office after other deputies and community members encouraged him to, particularly in the wake of a controversial incident that ended with the federal conviction this year of a Lancaster sheriff’s deputy who was found guilty of using excessive force. Key issues he wants to tackle include defending the 2^nd Amendment, finding more resources to support veterans in the department and preventing the release of violent criminals. He is pushing the state to change its immigration enforcement approach, saying he would lobby for tweaks to a law that prevents local law enforcement agencies from holding people in jail for extra time solely for immigration agents to pick them up. (LAT)

Much of what the papers uncovered are on his issues page.

He does not list any endorsements.

◯ Eric Strong (NP/Leans )

Strong appears to be the progressive candidate in this race. He was Chief of Campus Safety and Security Operations (Asst) at the LA County Probations Office between June 2023 and March 2025. Before that, he was with the Sheriff’s department for 12 years, rising to the rank of Lieutenant. He has a Masters from National University in Criminal Justice and Law Enforcement Administration. (LinkedIn)

According to Strong, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department is shaped by a culture of division—both between deputies and the communities they serve, and within the department itself. He described an environment marked by silos, internal fragmentation, and longstanding issues like deputy cliques and gangs. (LAP)

According to The Current Report, Strong was once positioned as a reform-minded alternative within LASD. However, his record has become mired in allegations of civil rights violations, toxic leadership, and credibility concerns that raise serious questions about his fitness to hold the county’s top law enforcement post. Multiple sources inside both LASD and LA County Probation confirm that Supervisor Holly J. Mitchell allegedly hand-picked Lt. Eric Strong to enter the race for Sheriff, not to win, but to sabotage. According to sources, the move was a calculated political ploy: Mitchell’s objective was to water down votes and derail incumbent Sheriff Alex Villanueva, during his re-election bid. However, “The Current Report”‘s author has a connection to The Epoch Times, which is a very right wing biased source, so the direction of the sabotage is unclear. However, WitnessLA also investigated and confirmed some of the complaints.

His priorities confirm the progressive agenda: (1) Ending Corruption, Building Trust; (2) Care, Not Cuffs; (3) Immigration Is Not Our Job; (4) Breaking the Jail Cycle; and (5) No Secrets, Just Service.

He lists no endorsements.

◯ Alex Villanueva (NP/Leans , but previously )

Villanueva was the previous sheriff. He defeated incumbent Sheriff Jim McDonnell in the 2018 L.A. County sheriff’s race, making him the first to unseat an incumbent in over 100 years. Before becoming sheriff, he was a lieutenant with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. The first member of the Democratic Party to be elected sheriff in 138 years, Villanueva campaigned as a reformer and appealed to some progressive values, but has received notoriety for more conservative policies during his tenure, as well as high levels of corruption. Villanueva lost his bid for reelection in 2022 by a wide margin of 61.3% to 38.7% against former Long Beach Police Department chief Robert Luna. He became a Republican in 2025.
(Source: Wikipedia)

Google AI reports that Alex Villanueva’s tenure as Los Angeles County Sheriff (2018–2022) was marked by intense controversy, characterized by battles with oversight bodies, defiance of subpoenas, and allegations of deputy misconduct. Key issues included his alleged protection of deputy “gangs,” retaliation against critics, controversial reinstatements of fired deputies, and high-profile fights with the Board of Supervisors.

According to the LA Times, with respect to Jail conditions, Villanueva said the department would continue to abide by Senate Bill 54, the state law that restricts local law enforcement from working with immigration officers and prevents them from holding inmates past release dates so they can be detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. It also prevents local officials from sharing inmate information with ICE. In his discussion with the times, he did not indicate he would encourage or cooperate with oversight; he famously did not during his first term. With respect to recruitment, he believes a recent spate of deputy suicides was tied to burnout from long hours, but said the department should be encouraging employees to recruit their friends and family. He also believes his leadership might help bring more deputies on board. Specifically, he said “My presence on the ballot itself is a huge lift on morale”, which seems to be quite the cult of personality.

At least on FB, Villanueva has been doing some very nasty smear campaigning against Robert Luna, using claims that appear to be exaggerated or sensationalized, or drawing inferences that appear false. For example, this morning (Tue 5/5), I was served a Villanueva ad implying there was something sinister because Luna supports Mayor Bass. Perhaps that’s a strange Republican delusion, but supporting the Mayor in a city within your jurisdiction doesn’t seem to be a problem. Rather, it seems to be the sign of a good working relationship between LA City and LA County. This advertising is problematic.

He is endorsed by a large number of elected leaders, generally Republican, as well as a number of Police Officers Associations and the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Professional Association. He is endorsed by the LA County Republican Party. He has no labor endorsements.

◯ André White (NP/Leans )

White has been with the LA County Sheriff’s Department for 11 years. His first assignment was working at the Twin Towers Correctional Facility. He spent seven years at the Carson Sheriff Station as both a patrol deputy and training officer, and one year as a Detective with Operation Safe Streets. Prior to becoming a detective, he was an EMT for five years, serving alongside the Los Angeles County Fire Department. He also worked in the ER at Torrance Memorial. He believes it is time for generational change in the department.

He has four main focii in his platform: (1) Accountability Now; (2) Community-Centered; (3) Hiring from Within; and (4) Technological Advancement. He wants to replace the Men’s Jail with a new facility. He welcomes oversight.  He believes that in addition to better pay, the department needs to look at other strategies to recruit people, such as softening the department’s policies on uniforms and grooming.

He has no endorsements.

Conclusion

This is a difficult race to assess. The first question is: Does Luna need to be replaced, or has this merry-go-round of Sheriff’s gone on long enough? Luna still has the support of county leadership. His support from his rank-and-file is less clear, but the rank-and-file would not like any leader that is making changes that are in any sense progressive. Villanueva claims they want him back, but those who remember the 2022 election will recall the rank-and-file didn’t like him either. My gut is saying that we’ve been on the merry-go-round long enough, and that Luna is doing a good enough job to give him one more term to solidify his changes.

For those that believe Luna needs to be replaced, the question becomes “but who?” Certainly not Villanueva. Villanueva’s behavior while he was Sheriff was unacceptable, and his behavior now is unacceptable. One can’t go on endorsements, because most of the candidates don’t have any. Start by eliminating those candidates with known problems, from either side. That cuts out Strong and Corbett. I don’t like Bornman’s views regarding gangs and cliques: they would appear to encourage them. I don’t like Martinez’ positions regarding immigrants. White just doesn’t seem to have the background. The one I liked best, if one has to replace Luna, is Karla Carranza. She seems to be moderately progressive and would be leading with both compassion and strength.

Conclusion: (1^st: Keep Luna) Robert Luna (NP/Leans , but until 2022) INC | (2^nd Replace Luna) Karla Carranza (NP/Leans )

City of Los Angeles

Mayor of Los Angeles

The Mayor of Los Angeles is the city’s chief executive officer, elected to a four-year term to oversee city departments, enforce ordinances, and manage a multibillion-dollar budget. Key duties include appointing general managers and commissioners, proposing the annual budget, vetoing council legislation, and directing emergency operations.

Given the large number of candidates, I’m going to break this into tiers, just as I did with the Governor’s race

Useful Reference:

• LAist, “Voter Guide: Los Angeles mayor“
• LA Times, “Your guide to the race for L.A. mayor: Four major challengers look to unseat Karen Bass“

Tier 1: Leading Contenders

Karen Bass (NP/Leans ) INC

Karen Bass has been the 43^rd mayor of Los Angeles since 2022. Bass previously served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2011 to 2022 and in the California State Assembly from 2004 to 2010, serving as speaker during her final term. After attending San Diego State University and California State University, Dominguez Hills, Bass worked as a physician assistant and community organizer, before being elected to represent California’s 47^th State Assembly district in 2004. In 2008, she was elected to serve as the 67^th speaker of the California State Assembly, becoming the first African-American woman in United States history to serve as a speaker of a state legislative body. Bass was first elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2010. She represented California’s 33^rd congressional district during her first term; redistribution of districts moved her to 37^th district in 2012. She chaired the Congressional Black Caucus during the 116th Congress.

For all of the major Mayoral candidates, I’m asking Google AI to summarize the negatives about the candidate. The AI notes that Bass has faced intense criticism, primarily surrounding her handling of the 2025 Pacific Palisades fires, alleged mismanagement of fire department resources, and overseas travel during crises. Critics, including political opponents, have accused her of overseeing budget cuts to the fire department and attempting to alter, or “water down,” critical after-action reports concerning the fatal fire response. The specific key negatives and criticisms surrounding Mayor Karen Bass include:

• • • Fire Response & Travel: Bass received severe backlash for traveling to Ghana for an inauguration during major wildfires in early 2025. Critics termed her absence “disgraceful,” particularly as she reportedly ignored initial questions upon her return.
    • “Firegate” Allegations: Reports emerged in 2026 alleging that Bass or her office pushed to edit a key after-action report on the Palisades fire to reduce criticism of the city’s inadequate, understaffed response. Critics claimed she tried to avoid legal liability, though she denied these allegations.
    • Budget Cuts: Bass has been criticized for cutting the LA Fire Department budget by millions of dollars prior to the wildfires, which some allege resulted in water shortages and equipment issues.
    • Resignation Demands & Low Approval: A petition calling for her resignation gained over 140,000 signatures following the fire crisis, with polling showing that a significant portion of residents viewed her response as poor.
    • Political Criticism: She has been labeled “inefficient” by critics like Elon Musk and faced criticism from opponent Rick Caruso over the fire safety response.
    • Policy Positions: Some progressives criticized her approach to law enforcement, noting her rejection of the “defund the police” movement and her plans to increase LAPD staffing.

The political criticism I can dismiss, as I do not have a high opinion of either Caruso or Musk. In fact, one of my negatives regarding Mahan for Governor is that Caruso supports him. But a number of the other complaints are valid, in particular the “Firegate” allegations. Bass also has only been somewhat effective regarding the homeless, she has a mixed record regarding public safety, and (as most LA politicians do), she has forgotten the San Fernando Valley.

But this is a nasty race. Bass has a specific page where she highlights the negatives of Raman, and notes what Bass would do different. It is convincing. She also notes that “Spencer Pratt has been able to solidify the MAGA vote bloc behind his candidacy and is a strong contender for the second spot.”

Bass’ campaign pages note the progress that has been made under her administration. She writes, “in just three years, we’ve created change and turned things around. Street homelessness is down for the first time in modern memory. Crime has fallen, with homicide levels lower than they’ve been since the 1960s. We’re accelerating nearly 40,000 units of housing after decades of under-building. And we’ve launched LA’s first-ever infrastructure plan to fix the sidewalks, streets, and streetlights that were neglected for far too long.”.  She indicates she wants to build on this, and has no further political plans after her second term as Mayor. That, of course, could change, as we’ve seen with Antonio Villaraigosa. She specifically notes the following accomplishments: (1) Street Homelessness Is Down 17.5 percent; (2) New housing policies are already accelerating nearly 40,000 units of housing; (3) Renter protections thanks to her signing into the law the first improvements to the City’s Rent Stabilization Ordinance in 40 years to limit rent increases and protect tenants; (4) Job growth through the start of construction on a new Convention Center for LA (leading to more investment) and the appointing of a Film Czar and the cutting city fees and an expanded film & TV tax credit (which is resulting in the return of productions to LA); (5) More Officers, Community Policing & Lower Crime, including the hiring of more police officers hired, the creation of the first-ever Office of Community Safety to increase civilian crisis response and community violence intervention, and the reduction of homicides to the lowest levels since the 1960s; (6) the creation of LA’s first-ever Comprehensive Infrastructure Plan, which will create a real roadmap to fix our infrastructure; and (7) Standing up to Trump, being in ICE’s face on the streets, and organizing Angelenos, dozens of local mayors and mayors nationally to stand against ICE and troop deployments and to stand up for our immigrants. She then links to more specifics.

What she doesn’t have on her website is a specific plan for her second term. Again, Google AI came to the rescue, noting that she is focusing on expanding her initial efforts to combat homelessness, increasing affordable housing, and enhancing public safety, including hiring more LAPD officers. Her proposed $14.9 billion 2026-27 budget aims for no layoffs while prioritizing infrastructure improvements and preparing for the 2026 World Cup and 2028 Olympics. It identified the following Key Second Term Priorities:

• • • Homelessness and Housing: Continue reducing street homelessness—which decreased 17.5% during her first term—by building on the accelerated production of thousands of affordable housing units and implementing new renter protections.
    • Public Safety and Policing: Focus on expanding the police force to bolster staffing levels following years of decline, while maintaining the Office of Community Safety to expand civilian crisis responses.
    • Infrastructure and Future Events: Implement the city’s first-ever Comprehensive Infrastructure Plan to repair sidewalks, streets, and streetlights. Focus on preparing city infrastructure for major upcoming events, including the 2026 World Cup and the 2028 Olympics.
    • Budget Management: The 2026-27 proposed spending plan reflects increased revenue from taxes, allowing for a balanced budget that avoids layoffs, aiming to stabilize the city’s financial standing after facing a potential $1 billion deficit.

In an interview with LAist, Bass talks about what she would have done differently with respect to the wildfires. In fact, her first response was “Oh my goodness. I would have to say, what would I have done the same?” She basically said the city needs to be better prepared for these events  and to take warnings more seriously: “It looks as though we are going to have a problem, whether it’s the rain, mudslides, whatever, and all of the departments and everybody is lined up to pre-deployment to get everything ready in advance. And that didn’t happen in the city. It also didn’t happen in the county. And so what has happened since then, I think is indicative of what I would’ve done differently, which is we go overboard now in terms of planning pre-deployment, making sure that there are fire engines all around vulnerable areas. Even if we don’t necessarily expect that it’s going to be devastating, but being very aggressive with prevention and that did not take place.” She’s also emphasizing prevention and brush clearance, which wasn’t pushed as strongly before. She does talk about the recovery. She notes “we were able to get the clearing of the debris in record time, months and months before it would’ve been. And then we took a lot of the lessons that we learned in addressing homelessness and expediting the permitting process, and applied that to the Palisades.” and “we’ve issued over 2,000 permits for over a thousand properties. Homes are being rebuilt at record speed. We have over 400 homes that are actively under construction now. People will begin moving in this summer.” But she noted that “The biggest problem in the Palisades now is the insurance industry and the banking industry. So you have hundreds of people that have been issued permits and plans have been approved, but they’re still not ready to rebuild because they wanna make sure that they’re gonna be insured and they’re gonna make sure that they have the financing to rebuild.”

With respect to homelessness, Larry Mantle held her feet to the fire regarding the efficacy of Inside SAFE. She admitted it wasn’t a perfect program, but it was getting people off the streets. She noted “along with Inside Safe, I also did an executive directive in my first couple of weeks to expedite the building of housing. We need more housing, there’s no question about that. So I’m fast tracking 42,000 units of affordable housing and 6,000 of those units are under construction right now.”

There’s a lot more in the interview, and it is well worth reading.

Bass has a broad set of endorsements, much more than any other candidate. Democratic Clubs. Issue-Focused Organizations. Unions. A modest list of election officials, but ones with clout, such as Kamala Harris, Adam Schiff, Brad Sherman, and most of the LA City Council.

◯ Spencer Pratt (NP/Leans )

Pratt is an American reality television personality and political candidate. I don’t care about his reality TV antics, as they provide no relevant experience for being Mayor. He has a Bachelors degree in political science from the University of Southern California. He entered the race after he lost his home in the Palisades Fire and he felt Bass’ response was ineffective.

I asked Google AI to summarize the negatives of Spencer Pratt. The AI noted that Pratt’s public persona is defined by his, and often others’, view of him as a “villain,” a reputation built on manipulative behavior on MTV’s The Hills and, more recently, contentious political rhetoric. Key negatives associated with him include serious allegations from his sister, claims of volatile, financially reckless behavior, and a reputation as an unqualified, publicity-seeking figure. The key allegations are: (•) Serious Familial Allegations: His sister, Stephanie Pratt, publicly urged voters to oppose his 2026 Los Angeles mayoral bid, alleging he “beat” her to the point of hospitalization as a teen, coerced her into drug use, is “unqualified,” and involved in a cult. (•) “Villain” Persona and Behavior: Known as the antagonist on The Hills, Pratt has admitted to manipulating situations and relationships for fame and money, embracing a “villain” role that many find authentic to his character. (•)  Political Criticism: Running for Mayor of LA in 2026, he has been described by critics as a “clown” and his campaign as relying on divisive, Trump-like, fear-mongering tactics. (•) Financial Recklessness: Pratt has openly admitted to wasting millions of dollars, largely due to poor, impulsive decision-making, such as spending heavily on crystal ventures. (•) Contentious Public Feuds: He has a history of dramatic public feuds, including intense criticism of local government, accusing officials of being “corrupt” and “negligent” following the loss of his home. (•) Alleged Exploitation: He has been accused of potentially using his political run to stay relevant and famous, rather than for legitimate public service, according to critics and his sister.

The Google AI also noted there is a controversy over his authenticity. Namely, Pratt has claimed that his on-screen villainy was fabricated for entertainment, though others have criticized this as a way to avoid accountability for his actual behavior. Lastly, there are mixed opinions on his political approach. While some in the Reddit community and Fox News reports suggest his supporters appreciate his blunt, anti-establishment approach, a significant number of others view him as a disruptive, unserious, and dangerous candidate, as shown on Reddit.

His campaign website actually highlights a lot of these negatives, with posters that are sensationalized or that make fun of Karen Bass. This plays up the disruptive or unserious nature of his run. His campaign has been angry and name-calling. In Pratt’s world, Mayor Karen Bass is Karen “Basura,” City Councilmember Nithya Raman is “crazy” and a “serious threat to your kids,” and critical reporters are “media sickos.” According to a CalMatters commentator, his memoir doesn’t help: “The Pratt of these pages — in his own words — is selfish, undisciplined and unprincipled. He deflects blame, squanders fortunes and complains. A lot. It’s hard to imagine him holding any office, much less one of such consequence.” The opinion piece also notes “In sum, then, the memoir details a candidate for public office who steals, squanders his income, compromises his principles and blames his setbacks on others, especially — in the cases of COVID and the fires — the government. And who makes his living, at least for a time, by selling crystals.” [and my mind is going, after reading this, “How Trumpian”]

His website highlights the following issues: (1) Crisis Leadership & Emergency Readiness; (2) Fiscal Integrity & Government Reform; (3) Public Safety & the Rule of Law; (4) Treatment-First Approach to Homelessness; (5) Infrastructure & Quality of Life; (6) Economic Opportunity & Small Business Empowerment; and (7) Utility Accountability & Ratepayer Protection. I read through his approaches and complaints here. Some highlights. First, they give the impression that he really doesn’t understand how the city works. They also seem to emphasize a common Republican manta of fiscal mismanagement and the need to conduct audits to find the massive fraud, waste, and abuse they believe to be there, simply because they think government should work the same as a general business. His view on public safety is one that probably would make the folks on NextDoor happy: ” prosecuting retail theft and organized criminal activity and enforce existing laws that protect neighborhood safety and quality of life. Officers will receive clear rules, clear backing, and clear expectations.” His plan for addressing homelessness takes a similar Republican bent: “Under a Treatment and Recovery First framework, resources will be redirected to mental health care, drug treatment, and stabilization services. Participation in treatment is a must for city- funded assistance, and long-term housing will be reserved for those demonstrating a stability and sobriety.” Pratt seems to blame homelessness on mental illness and addiction, failing to recognize that family economics are so precarious that the loss of a job or an increase in rent can send someone to the streets.

Overall, Pratt’s ideas seem broad and not well thought out. There are no notions in his ideas about how to work with the City Council, or covering the entire city. They also show Pratt’s background from the Palisades: He doesn’t have a great consideration of the problems of the urban core of the city. He also ignores the San Fernando Valley, but that’s common in the Palisades (I know, I grew up there). The lack of depth of his platform really demonstrates his lack of experience in politics. One gets the sense that he is only doing as well as he is in the polls because of his Republican affiliation (none of the other candidates appear to lean that way).

There have been arguments that he is ineligible to run for Mayor of Los Angeles, as he has been living at his father’s rental home in Carpinteria, about 12 miles south of Santa Barbara. His burned-out lot in the Palisades is still his legal residence. According to the L.A. Times report, Pratt and his wife, reality star and singer Heidi Pratt, both listed a Carpinteria address linked to Pratt’s parents on their voter registrations. Pratt listed it as his mailing address, while Heidi listed it as her mailing address and residence.

I attempted to find endorsements for Pratt. According to the Google AI, key endorsements and supporters for Pratt include: Media Personalities: Joe Rogan (podcast host), Adam Carolla (comedian/podcaster); Celebrity/Co-stars: Audrina Patridge (The Hills); Political Figures: Senator Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Richard Grenell (former acting Director of National Intelligence); Donors/Supporters: Notable donors include producer Jeff Jenkins and Rick Salomon. I’ll also note that his campaign is being run from San Diego (Pratt For Mayor lists an address in Imperial Beach).

◯ Nithya Raman (NP/Leans )

According to Wikipedia, Raman is an Councilmember for CD4 since 202, a member of the Democratic Party and the Democratic Socialists. She earned a bachelor’s degree in political theory from Harvard University then a master’s degree in urban planning from MIT. After living in the United States for many years, Raman returned to her home country of India and founded the research firm Transparent Chennai. The firm’s goal was to improve sanitation in the city of Chennai. In 2013, Raman moved to Los Angeles and worked for the city administrative officer of Los Angeles. In 2017, Raman founded and headed SELAH Neighborhood Homeless Coalition, a homelessness outreach nonprofit in Los Angeles; she also served as the executive director of Time’s Up Entertainment. Raman became a naturalized American citizen at the age of 22.

I asked Google AI to provide a summary of Raman’s negatives as a prelude to reviewing her plans and promises. The Google AI indicated that concerns regarding Los Angeles City Councilmember Nithya Raman often focus on her approach to homelessness, public safety, and her perceived political alignment. As she campaigns for Mayor in the June 2026 primary, these criticisms have intensified from both constituents and political opponents. They fall into the following areas:

1. 1. 1. 1. Homelessness and Public Safety. Critics frequently target Raman’s opposition to stricter enforcement of encampment bans. There are three primary areas: (•) Encampment Ordinances: Raman has consistently voted against or questioned the effectiveness of ordinances like 41.18, which bans encampments within 500 feet of schools and parks. Opponents argue this creates unsafe environments for families and students. (•) “Inside Safe” Criticism: She has proposed scaling back Mayor Karen Bass’s signature Inside Safe program, calling it too expensive and advocating for more cost-effective shelter options. Critics, including the Bass campaign, have called her alternative plans “unrealistic”. (•) Police Funding: Her votes against certain LAPD funding allocations have led critics to label her “anti-police”.
         2. Political and Constituency Criticism. Raman’s late entry into the 2026 mayoral race has also sparked internal political backlash. Again, there are three areas of concern. (•) “Political Opportunism”: Some colleagues and labor leaders, such as Yvonne Wheeler of the L.A. County Federation of Labor, have characterized her run as “selfish ambition” and a “distraction,” noting she had supported Mayor Bass’s re-election only weeks prior. (•)  Constituent Services: Some neighborhood activists argue her focus on broad structural reforms comes at the expense of “quality-of-life” concerns like basic street repairs and immediate constituent needs. (•) Ideological Friction: While she is often associated with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), she has also faced criticism from the left for being too independent, such as her support for easing the “mansion tax” to encourage apartment construction.
         3. Noteworthy Incidents. There are also two incidents that keep being brought up. (•) School Buffer Zone Viral Clip: A video of Raman appearing to dismiss concerns about a homeless encampment near a school—and reportedly rolling her eyes at a resident—went viral, fueling accusations that she is out of touch with safety concerns. (•) Bureaucracy Concerns: Critics of her proposed “Bureau of Homelessness Oversight” argue it would add unnecessary red tape to a system that already has oversight via the City Controller.

So lets turn and look at what she is saying. Her campaign website lists four commitments she is making: (1) Fix the city: fill the potholes, pave the roads, plant trees, turn on streetlights, and put a park near where you live; (2) Protect Angelenos: from ICE, from harassing landlords, from unsafe streets, from fires and natural disasters. I’ll make sure when you call 911, someone actually shows up; (3) End the pay-to-play politics that have dominated the city for decades. I will not make political decisions. Only the best decisions for Angelenos; (4) Bring the jobs back. I’ll make it easier to start and run a business. We’ll revive small businesses, support restaurants and bars, and bring the Hollywood jobs back home.

She has five distinct issues pages that describe how she will do this: Homelessness | Housing | Protect renters | Transportation | Hollywood Jobs | Parks & Shade. I read through the pages. Her plans are detailed and well thought out. Certain plans are sure to draw the ire of groups. For example her plan to Protect renters is sure to draw the ire of the powerful realtor and apartment owners organizations. Now that I’m aware of this, I’m going to see how many of the attack ads against her are being funded by this group. But her goal to protect renters isn’t a surprise: it comes from the constituency she was elected to represent, as CD4 has loads of renters. Those that represent the more suburban single-family-home areas might have different views. But reading through the rental protection plans, they make sense. This includes cracking down on vacation rentals and supporting small landlords. Her particular ire seems focused on the corporate landlords, and those who are pulling rental stock from the markets, evicting tenants, and then getting the stock back at higher rents.

I looked particularly at her Transportation plan. Her plan to expedite projects and construction is good, but doesn’t recognize some of the major problems, such as utilities that balk on moving lines or services. This adds delays to the projects, which increase costs. Edison is well known for this, as are other private concerns such as the railroads. Her bus plan is similarly incomplete: It fails to address the fact that while bus service in the urban core is strong, it is piss poor in the northern valley (there are no lines running N of Devonshire, for example). Busing and transit needs to serve ALL of the city. Her other transportation ideas are good.

After reading through all her plans, they seem well thought out. However, she is inconsistent in her coverage, and I’m not sure she “gets” the concerns of all of the city. Her plans are great in the urban core, in Hollywood, and perhaps even on the West Side. Do they work equally in NoHo? In Porter Ranch? In Sylmar? Do they work down in San Pedro or the Shoestring Annex or in Westchester? Do they protect the homeowners as well as the renters, the people driving as well as the people taking transit? There I am less sure, but I’m also not sure the other candidates are better (Bass certainly isn’t).

When I searched to find out who was endorsing Raman, an attack site came up. Mostly, it just highlighted the negatives that Google AI pointed out: (1) Voted over 75 times to allow homeless encampments near schools, day cares and other sensitive locations; (2) Voted to eliminate thousands of local police officers; (3) Supports raising taxes on seniors and homeowners; (4) Supports taxpayer-funded government-owned public housing in any neighborhood with no special city permission. What I was more curious about was: Who was funding the attack? And the answer came at the bottom: “Major Funders: Los Angeles Police Protective League in the amount of $577,350, Douglas Emmett Properties, LP in the amount of $225,000, Jerry Greenberg”. It is clear that the LAPD officers don’t like Raman, likely because she wants to cut back on LAPD, and Douglas Emmett is no surprise because of her support of tenants. I’m not sure who Jerry Greenberg is. Doing further search to find Raman’s position on public safety uncovers loads and loads of attack articles from the LAPPL against Raman. According to Raman on Instagram, the LAPPL is spending hundreds of thousand of dollars against her. Well, looking at the website I found, it is over a half-million against her. Why? Because she voted against the police contract that spent more money on the police than the city could afford.

The attack website highlights an interesting point: For all of her policies related to the homeless and the downtrodden, and for all of her policies about bringing business back to Los Angeles, she has no policy related to public safety. What is her plan to reform and correct the deficiencies at the LAPD? What is her plan to reduce crime in the city, and to make the streets safer? How would she be fighting back against ICE, and preventing the excesses we have seen from the LAPD officers supporting ICE? How would she restore the image of the LAPD to what it was in the “Adam 12” era?

So I did some searching. Although at one time she was in the “Defund the Police” camp, she is now saying “We need to maintain the size of our police force and grapple with the fact that even the size of our existing police force is not enough to respond to 911 calls in a timely fashion”. In her first council campaign, she advocated for the LAPD to be transformed into a “much smaller, specialized armed force,” with responsibility for traffic enforcement, car crashes and nonviolent mental health crises shifted to other agencies. That’s actually a reasonable notion. Her council website notes that she has invested in the CIRCLE program. CIRCLE stands for Crisis and Incident Response through Community-Led Engagement, and it serves as an alternative response to nonviolent incidents, including those involving people experiencing homelessness. If someone needs a wellbeing check or is causing a nonviolent disturbance, the CIRCLE Team can arrive quickly and help manage the situation. In the year since in January 2022, the CIRCLE program responded to 4,479 diverted calls from 911 or the LAPD non-emergency line, along with thousands more incidents encountered in the field.

Additionally, in her first year in office, Councilmember Raman introduced a motion to improve the City’s framework for hate incident and hate crime reporting and data collection. Also, in October 2022, Council adopted a motion introduced by Councilmember Raman to develop a multi-year plan to fully shift responsibility for nonviolent calls to unarmed civilians rather than armed officers, and to implement alternative models and methods for traffic safety enforcement that do not rely on armed law enforcement.

Similarly, she does not have plans related to LA Fire. She does not talk on her website about the Palisades and how Fire Recovery would be addressed. She does not address how she would harden the city against future fires or other climate disasters?

I read through her interview with Larry Mantle. She does talk about law enforcement in that interview, but mostly in their relationship to ICE and whether she would retain the Chief of Police. Nothing about reducing crime.

She does not list endorsers on her website. Google AI indicates that key endorsements and support for Nithya Raman’s 2026 mayoral campaign include organizations such as Streets for All, Urban Environmentalists, and the Housing Action Coalition (HAC); writers, producers, and other professionals in the Los Angeles entertainment industry; the pro-housing “YIMBY” (Yes in My Backyard) movement. As there are two DSA candidates in the race (Raman and Huang), DSA has not made an endorsement. I’m guessing that she doesn’t have union or elected official endorsements, as she isn’t listing them.

Tier 2: Distant Possibilities

◯ Rae Chen Huang (NP/Leans )

Huang is other Democratic Socialist candidate in the race (not Socialist, which is a different thing), whose campaign draws a lot of similarities to Mamdami’s campaign in New York. She has a Masters in Theology from Duke Divinity School in 2013 (Sociology of Religion), a Masters of Divinity from Boston University School of Theology in 2007, and a Bachelors in Human Development and Theology from Boston College in 2004. Huang is a senior organizer at Housing Now! CA, a statewide housing justice coalition in California. She is an ordained Presbyterian (PCUSA) pastor and community organizer in Los Angeles, and serves on the board of Creating Justice, an organization advancing economic justice through creative expression in Skid Row. Her work on housing has likely made her the enemy of groups like The California Apartment Association, California Association of Realtors, Apartment Association of Orange County, Building Owners and Managers Association of California and Institute of Real Estate Management.

Unsurprisingly, one of her key focii is housing. She believes in “social housing” — which can range from publicly-owned developments to tenants taking ownership cooperatively. She sees a need for publicly- or community-owned housing when it comes to answers around funding, development and acquisition. (ref)

There are articles out there calling Huang a socialist. Reading through them, however, shows that the claim is sensationalized journalism. She’s a Democratic Socialist. Democratic Socialism is a philosophy that advocates for a democratic political system alongside a socially owned or regulated economy, aiming to meet public needs over private profit. It seeks to achieve social justice, economic equality, and worker empowerment through democratic, electoral means rather than revolution, differentiating it from authoritarian socialism. Socialism, on the other hand, is an economic and political system based on public or collective ownership of the means of production, rather than private ownership. It focuses on reducing inequality through social control of resources, with production geared toward human use rather than profit. It often involves state regulation or planning of the economy. That is not what Huang is advocating.

Huang has a detailed website. Her approach is based on the following vision pillars: (1) Housing for All; (2) Clean and Green Infrastructure; (3) An Economy for the People; (4) Real Safety; and (5) Transparency & Accountability.  I’ve read through her platform. For example, I looked at her ideas to address housing and homelessness. Many are similar to other ideas or common DSA thrusts. One particularly stood out:

Reparative Spatial Justice Initiative: Housing Reparations & Indigenous Land Back for Los Angeles

Los Angeles’ housing disparities are the result of deliberate public policies including redlining, racially restrictive covenants, freeway construction, urban renewal, and discriminatory land use decisions that displaced Black communities and dispossessed Indigenous peoples. Los Angeles’ Reparations Advisory Commission has documented this harm. Without structural repair, displacement and segregation will continue to compound generational inequity.

As Mayor, Rae will establish a Housing Reparations Fund providing direct housing assistance to eligible Black Angelenos harmed by historic discrimination, implement a legally enforceable Right to Return policy for displaced families, create a Racially Motivated Takings Review body, and adopt a Tribal First Right of Refusal policy to facilitate structured Indigenous land return. Repairing these historical and ongoing injustices heals generations of harm, and makes our LA a better home for us all.

This policy goes beyond anything I’ve seen from any other candidate, and I’m not sure it would go over well. She has similar … novel … ideas in other areas. For example, in her section on the Economy for the People, she talks about creating “LA’s first Office of Nightlife, a 24-hour city presence dedicated to making sure our bars, restaurants, music venues, queer spaces, and the workers and neighbors who sustain them have the resources and representation they deserve. Cities around the world, including New York, Boston, Amsterdam, and London, have appointed dedicated nightlife offices and seen measurable results: more jobs, fewer venue closures, reduced violence, and stronger neighborhood economies. It’s long past time LA joined them. The Office will run late-night bus service until after last call, so people can get home safely without putting themselves or anyone else at risk. It will launch a mediation program between residents and venues so that disputes get resolved without defaulting to LAPD. It will put naloxone in the hands of venue staff, strengthen protections for those who call for help during a medical emergency, and connect night workers to public health resources after their shifts end.”

Reading through her policies, one gets a strong sense of a passionate, social activist. One also gets the sense of someone that doesn’t understand how City government works. There’s no mention of working WITH the City Council. There’s no mention of working with constituencies. There’s no mention of providing equal benefit across the city, including the Valley and the Ports. There’s no indication of where the funding for all these interesting ideas will come from, especially given the cities budget problems. It is a DSA pipe dream, and it is unclear how she would govern when reality hits.

Huang also did an interview with Larry Mantle of LAist. In this interview, she does talk about working with the council and building coalitions: “And so together as I pull together the various departments, the county officials, our city council members, and even together with the state, we can work out and create the plan we need. For our capital infrastructure plan and then begin to work together towards that vision. And I’ll be doing that with directed departments that I’ll be, or with a particular office, that I will be able to set up to ensure that we’ll be able to maintain those healthy relationships.”

She has also talked about reducing the size of the LAPD and putting the funds into social program. She “would like to fire Chief McDonnell. He has not been shown to be able to follow the law, the state law, for example, which has a mandate to ensure that federal agents do not wear masks while they are around the city around our state. But Chief McDonnell has continually said that he refuses to follow that law. We’ve seen collusion between ICE agents and also LAPD. So we need to end those relationships and we also need to ensure that our that our police are continually not attacking our protestors, which we’ve seen assault, including of our teenagers up in the valley recently.” (ref)

She supports taxing the top earners to pay for her plans, and to move money from the LAPD to pay for services: “And I do believe very much that the police is taking up half of our budget right now in the city, and we can reallocate that budget to other things that we need in the city.” (ref)

She has endorsements from the Democratic Socialists, the Future Urbanists, and the “Feel the Bern” organization.

◯ Adam Miller (NP/Leans )

Adam Miller is a tech entrepreneur, nonprofit leader, and Democratic candidate for Mayor of Los Angeles in the 2026 election. He is co-founder of Instil, co-founder of Groundswell, a managing partner at AllerFund, chairman/director at Team Rubicon, director of Food Allergy Research & Education (FARE). He is also Managing Partner at 1P Ventures, Exec CHairman at Profi. He was Founder/CEO/Chairman at Cornerstone on Demand. He’s also a philanthropist at Better Angels, 1P.org, and LA-Tech.org. By age 25, he had earned degrees in law, business, and economics, while also passing the CPA and Series 7 exams. He has a BA in History from U-Penn, and a BS in Economics from The Wharton School. He has a JD from the UCLA School of Law, and an MBA from the UCLA Anderson School of Management. He founded Cornerstone OnDemand, a cloud-based learning company, and later co-founded Better Angels, which focuses on building affordable housing. Cornerstone grew in Los Angeles into the world’s largest education technology company, scaling to more than 3,000 employees across 25 countries and empowering over 75 million people worldwide. The platform has delivered more than two billion courses to learners in 192 countries. In 2021, Cornerstone was taken private in a $5.2 billion transaction — but the mission never changed: opportunity should be accessible, not exclusive.  (LinkedIn)

Reading through his campaign page bio, he comes across as someone that is trying to do a lot of good (and doing it outside the normal political system). He seems like a good person, but I’m getting strong “Tom Steyer” vibes. Although admittedly the notion of good rich tech philanthropist wealthy dude goes into politics to do progressive things (Miller, Steyer) is much better than evil rich capitalist wealthy dude goes into politics to do regressive things (Trump, Musk), I still have a big problem with the rich wealthy dude goes into politics trope—in either direction.

His website indicates that Adam is running because he believes Los Angeles is still one of the greatest cities in the world, but also knows it is falling short of what families deserve. Housing is too expensive. Homelessness remains unresolved. Too many people feel less safe, less supported, and less confident that city government can deliver results. Adam believes LA does not need more excuses. It needs leadership that can solve hard problems and execute with urgency.

Miller’s campaign is focusing on homelessness, public safety, and economic mobility.

His campaign website indicates that his plan is something called The THRIVES Vision: Transparency, Homelessness, Rent, Innovation, Vibrancy, Economic Mobility, and Safety. His website goes into detail for each point about why that point matters, and the plan to implement/support/address that point. I’ve read through his plans, and the ideas sound good. But they are also incomplete and lack a wholistic vision. For example, he wants to dramatically expand housing and dramatically expand business. That’s all fine and good, but how will he address scaling up of the supporting infrastructure. If we are doing this growing, where will the water and the power come from? How will the people move around the city? Does his vision cover the entire city, or is it focused on the urban core and the westside (loads of leaders love to forget the San Fernando Valley and the ports).

He also has something he calls the 7×7 plan. These are seven clear goals: (1) Reduce Street Homelessness by 60%; (2) Lower Average Rents by 10%; (3) Double Law Enforcement Patrols; (4) Reduce Permitting Time by 80%; (5) Rebuild 1,500 Miles of Roadway; (6) Create 100,000 New Jobs; and (7) Bring LA into the 21st Century. WIthin each goal, he has seven specific steps. I’m a Highway Guy, so I looked at his road related goal. His steps related to rebuilding roads are:

(5.1) Clean the streets: Deploy dedicated street cleaning enforcement and sanitation surge teams across all 15 council districts / Clearing illegal dumping within 48 hours of report, doubling street sweeper frequency on the dirtiest corridors, and holding property owners accountable for sidewalk maintenance so no neighborhood in LA looks or feels abandoned.; (5.2) Deploy 10 dedicated rapid-response pothole crews operating 7 days a week with real-time GPS dispatch / Publishing fill time from report to completion for every ticket, by district, on the public dashboard.; (5.3) Require LADWP and all utility companies to restore pavement to full City standard within 48 hours of completing any underground work / Eliminating the single largest source of new pothole creation, which currently produces tens of thousands of pavement failures per year.; (5.4) Increase funding for Bureau of Street Services operational budget through reallocation from underperforming general fund programs / Bringing LA’s per-lane-mile street maintenance spending up to the national benchmark for comparable cities. (5.5) Prioritize the 500-mile road rebuilding program using a neighborhood equity index / Prioritizing busiest thoroughfares, then ranking streets by pavement condition score and weighting toward the 50 zip codes with the worst infrastructure.; (5.6) Launch the FixLA 311 accountability system on Day 1 / Every pothole report assigned to a crew within 24 hours and tracked to resident-confirmed resolution before the ticket closes, backed by a live Road Conditions Map showing pavement scores for every street in the city and fed by annual automated road-scanning that identifies deteriorating pavement before it breaks, enabling preventive maintenance at 20% the cost of full reconstruction. Implement an audit team to confirm proper completion and keep systems accountable. (5.7) Use the 2028 Olympics as a contractual forcing function / Lock in the full 500-mile corridor list by January 2027 and tie Olympic venue access route completions to binding contractor deadlines with LADOT.

Looking at this with the understanding I have of road maintenance from my years doing the California Highways page, it is overly simplistic and shows a lack of engineering knowledge. Potholes are temporary patches causes by larger road deterioration. Fixing the roads requires a deeper effort, often taking the road back to dirt and completely rebuilding it. Finding the money for that from underperforming general fund programs is the wrong answer—simply because we might need those general fund programs, and the answer is to make those programs perform, not to take their funds away. Focusing on the Olympic Venues also does something I fear: It focuses on the urban core and the Westside, and neglects the San Fernando Valley. The mayor needs to represent the entire city. Hmmm, it looks like looking specifically at the roads gives great insight into this candidate’s thinking.

His LAist interview shows some problems with his approach. For example, when asked how he would fix the Housing problems, Miller said, “Well, the good news is I’ve been a leader for 35 years. I’ve been running corporations, startups, nonprofits, and that experience has taught me how to lead teams big and small. And the reality is that leadership can be applied across multiple types of organizations. At the end of the day, an effective executive is good at setting a vision, aligning a team to that vision, operating with excellence, holding people accountable by measuring results and iterating when you need to make changes. That’s what I’ve done across every organization I’ve had, and that’s how I’ve been able to deliver results, and that’s exactly what I would do as mayor.” But the problem is that the City is not a business, it is not a foundation, it is not a philanthropy. There are regulations and rules that constrain what an individual or agency can do. There are unions and turf wars and budgets, and having to obtain approval from the city council. There are processes and paperwork. Executive experience in business doesn’t always work in a political office. Some can figure out how to work the system (Riordan). Some can’t (Trump).

The LAist/Larry Mantle interview is interesting reading. What comes across is that Miller is a man that wants to do good. However, he also has no understanding of how to do it in a municipal/political way; he views things as an executive and more specifically as a tech executive. There is no mention, for example, in his visions about working with the City Council, about getting buy in from the neighborhoods impacted by the ideas. Even with the best ideas, the lack of ability to work within the political structure will doom them.

He does not appear to have any endorsements.

Tier 3: The Great Unwashed “Rest of the Pack”

These candidates basically have little funding and little exposure. Given the nature of the “jungle” primary, the odds of them making the top-two slots is extremely low. They are included here more for exposure, but they really don’t have a chance.

Useful reference:

• LA Times, “These candidates for mayor are long shots. But they hope to lead the city of L.A.“

◯ Bryant Acosta (NP/Leans )

Acosta is a Freeland Creative Director in the LA area. He is also Chief Creative Officer at The Nightbreed. He was also Group Creative Director for Ayzenberg. He has a BA in Graphic Design from The Art Institute of California, Los Angeles.

He has a detained blueprint on his website with 6 Pillars and 43 Solutions: (1) Transparency and accountability; (2) Restoring affordability; (3) Uplift and protect; (4) Prosperity Plan; (5) Empowering local commerce; and (6) Green Energy Update.

He does not list any endorsements.

◯ Asaad Alnajjar (NP/Leans )

Alnajjar is a Senior Engineering Manager for the City of Los Angeles, having been with the city for 36 years. He is the founder of Intelepeer, a/k/a VoEx Inc, a VoIP MSP providing global peering infrastructure. He has a degree in Civil Engineering from USC. He is currently a member of the team leading the designing, construction and helping to build 35 citywide light rail and rapid bus systems including LAWA’s People Mover project opening June 2025 and others to be completed by 2027 at LAX in preparation for LA 2028 Olympics. He also is an active engineer leading the team for sidewalk repairs through 311 and MYLA311 which serves all the 15 council districts of the city with a 24Hr turn around.

According to his website, his platform includes: (1) Ending homelessness through housing-first strategies, outreach, and mental health care; (2) Rebuilding aging infrastructure using smart city technology and efficient budgeting; (3) Enhancing public safety by working alongside first responders and investing in prevention; and (4) Improving transparency, accountability, and resident access at every level of city government. His platform focuses on practical, engineering-led solutions to prioritize technical efficiency and fiscal accountability. He has detailed specifics on his website.

He does not list any endorsements.

◯ Tish Hyman (NP/Leans )

Latisha Tawana “Tish” Hyman is an American singer-songwriter, rapper, and record producer. She attended the Fiorello H. LaGuardia High School of Music and Art and Performing Arts.

She says she is running to restore common sense to City Hall. To protect taxpayers, prioritize public safety, and create real opportunity for families, workers, and small businesses. Los Angeles can do better, and together, we will.

Her campaign website has a digital twin to answer any questions. It indicates she will fight for the following policies: (1) Reduce encampments, Reduce emergency response burden, Reduce hospital cycling; (2) Economic Revival — Bring Hope Back to Hollywood; (3) Fiscal Discipline; (4) Safe Streets & Safe Spaces; (5) Make LA the Nightlife Capital of America (Safely); and (6) Housing Supply + Accountability. Her website has more details, and I’m sure you could ask her digital twin. But some of her plans are a bit naive. For example, in the Nightlife topic, her ideas are: 4AM pilot zones / Alcohol cutoff at 3AM / Free water after midnight / Mandatory food vendors / Permit-funded safety patrols / Rideshare partnerships. Some of this is out of the purview of the mayor, and some are really not well thought out.

She does not list any endorsements.

◯ Andrew Kim (NP/Leans )

It is interesting to note that his 2026 website is essentially a clone of his 2022 website.

Kim has a Bachelor in Political Science from Claremont McKenna College. He has a JD from Pepperdine Law School. While working as a lawyer, he was “born again”, and enrolled in Talbot Theological Seminary in La Mirada, obtaining a Masters in Theology. He is presently on leave while pursuing a PhD in Religion at Claremont Graduate School. For a number of years, he has run a one-man law firm, Low Offices of Andrew Kim. He ran for AD 46 in 1996 and LA City Council CD 10 in 2011. He has served as a LA County COmmissioner for Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, and a pro tem judge of the Superior Court.

His focus areas would be (1) Jobs and Opportunity, (2) Homelessness; (3) Public safety and crime; and Corruption in City Hall. He says that in the first few days after being elected, he would declare a state of emergency, create an Economic Promotion Planning department, and appoint a Homelessness Czar. He also has a number of specific things he would do in the first year to address homelessness, audit city hall, and clean the city.

He does not list any endorsements.

◯ Suzy Kim (NP/Leans )

Kim is the Economic Development & Opportunity Deputy for Supervisor Lindsey Horvath. Her policy portfolio includes the Department of Public Social Services, Department of Economic Opportunity, Aging & Disabilities Department, and Equity policies. She began her career in children, youth and family policy, in the areas of child welfare, urban education and youth leadership development. After a career in non-profits, she worked in two Los Angeles mayoral administrations, serving as policy advisor for affordable housing, CDBG, economic development and homelessness. Susan graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree from Wesleyan University (interdisciplinary major of Economics, Government, History & Philosophy) and a Master in Public Policy from University of California, Berkeley.

Her policy pillars are: (1) Heal & Unite; (2) Safe & Livable City; (3) Care for People; and (4) Serving with Integrity. Her website has more details on those pillars, although they are essentially single sentences.

Her explanation for running has some interesting beats. She felt that she “couldn’t ignore what I was seeing—people struggling to get the help they need, whether it’s because support isn’t there, or because reaching for it isn’t always easy.” and that “Through my faith and my relationship with Jesus, I believe there’s real hope, real healing, and a different path forward.” She also writes “My faith is a big reason I’m stepping forward. I believe we’re called to care for each other, to show up with compassion, and to serve—especially when things are hard. That’s how I try to show up, and that’s how I would lead.”. There’s an interesting distinction here. Your faith driving you to lead to show compassion is fine. You’re putting your faith into action. However, trying to impose tenants of your faith on others (such as is being done with abortion restrictions, or posting the 10 Commandments in schools) is a problem.

She doesn’t list any endorsements.

◯ John Logsdon (NP/Leans )

Logsdon is a director and producer at Blind Vision Films. He has also worked at Atlantic Records doing music video production, and was program director at KGLT-FM. He has a BA in Film, Radio, and TV from Montana State University in Bozeman. He has served as a Community Police Advisory Board for the LAPD Pacific Division.

His key issues are: (1) Public Safety; (2) Homelessness; (3) Housing, Density & Affordability; (4) Protecting Our Environment; (5) Mobility; (6) Olympics; (7) The Entertainment Industry (Film, TV & Music); and (8) Your City Government. The details of his plans are on his website.

He does not appear to have any endorsements.

◯ Juanita Lopez (NP/Leans )

Lopez does not have a campaign website.

According to her Patch interview, she is a political scientist graduate from University of California, Irvine, with another degree in social and behavioral sciences. She  was a manger in operations at First Intersate Bank in Los Angeles, balancing end-of-day branch totals in Southern California, and also responsible for international currency exchange. She also worked at the Federal Reserve Bank, where she managed multi-million dollar accounts, emphasizing accountability. She prioritized transparency and ethical standards for other financial institutions in Southern California.

She feels that key issues facing cities like Los Angeles include high taxes, environmental concerns, and deteriorating infrastructure. She’s relatively strict on the homeless, saying “Homeless individuals will be fingerprinted to check for warrants. Those refusing help to become self-sufficient may be detained, and a judge could order them to detox. If they can’t care for themselves, a judge may assign them to permanent supportive housing. Encampments will be cleared. Homeless individuals will be treated with dignity and will no longer sleep on the streets. Hire social workers to assist them until they secure a job and housing. To reduce costs, those receiving social security benefits will use that money to support their stay in permanent supportive housing.”

She doesn’t appear to have any endorsements.

◯ Andrej A. Selivra (NP/Leans )

Andrej put himself through community college and transferred to UCLA where he graduated near the top of his class with a degree in political science, while working full time to pay for his education. He’s since gone on to become a systems engineer, dedicated to helping teams and organizations improve their tools, resources and processes to get things done.

He has a detailed plan. His main three areas are (1) Create Housing; (2) Improve Transportation; and (3) Empower Community. The specifics for each plan are on the website. One thing that stood out to me, especially for his transportation plan, was the lack of attention on the San Fernando Valley. These candidates need to remember that the Valley is part of Los Angeles. I do like his ideas on supporting live entertainment and volunteerism.

When asked why he is better than his challengers, he said, “The establishment, led by Mayor Bass and defended by insiders like Nithya Raman, has normalized incompetence. They funnel billions to unaccountable contractors while our street crisis worsens. When the mayor’s inner circle faces scandals — like a deputy mayor faking a bomb threat to skip a meeting — it proves this administration is fundamentally unserious. Meanwhile, challengers like Adam Miller offer empty rhetoric without a single concrete blueprint. I offer a completely different paradigm. I didn’t learn about LA’s broken safety nets from a policy paper — I lived them. I survived the foster care system and teenage homelessness right here in this city. I know what it means to fall through the cracks. I fought my way from sleeping in my car, through community college to UCLA, and built a career fixing complex, failing systems for massive organizations.” (Patch)

He designed his website himself (most of these folks are using contractors). It has some weaknesses in terms of large graphics and a poorer layout.

He has no endorsements.

◯ Griselda Diaz (NP/Leans ) Write-In

Diaz has an AA in Business Administration and Communications from West LA College, and a BS in Business Administration from Mount St. Mary’s University. She expects an MS in Law in 2026. She has worked in software development for city governments, advertising and marketing operations, people operations management at a lobbying firm focused on building and safety, and administrative management in private manufacturing in Santa Fe Springs.

Her website has positions on Housing, Policing, Transit, Community, Safety, Food, Transparency, and Getty House. However, the links for those positions are not there. She does have a post on reddit with some positions: She basically believes in (1) Transparent Government, such as a daily public office hour and livestreamed public-facing work sessions; (2) Housing First — but structured — such as use city-owned parking lots for solar-canopy “safe sites” with sanitation + case management, or adaptive reuse of underused buildings for non-congregate interim housing; (3) Community After-School & Wellness Centers, providing after-school spaces (3–7 PM) offering various services; (4) Parkway / Median Conversions, gradually replacing ornamental turf grass in city-owned parkways with drought-resistant edible plants (e.g., prickly pear), native pollinator plants, drip irrigation systems, and expanded community gardens; and (5) Expanded Audit Capacity, providing funding to expand the City Controller’s office capacity via a Public Finance Fellows program.

She has no endorsements. She was a write-in candidate because she had insufficient signatures submitted for their petition to qualify for the Mayoral race.

◯ Misael Ortega (NP/Leans ) Write-In

Ortega is a painting contractor who was spurred to run by the Palisades Fire.

His website is scant on specifics. He wants to end ICE raids in Los Angeles and push for real immigration reform. He wants to make sure no one in Los Angeles goes hungry. He wants to raise the minimum wage so working people can actually live — not just survive. He wants to defend women’s health, LGBTQ+ rights, and mental health, because healing this city starts with its people. He gives no more specifics.

He has no endorsements. He is a write-in candidate because he had insufficient signatures submitted for their petition to qualify for the Mayoral race.

Conclusion

Whew! That was a lot of investigation. As I’ve noted elsewhere, this is clearly an election cycle where “perfect is the enemy of good enough” is the motto. Give up your search for the perfect candidate. We need to pick the best of what we’ve got, and being “best” includes being able to get past the jungle primary. Being good is useless if you can’t get into the top two spots. So let’s start with the easy part. We can dismiss all the Tier 3 candidates, as they have no chance at this point of getting into the top 2. I think we can also dismission the Tier 2 candidates. Huang is likely too radical to make top two (especially given that the more conventional Raman is in the game), and Miller is just another Wealthy Guy trying to buy his way in not knowing what he is doing.

That leaves us with the three Tier 1 canddiates, and one of them can get tossed quickly: Spencer Pratt. He’s Republican-leaning, he echoes Republican ideas, and his personality makes Trump shine. He’ll likely make the top two of the primary, tho, thanks to the Republican leanings and the fact that the Republicans that don’t like Bass hate Raman even more.

We’re now down to two: Nithya Raman and Karen Bass. I wrote this summary working my way up the candidates. While researching Raman I was growing to like her, until I ran into her lack of positions on public safety and wildfire response. I then researched Bass, and found out that she had done a lot more than I had known. Yup, she screwed up on the wildfire response, but I’m also not sure that her presence would have done more, or that even a perfect Fire Department could have done more. She has a much better handle on public safety than Raman, and I think she’s taken the lessons from the wildfires to heart. She’s also making progress in other areas, such as housing, the homeless situation, infrastructure, and transportion. She’s not as transformational as Tom Bradley, but she is making progress. She does suffer from the common problem of LA Mayors: She ignores the San Fernando Valley. We get promises, but the focus remains on the S side of the Santa Monica Mountains.

In any case, investigating Raman vs Bass led me to the conclusion that Bass deserves a second term. She’s not perfect, but she’s good enough and is making progress. Raman has some good ideas, but is missing good concrete plans on public safety and wildfires. The attacks from the LAPPL don’t help.

Conclusion: Karen Bass (NP/Leans ) INC

◊

City Attorney

According to the city, as the City’s general counsel, the City Attorney provides advice and opinions on matters of municipal concern, examines contracts and ordinances as to form and legality, and is frequently called upon to interpret the City Charter, federal and state statutes, and other laws that govern Los Angeles. As the City’s chief prosecutor, the City Attorney prosecutes all misdemeanor criminal offenses and infractions occurring in the City of Los Angeles. The City Attorney works closely with local law enforcement agencies to prosecute crimes through the Criminal Branches of the City Attorney’s Office located throughout Los Angeles. The City Attorney’s Office is also a resource for victims and witnesses of crimes, and provides a network of referral services as well as crisis intervention and support. Additionally, the City Attorney administers a number of citywide crime prevention initiatives focused on preserving the quality of life throughout Los Angeles’ neighborhoods. The City Attorney litigates all civil actions on behalf of the City and represents the City, its boards and officers in all civil trials and legal proceedings, in both state and federal court. The City Attorney advocates for the benefit of the City before the United States Congress and the State Legislature and represents the City in proceedings before the State Public Utilities Commission, the Federal Maritime Board, and other federal and state administrative bodies and committees when the City is an interested party.

In order to assess whether to support the incumbent or not, I asked Google AI for a summary of the incumbent’s negatives. These were the Key Controversies and Criticisms that Gemini identified: (ref)

• Massive Data Breach & Loss of Police Endorsement: In April 2026, her office disclosed that it had inadvertently leaked 7.7 terabytes of data. This included thousands of confidential LAPD disciplinary records. The breach occurred because the files were placed on a non-password-protected file-sharing system. Critics and council members lambasted her for waiting weeks to disclose the breach. Consequently, the Los Angeles Police Protective League rescinded its endorsement of her 2026 re-election campaign.
• Skid Row Housing Trust Receivership: In 2023, Feldstein Soto recommended Mark Adams as the receiver to manage the Skid Row Housing Trust. Months later, she admitted it was a mistake after Adams failed to make progress on safety problems and wrongfully threatened hundreds of vulnerable tenants with eviction. It was later revealed by the Los Angeles Times that Adams had hosted a campaign fundraiser for her.
• Staff Whistleblower Claims & Workplace Environment: Multiple former employees filed retaliation claims against her. One high-ranking former prosecutor alleged that Feldstein Soto demanded a case dismissal because the defendant was represented by a maximum campaign donor. Other employees have accused her of reading staff emails without consent and creating a “climate of fear” in the office.
• Targeting Journalists and the Public Records Act: Feldstein Soto drew harsh criticism from press freedom advocates after her office sued a journalist and an advocacy group to force the return of LAPD officer photos that the city had originally legally provided under a public records request. She was also criticized for attempting to lobby state legislators to weaken the California Public Records Act in response to the error.
• Soaring Legal Payouts: Critics and political opponents have pointed to a massive surge in liability payments by the city. Her office took a highly combative stance against plaintiffs rather than settling. Opponents argue this forced cases to trial that ultimately yielded massive jury verdicts against the city.
• Pro-Palestinian Bias Allegations: In 2025, a judge found some evidence of “biased prosecution” by her office regarding its aggressive stance in charging pro-Palestinian protesters who blocked traffic, noting that such prosecutions are historically rare in Los Angeles.
• Opposition to Affordable Housing: She faced backlash and lawsuits from housing advocates for instructing city agencies not to interact with developers regarding a previously approved 140-unit affordable housing complex in Venice.

This is a fair set of negatives. The potential replacements need to address these concerns and indicate how they would prevent them. For me, the big one is the data breach, but they all are reasonable concerns.

Useful References:

• LA Public Press: “Who is running for LA City Attorney?“
• LA Times: “Your guide to the L.A. city attorney’s race: three against Hydee Feldstein Soto“

◯ Aida Ashouri (NP/Leans )

Her about page provides a detailed background. Aida Ashouri is a former staff attorney at Public Counsel and Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, representing tenants and low-income small business owners. Ashouri has also worked for the LA City Attorney and the San Diego City Attorney. LinkedIn shows the following experience: Self Employed Public Rights Attorney, March 2025 – Present; Staff Attorney at the Affirmative Litigation Division of the Homelessness Prevent Project, 9 mos; Staff Attorney at the Legal Aid Foundation of LA, 1yr4mo; Attorney Advisor, US SBA, 2yr5mo; Associate at Foley & Mansfield PLLP, 1yr9mo. She received her JD from the UC Berkeley School of Law. She also attended George Washington University, Elliot School of International Affairs with a master’s in International Affairs; and the University of California, Irvine, with a bachelor’s in international studies. She was admitted to the bar in 2014, and has an active license: #300502. She was elected to the board of the Los Feliz Neighborhood Council from 2021-2025, and appointed to the Griffith Park Advisory Board in 2022-2024.

Her platform has the following thrusts: (1) Holding slumlords accountable; (2) Protecting our rights to protest and be free from unreasonable search and seizure; (3) Support for immigrants and workers; (4) Safeguarding our environment; (5) Supporting survivors of domestic and sexual violence; (6) Prioritizing mediation and restorative justice in our communities; (7) Housing over handcuffs; and (8) Taking concrete action to make our streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists.

Reading through her Patch interview, one gets the sense of a very progressive agenda. It is unclear if she would be strong enough on crime for the city, or whether her progressive approach would sink her just like it sunk George Gascon. It would certainly be a breath of fresh air in terms of approach, but I’m not sure it would work.

I find it odd that her campaign committee is far out of Los Angeles, out in Rancho Mirage.

According to LA Public Press, Ashouri has endorsements from organizations and individuals that include the Peace & Freedom Party Los Angeles; civil rights organizer Eric Mann; Yolanda Davis-Overstreet, the founder of Biking While Black; and Tany Ling, founder of the Stop the Gondola coalition.

◯ John McKinney (NP/Leans )

McKinney has worked as a prosecutor for the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s office for nearly 30 years. McKinney said that he has tried nearly 40 murder cases, including the man who shot and killed Nipsey Hussle. He currently heads up the office’s bureau of specialized prosecutions, overseeing cases from gang homicide to sex crimes to the office’s entire juvenile division. According to his About page, he did his undergraduate at Rutgers and got his law degree at the UCLA School of Law. He was admitted to the bar in 1998; his license is #194455. He ran for District Attorney in 2024. After he failed to get past the primary, he endorsed Nathan Hochman.

His top three priorities as city attorney are public safety, fiscal responsibility, and  rooting out fraud, waste, corruption, and abuse in the government. His issues page highlights the following issues: (1) Public Safety and Neighborhood Protection; (2) Reducing Lawsuits and Protecting Taxpayer Dollars; (3) Fiscal Responsibility and Modernizing the City Attorney’s Office; (4) Compassionate Accountability on Homelessness; (5) Fighting Corruption and Protecting the Public Trust; (6) Protecting Workers and Combating Exploitation; (7) Protecting the Environment and Public Health; (8) Protecting Renters While Respecting Property Rights; and (9) Connecting the City Attorney’s Office to the Community. This seems a relatively progressive agenda.

According to LA Public Press, McKinney has endorsements from former LA County District Attorneys Steve Cooley and Jackie Lacey.

Marissa Roy (NP/Leans )

According to her LinkedIn profile, Roy is a Deputy Attorney General in the California Department of Justice, and a Lecturer in Law at USC. Previously, she was a staff attorney at the Public Rights Project for 2 years, and an Associate at O’Melveny & Myers LLP for 2 years. Roy worked for the City Attorney’s Office from 2017 until 2018 She was also a clerk for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. She has a Masters in Public Diplomacy from USC, and a JD from Yale Law School. She was admitted to the bar in 2017; her active license is #318773. She did studies in Rwanda to learn how law is implemented after Genocide. From that, she learned how important it is to take culture and people’s experiences into account when administering the law. Though Americans are often taught that the law is objective, Roy said Rwanda showed her that law is in fact always subjective, based on people’s gender, socioeconomic status and other factors.

Roy believes Feldstein-Soto “has failed us in so many ways.” She said Feldstein-Soto has missed opportunities to stand up to the Trump Administration, worked to block the construction of affordable housing, and prosecuted journalists and pro-Palestinian protesters. If elected, Roy said she would file more lawsuits to protect families, workers, and tenants, including through stronger enforcement of the city’s Tenant Anti-Harassment law, which has led to 13,000 complaints of tenant harassment. Roy said she would also do more to protect LA residents from Trump administration policies. Roy was part of a legal clinic that challenged Trump’s attacks on sanctuary cities, and when she later worked at O’Melveny & Myers LLP, where she was outside counsel for LA County, she penned briefs on more than a dozen legal cases challenging the first Trump Administration. (LAPP)

Her online platform addresses the following areas: (1) Protecting workers’ rights; (2) Protecting tenants’ rights; (3) Protecting the environment; (4) Protecting consumers; (5) Fighting Trump; (6) Addressing housing and homelessness; (7) Building community safety; and (8) Saving taxpayer dollars.

LA Public Press noted that Roy said she would also expand the City Attorney’s office public rights division, devoting more lawyers to  issues like workers’ rights, tenants’ rights, climate justice and litigation against the Trump administration. She said she wants to limit the use of outside counsel and negotiate a government rate if the city has to contract with an outside firm. As for the city’s liability payments, Roy said she would welcome an audit from the city controller, to help identify recurring issues and what it costs when they’re not fixed.

She has raised over $638,567 in campaign contributions, second only to Feldstein Soto.

She has a large number of endorsements, including a large number of unions and Democratic organizations. She has endorsements from LA City Council members Eunisses Hernandez and Ysabel Jurado, as well as LA County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath. She’s also endorsed by the California AG, and a number of significant elected officials.

◯ Hydee Feldstein Soto (NP/Leans ) INC

Hydee Feldstein Soto is the 43^rd Los Angeles City Attorney, elected in November 2022 and sworn into office in December 2022. Prior to that, she was VP and Interim General Counsel at Kin Community, and a partner at Sullivan & Cormwell LLP. She was also an Equity Partner at Paul Hastings. She has BA in Political Science and Economics from Swarthmore, and a JD from Columbia University. She was admitted to the bar in 1982, license #106866.

According to her campaign website, her main areas of focus are (1) Keeping Los Angeles Safe; (2) Standing Up For Our Immigrant Communities and the U.S. Constitution; (3) Protecting Your Rights and Your Wallet​​; (4) Fighting for Workers; (5) Protecting Women and Girls; (6) Helping Renters Stay in Their Homes; (7) Helping Our Unhoused Get Back on their Feet; (8) Solving Neighborhood Problems; and (9) Keeping Government Honest.

According to the LA Times, Feldstein Soto has highlighted her work fighting sex trafficking on the city’s notorious Figueroa Corridor and, more recently, nearby Western Avenue. She said the city has shifted emphasis away from arresting sex workers and toward the prosecutions of the johns. The city attorney said she also has worked to expand “restorative justice” programs, including one that holds outdoor court proceedings on Skid Row. She defended her record on legal payouts, saying such costs have been climbing in cities across the country. She pointed to the huge payments being made by Los Angeles County, which signed off on a $4-billion settlement to resolve thousands of claims of sexual abuse. She also contends that her office experienced a backlog in payouts in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in a lengthy shutdown of the courts.

She’s raised more than $845,582 in campaign contributions.

She has a large number of endorsements: Some unions, Democratic clubs, womens groups, latino groups. She has the backing of Mayor Karen Bass and Senator Adam Schiff. She has a fair number of elected officials: city, county, and state elected.

Conclusion

For me, this is a decision between Feldstein Soto and Roy. I think Ashouri is too progressive for the office and would run into problems. McKinney’s dearth of endorsements, plus the fact of who he does have endorsing him is problematic for me. Normally, I’d like Feldstein Soto’s progressive positions  and her pattern of what she’s done so far. She also has strong endorsements. But she’s also racked up a large track record of programs and poor judgement while in office. The city doesn’t need that. Roy has some good plans and proposals, and has strong endorsements behind her.

Conclusion: Marissa Roy (NP/Leans )

◊

City Controller

The LA City Controller is the chief accounting officer, auditor and paymaster for the City of Los Angeles. One of the Controller’s main functions is to analyze the effectiveness of different city departments. The Controller oversees 3 divisions: Audit Services, Accounting Operations, and Financial Reporting along with 160 employees who conduct independent audits. These auditors are in charge of managing city payroll and spending, report on city finance, and provide City metrics and data.

According to the Google AI summary, key criticisms and negative points associated with Kenneth Mejia include:

• Office Management and Turnover: Shortly after taking office, Mejia faced allegations of a “terrible and toxic” work environment from former campaign staffers turned employees, leading to the dismissal of key staff, including his director of technology and director of community engagement.
• Blurring Campaign and City Work: He has faced scrutiny for using city resources, specifically his corgis and associated graphics, for both official office communications and campaign materials. A complaint was filed with the city’s Ethics Commission regarding this issue.
• Political Activism over Auditing: Critics argue his office acts more as an activist organization than a professional auditing entity. This includes focusing on public safety and homelessness spending, which has created tension within City Hall.
• Past Controversial Statements: Former City Controller Laura Chick called Mejia “unfit” due to his “erratic” behavior and past social media posts, such as those calling President Biden a “racist” and “rapist”.
• Unfulfilled Audit Promises: While promising to audit, Mejia has been criticized for not delivering on promised audits, such as a “focused audit” on the Inside Safe homelessness initiative, which was instead sent to a private firm.
• Aggressive Approach: His confrontational, often anti-establishment, approach has been described as divisive by some, with some staff expressing frustration over his management style.

Mejia has countered these criticisms by arguing that he is shaking up the status quo, fulfilling campaign promises of transparency, and focusing on the public’s money, stating that his work has made the Controller position more active and visible.

Useful reference:

• LA Times, “Your guide to the L.A. city controller race: Kenneth Mejia faces challenger Zach Sokoloff“

Kenneth Mejia (NP) INC

First and foremost: TIL that the LA City Controller’s website has a map to LA City and County bathrooms and water fountains on its website. That’s a great service.

Before I get to the background: Looking closer at the LA City Controller’s website: Boy, has Mejia put a lot of data out there. He is really being transparent about what his office is doing. For example, there’s an interactive city budget, a homelessness dashboard, a liability claims dashboard, a city departments metrics dashboard. There are financial datasets made public: payroll, the city checkbook, all city funds, and revenue data. There are all sorts of oversight and audit reports. There are all sorts of financial reports and budgets. There are data sites: speed camera maps, unspent homelessnetss funds, capital projects, parking tickets. This is what the State Controllers office should be doing — if this guy ran for State Controller, I’ve support him in a heartbeat.

Oh, and as for his background. Kenneth Mejia is the only CPA running for City Controller. He has 15 years of accounting & auditing experience. In 2022, he won the most votes of any controller candidate in city history, despite lacking name recognition and running against a sitting city council member, Paul Koretz. He graduated from Woodbury University in 2010 with a Bachelor of Science in Accounting, and worked as an auditor at a “Big 4” accounting firm before becoming a CPA and community organizer.

According to the LA Times, with respect to the current LA City Budget shortfall, Mejia said he has tried to right the budget by warning about potential shortfalls as well as large increases for liability payouts. He also has discouraged the city from raising taxes and pushed for other ways to make money, including hitting owners of empty properties with a vacancy tax. With respect to homelessness, Mejia has been critical of the city’s spending, citing an instance in which half the money budgeted to address the issue went unspent. He believes the city controller’s office should review spending on homelessness programs to potentially catch fraud situations. However, he said that with just five investigators, it’s “next to impossible” to investigate all of the 700 waste, fraud and abuse claims his office receives each year. Mejia said his team built a map showing that multifamily housing projects have been concentrated in denser, low-income areas. The city, he said, could increase housing affordability by building in single-family areas that haven’t experienced racial redlining.

Mejia has a number of union endorsements, but has specifically not opted to seek or accept endorsements from political parties to maintain the independence of the Controller’s office.

◯ Zach Sokoloff (NP/Leans )

Sokoloff graduated from Yale University, received a master’s in education policy and administration from Loyola Marymount University and an MBA from Harvard University before teaching algebra at a middle school in Boyle Heights and a high school in Watts. He joined Hackman Partners in 2018, where he has worked on multibillion projects transforming legacy studio lots. He claims his experience managing large-scale projects is key to navigating the city’s budget and bureaucracy.

According to the LA Times, with respect to the current LA City Budget shortfall, Sokoloff said the previous budget crisis — the city recently faced a nearly $1-billion deficit — will be the pervading issue in the coming years. If elected, he would audit basic city services — roads, sidewalks, street lights — to see where the money is going. He would appoint a chief revenue officer to find new income streams. With respect to homelessness, Sokoloff said affordable housing units cost too much to build and he wants to work with the city to build cheaper housing more quickly. He supports bringing back a dashboard showing city-owned vacant land that potentially could be built on, and believes it’s important to maintain a working relationship with the county to avoid duplication and finger-pointing.

Sokoloff has raised significantly more money: $510,594 to Mejia’s $112,761. That raises the question of independence: How beholden will Sokoloff be to his contributors?

Sokoloff has all the of political endorsements that Mejia eschewed: Democratic clubs, Democratic elected officials. He also has a fair number of unions backing him.

Conclusion

I was blown away by the City Controller’s website and its transparency. I’ve read through the negatives, but they don’t convince me that we need to change the leadership here. I also think it is important to have a skilled CPA in this office. I don’t believe that Sokoloff’s experience is relevant to the controller’s office.

Conclusion: Kenneth Mejia (NP) INC

https://cahighways.org/wordpress/?p=17606

Posted by cahwyguy

https://cahighways.org/wordpress/?p=17601

Here in California (and in Los Angeles in particular), we have an election coming up. You know what that means: Every election, I do a detailed ballot analysis of my sample ballot. This is where I examine each candidate and share my conclusions, and invite you to convince me to vote for the other jerk.  Because this is a long ballot, I’m splitting this analysis into a few chunks (note: links may not be available until all segments are posted):

1. Governor of California
2. Other State and National Offices (excluding judges)
3. County and City (Los Angeles) Local Offices (excluding judges)
4. Measures (nee Propositions)
5. Judicial Offices (County and State)
6. Summary

Note: This analysis is NOT presented in the same order as the Sample Ballot (the ballot order makes no sense). I’ve attempted instead to present things in more logical order.

This part covers the Governor’s race, which has so many candidates it is getting it own post. We’re going to divide this into three tiers:

1. Realistic “Past The Gate” Candidates: These are the folks that are polling sufficiently high enough that they have a change of getting into the “top two” general election. Realistically, if you want your vote to have impact, you’ll pick one from this tier.
2. Valid Candidate, But No Chance, Candidates. These are the folks that are actually reasonable and sane candidate, perhaps with decent positions. However, they are polling so low that, given the jungle primary, a vote for one of these is wasted (and could, in fact, result in a problematic general election).
3. Hopefuls, Kooks and Nuts. Any election brings out a large number of folks who are running for reasons they only understand. Given the nature of the California Primary system, they have no chance. A vote for them is wasted, essentially. But, as I promise in these reviews to give consideration to everyone, they will at least get a paragraph, even if it is a paragraph of “hell no”. You’ll see why I’m saying that.

Bottom Line Up Front: Here’s the bottom line for the Governor’s Race, as the Republican Candidates are unacceptable, and all of the top tier Democratic candidates are: Vote for the top polling Democratic candidate as of May 15 or later, to ensure a Democratic candidate gets into the General election. You can’t go wrong with any of the top tier Democratic candidates. And remember: Perfect is the enemy of “Good Enough”. We can’t get a perfect candidate; good enough will do.

Now, if you push me to select a favorite candidate, it is Katie Porter. I liked her when she announced, and I still like her. Alas, she is not polling that well, and she’ll likely land below the cutoff where I’ll be able to vote for her. My second choice is Tom Steyer. I don’t like the fact that he is a billionaire or his lack of experience. But I still think he’ll be better for California than Becerra.

Tier 1: Realistic “Past The Gate” Candidates

The top tier of candidates contains those candidates polling above 5% in most polls. These candidates have been in all of the televised debates, and are generally considered front-runners. California has a unique primary system: It is the top two winners overall (regardless of party) that advance to the general election. This means that if the Democrats divide the vote too much, the top two candidates could both be Republicans. I’ll address that calculus (because it does impact choices) in my conclusion at the bottom, and (as you’ve seen if you read this sequentially) in the Bottom Line Up Front. For now, for each candidate, I’m going to talk about their strengths and weaknesses from my perspective, including my assessment of their debate performance. I’m also going to be asking Google AI to summarize their negatives, as it produces a more concise result and can comb though a lot more webpages.

A few last reminders:

• Single Payer Health Care. The phrase “single payer health care” does not mean free healthcare. Remember that folks on Medicare pay premiums (often it is deducted from Social Security checks); those who earn more money can pay much more in premiums (look up IRMAA). If you are Medicare Part C, you may also pay different premiums based on the quality of your plan. Where Single Payer saves money is by having a single administrative apparatus to handle claim processing and payments, and a single set of rules regard payment for procedures and such. This saves a lot of overhead money (which reduces costs), and makes lives easier for the medical community because they have one set of rules. Additionally, if the government or a non-profit runs the single payer, costs are less because they don’t have to return profit to the shareholders. However, single-payer also makes it easier for the government to deny procedures and medicines they don’t like.
• SB1 Gas Tax. With the high price of gas, people like to complain about the gas tax. They blame the gas tax for the high price of gas in California. That’s not entirely true. As of July 1, 2025, the California SB 1 (Road Repair and Accountability Act) gasoline excise tax is 61.2 cents per gallon. This rate is adjusted annually every July 1^st based on the California Consumer Price Index to account for inflation.  Note that it is a fixed amount: That means that through all of the Iranian “Conflict”, it hasn’t changed. The gas tax has not made California gas more expensive, and the cost it adds to California gas is much less than folks think (there is also Federal Gas Tax). The Gas Tax goes to road repair and transit. It’s allocation is controlled by the California Transportation Commission (read my pages for more details), and there is transparency on how it is spent. There is an excellent website detailing transportation spending, and there is a specific map showing projects.  Two additional notes: (1) The SB1 Gas Tax does not go towards High Speed Rail; (2) the VMT is a separate proposed tax and currently electrics and hybrids also support the road through a specific fee on their registration. The VMT is a proposed tax for electric and hybrid vehicles only (different rates) that is based on miles driven; it is necessary because such vehicles do not pay into the SB1 funds.
• High Speed Rail. There are lots of complaints about High Speed Rail and its costs. Most folks don’t understand what has led to the high costs and delays, and it is important to understand what is happening (as it is common in many major projects). First, NEPA and CEQA (the Federal and State Environmental approval processes) add to costs simply because they require lots of public reviews and approvals. Those approvals were less in the Central Valley, which is where they started building the line, but are significant for other parts of the route, such as crossing the passes and mountains into Southern California. There are also major design issues related to the soil composition and utilities. Utilities are a big issue, and construction of the line means moving existing rail lines and power utilities (owned by private entities, who balk and delay at moving their lines). There is also the need to move existing roads and cross existing roads, which means involvement with city, county, and state construction projects and authorities. I know (for example) there was major rerouting of Route 99 in Fresno. There have been problems with HSR, and the reports are all available from the State Auditor. There have been financial problems, yes, but all large government construction problems have some level of those problems, and the eventual end result is worth it. That’s true of HSR as well: Having a fast HSR system between LA and the Bay Area will remove a lot of vehicles from the road, and provide significant environmental benefits and benefits to business.
• When Was California At Its Best. A number of the Republican candidates are pining for the “good old days”, and believe that the days of prosperity were under Ronald Reagan. They should check their history. What brought California prosperity was the administration of the strong Democrat “Pat” Brown, Jerry Brown’s father, who left office in 1966. It was under Brown that the UC system achieved its excellence, and it was under Brown that the Freeway system was constructed and numerous homes were constructed. Reagan’s administration started the destruction of that system. Jerry Brown (in his first go around) tried to recover the budget through austerity. Governors since then have just been trying to recover things. As always, I highly recommend this book: “The Last Days of the Late, Great, State of California” by Curt Gentry. It explains well the pivotal election of 1966 that brought us the Republican party of today.

And now, let’s explore the candidates:

◯ Xavier Becerra (D)

Xavier Becerra served as the 25^th United States Secretary of Health and Human Services under President Joe Biden from 2021 to 2025. Becerra previously served as the 33^rd attorney general of California from 2017 to 2021 and as a U.S. representative from California from 1993 to 2017. Born and raised in Sacramento as the son of Mexican immigrants, Becerra received a Bachelor of Arts and a Juris Doctor from Stanford University. He worked as an administrative assistant for state senator Art Torres and as a deputy attorney general in the California Department of Justice in the late 1980s. He served in the California State Assembly from 1990 to 1992. First elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1992, Becerra chaired the Congressional Hispanic Caucus from 1997 to 1999 and the House Democratic Caucus from 2013 to 2017. In 2017, Governor Jerry Brown appointed Becerra to replace Kamala Harris as attorney general after Harris was elected to the U.S. Senate. He was elected to a full term in 2018 and served until he joined the Biden cabinet in 2021. (Wikipedia)

I asked Google AI to summarize Becerra’s negatives. It noted that Becerra faces significant criticism regarding his management at the federal level, an ongoing campaign finance scandal involving former top aides, and shifting stances on key policy issues like healthcare.

• • • Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Tenure: Critics and former colleagues from the Biden administration have attacked Becerra’s record as HHS Secretary, particularly his handling of major crises: (•) Migrant Child Crisis: Rivals, including Tom Steyer and Matt Mahan, have highlighted a New York Times investigation revealing that HHS lost contact with approximately 85,000 unaccompanied migrant children during his tenure. Critics allege Becerra rushed their release to sponsors while ignoring safety warnings, leading to some children being trafficked or forced into illegal child labor. (•) Inadequate Crisis Management: Some former Biden administration officials have characterized Becerra as “ineffective” and “not cut out” for high-level management, alleging he lacked urgency and was often unprepared when briefing the President on COVID-19 and border issues. (•) Lack of Health Expertise: During his confirmation and subsequent tenure, he was frequently criticized for having no medical or public health background despite leading the nation’s primary health agency.
    • Campaign Finance Scandal: Becerra’s gubernatorial bid has been shadowed by a federal corruption investigation: (•) Theft of Funds: In late 2025 and early 2026, his longtime former chief of staff, Sean McCluskie, and other associates were charged with conspiring to steal $225,000 from Becerra’s dormant state campaign account. (•) Management Scrutiny: Although Becerra has not been charged with wrongdoing and maintains he was unaware of the scheme, opponents argue the incident undermines his “managerial acumen” and raises questions about his judgment in choosing inner-circle staff.
    • Policy and Political Criticism: (•) Healthcare “Backpedaling”: While Becerra has long championed a single-payer system, he has recently faced backlash for “subduing” this message and sidestepping questions about whether he would support a state-run single-payer system as governor. (•) Record as Attorney General: During his time as California’s top prosecutor, some editorial boards labeled him the “top coddler of bad cops” for initially resisting certain police oversight efforts. Conservative critics also point to his office’s legal battles with religious groups, such as the Little Sisters of the Poor. (•) “Status Quo” Label: Rivals such as Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Matt Mahan argue that Becerra represents a continuation of current Governor Gavin Newsom’s policies, which they blame for California’s high cost of living and crime rates.

For some of these, the extent to which Becerra has major problems is unclear. But often, it is the appearance of problems that can take on a life of its own, and how those problems are addressed (or deflected) that matters. Becerra has been responding poorly in the debates, attempting to deflect responsibility vs acknowledging his role (even if his role was small). It is that deflection of responsibility that is a problem and may be hurting him.

He has also had a problem with interrupting others during the debate, and not showing respect to others on the playing field. He talked over others quite a bit, and (as noted above) never noted where he might be wrong. That comes off as a bit bullying.

Where Becerra is someone better is his positions. He has a strong set of priorities on his website, most of which I agree with. For each, he details both his accomplishments in that area and what he will do at Governor. He has also described his policies well during the debates.

Becerra has a large number of endorsements. Our assemblycritter Pilar Schiavo endorsed him (as well as Thurmond). He has a fair number of elected officials, although not a lot of names I recognize. He has perhaps four construction unions, the Faculty Association, the Nurses (although I think they also endorsed a second candidate), SEIU (although, again, I think they have a split endorsement), and some physicians and dentists, and the California Medical Association. One would think a former HHS secretary would get more healthcare endorsements, and a former AG would get more law enforcement endorsements (although those often go to the Republicans). He has a lot of Democratic groups, plus Planned Parenthood and Equality California. He also has a number of environmental justice endorsements.

Note that one of his endorsements, from CHIRLA, is controversial. As of May 2026, the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA) is involved in a controversy regarding its endorsement of gubernatorial candidate Xavier Becerra and allegations of using state-funded resources for political activity. Critics allege the group employs individuals not authorized to work to campaign for Becerra, prompting calls for investigations. CHIRLA has defended its actions.

◯ Chad Bianco (R)

Chad Bianco has served as sheriff of Riverside County, California, since 2019. He holds a Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice/Police Science from Columbia Southern University. He attended the College of Eastern Utah and the University of Utah between 1985 and 1989 before moving to California. In 1993, he attended the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Academy. He graduated at the top of his class, and joined the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department shortly after graduation. Bianco was first elected Riverside County sheriff in 2018. He was re-elected in 2022 with about 60% of votes for a term set to last until 2028 due to a state law changing sheriff election years to match presidential ones. (Wikipedia)

As with the other candidates, I asked Google AI for Bianco’s negatives. According to Google, there are quite a few. Bianco has faced scrutiny over his past membership in an extremist group, rising jail deaths, and his controversial use of law enforcement power for election-related investigations.

• • • Extremist Group Affiliation: (•) Oath Keepers Membership: In May 2026, Bianco drew significant backlash during a nationally televised debate when he stated he was “very proud” of his past membership in the Oath Keepers, a far-right anti-government militia linked to the January 6 Capitol attack. (•) Refusal to Disavow: While he previously downplayed his 2014 membership as a brief, one-year affiliation, his recent defense of the group has led critics to label his judgment as unfit for higher office.
    • Election Investigation Controversies: (•) Ballot Seizure: In March 2026, Bianco used criminal warrants to seize over 650,000 ballots from a 2025 special election, citing unsubstantiated claims of fraud. (•) Supreme Court Halt: The California Supreme Court eventually ordered him to pause the investigation and unsealed his warrants, which revealed no direct evidence of voter fraud. (•) Legal Fee Refusal: The Riverside County Board of Supervisors voted not to pay for the private law firm Bianco hired for the probe, leaving him to face millions in accrued legal costs.
    • Jail Conditions and Misconduct: (•) Rising In-Custody Deaths: Under his leadership, Riverside County jails have seen a surge in inmate deaths, leading the nation in 2022 and prompting a state civil rights investigation by the California Attorney General. (•) Large Settlements: His department has been hit with millions of dollars in lawsuit settlements, including a $7.5 million wrongful death settlement in early 2026 and a $2.25 million award to a sergeant who reported workplace harassment. (•) Low Crime-Solving Record: A 2025 report ranked his department last in California for its crime clearance rate regarding major offenses.
    • Policy and Pandemic Stances: (•) COVID-19 Defiance: Bianco gained national attention for refusing to enforce mask and stay-at-home mandates, labeling them “tyrannical” and criticizing Governor Newsom’s policies as hypocritical. (•) Constitutional Overreach: Critics argue his “Constitutional Sheriff” philosophy—believing sheriffs have supreme authority over state and federal law—represents a disdain for legal accountability.

Quite a few of these are major problems for me. A law enforcement official should follow the law, and being part of an association that support violation of the law on January 6 is not right; further, sheriff department officials should not be part of paramilitary unofficial groups. That was a major problem with the gangs and cliques in the LA Sheriff’s Department. The Sheriff should not be seizing ballots in an election that has already been settled and approved by the Secretary of State, especially when it breaks the chain of custody. Again, that’s an example of a Sheriff putting himself above the law. Wrongful deaths and civil rights investigations should not be due to actions during the administration of a Sheriff that is following the law. Add to that a refusal to follow state mandates and arguing that he has supreme authority. This is all a pattern of someone who puts their beliefs above the Constitution (State and Federal) and puts themselves above the law. It is wrong whoever does it, be it Bianco or Trump. Bianco said lawbreakers need to go to jail: if he truly believes that, he belongs in jail.

He has a wide set of policies and priorities on his website. I disagree with most of them. He wants to kill HSR. He wants to get rid of the gas tax. You know my stance on those. He believes that all homeless have mental health and drug problems. That’s not true; most have been pushed to the streets because of the financial situation in the state, the loss of jobs, medical bills, or the cost of housing. Solve those problems (which are cheaper to solve), and you make a large dent in the homeless. Go after the low hanging fruit first.

He also has traditional MAGA positions regarding things like gay rights, abortion, trans rights, civil rights, and much more. I completely disagree with those. I’m guessing you do to, as you wouldn’t be reading my pages otherwise. I’m often surprised by the support for Bianco in FB comments or Nextdoor, but I guess those forums give the MAGAites a freedom to speak louder than their weight.

I also abhor Bianco’s performance during the debates. He was disrespectful (especially to Katie Porter), and talked all over other candidates, acting like the bully that he is.

He has a fair number of endorsements. A small number of elected officials. Loads of public safety officials.  More local elected folks, mostly from Republican cities. He has a number of county-level Republican organizations and affinity Republican organizations, but not CAGOP. He has no union endorsements.

◯ Steve Hilton (R)

Stephen Hilton is a British and American conservative political commentator, former political adviser, and contributor for the Fox News Channel. He served as director of strategy for British prime minister David Cameron from 2010 to 2012. Hilton hosted The Next Revolution, a weekly current affairs show for Fox News from 2017 to 2023. He is a proponent of what he calls “positive populism” and is a strong endorser of U.S. President Donald Trump. He was a co-founder of the crowd-funding platform Crowdpac, but resigned as CEO in 2018. He was given a bursary to Christ’s Hospital School in Horsham in Sussex, before studying Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at New College, Oxford. Hilton became a U.S. citizen in May 2021. (Wikipedia)

As with the other candidates, I asked Google AI about Hilton’s negatives. Having not served in public office before, his negatives have a slightly different spin. Hilton faces criticism over his past political associations, his media background, and his close alignment with Donald Trump in a deep-blue state.

• • • Political “Chameleon” and Past Liberal Ties: (•) Crowdpac Controversy: Hilton has been labeled a “chameleon” by primary rivals like Chad Bianco for his “dark past” as the co-founder and CEO of Crowdpac, a crowdfunding platform. Critics allege the company fundraised tens of millions for radical liberal causes, Black Lives Matter protesters, and activists resisting the Trump administration. (•) British Political Record: Opponents point to his background as a top strategist for former UK Prime Minister David Cameron, where he was credited with pushing for government shrinkage and deregulation. Critics argue this reflects a “visceral disdain for the state” that could lead to a “wrecked economy” if applied to California.
    • The “MAGA Problem” in California: (•) Trump Endorsement: While Donald Trump’s “complete and total endorsement” has helped Hilton lead GOP polling, analysts suggest it may be a liability in a general election. In a state where two-thirds of voters “loathe” Trump, his close alignment is framed as a significant electoral hurdle. (•) Election Integrity Stance: During debates, Hilton has been called out for refusing to explicitly state that Trump lost the 2020 election, a stance that has fueled criticism of his democratic credentials.
    • Managerial and Policy Critique: (•) Lack of Government Experience: Democratic rivals like Xavier Becerra have attacked his lack of practical governing experience, calling him a “Fox News talking head” who has never balanced a budget the size of California’s. (•) “Unrealistic” Promises: He has been accused of “lying to voters” over central campaign promises, such as his claim that he can slash gas prices to $3 a gallon. (•) Tax Plan Skepticism: While popular with some, his plan to eliminate state income tax for those earning under $100,000 has been criticized as necessitating drastic, potentially harmful cuts to state services.

Of the negatives surfaces by Google AI, there are a few that are problems (beyond his broader MAGA positions). First, there is his lack of government experience, and his lack of state government experience. He became a citizen in 2021. His broad civic experience is in the British political system. That’s very different than the legislative system of California. He also doesn’t have a legal background; he doesn’t have experience working with the legislature; he doesn’t have executive experience; he doesn’t have experience balancing government budgets. He just doesn’t have the experience. Now, sometimes that can work (Arnold Schwarzenegger), but generally it doesn’t (Trump). I’m also bothered by his stance regarding the 2020 election. That election was done and settled, and the Congress selected a President. At this point, there should be no debating regarding its validity.

His policies are on his webpage. They are MAGA policies. I disagree with them. I shouldn’t need to say much more. Those values are not my values. I will, however, note that some of them do align with Democratic policies, such as speeding up the permitting process.

With respect to his debate performance: With respect to the Republicans, I think he came off as way better than Bianco. If you are looking for a Republican candidate, Hilton is better than Bianco, hands down. He also showed a bit more respect to the other candidates on the stage.

I just generally believe Hilton has policies that are incompatible with my values, and he lacks the experience required for the position.

Steve Hilton does not list endorsements on his website. He has the big one for his followers: Donald Trump. He does not have the endorsement of the CAGOP, as they are staying out of the primary fight. Other key endorsers are: Vivek Ramaswamy, Tom McClintock, Gloria Romero, the Nisei Farmers League, the Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC), Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association (PAC), Israeli-American Civic Action Network, California Republican Assembly, California Rifle and Pistol Association, Rupert Murdoch, (the late) Charlie Kirk, and numerous Tech Industry Leaders.

◯ Matt Mahan (D)

Matthew Mahan has served as the mayor of San Jose, California since 2023. Mahan previously served as a member of the San Jose City Council from 2021 to 2023. Mahan was the co-founder and CEO of Brigade Media, a tech company focused on civic engagement. Mahan graduated magna cum laude from Harvard University in 2005 with a degree in social studies. He served as president of the Harvard Undergraduate Council. He also received a Michael C. Rockefeller Memorial Fellowship to Bolivia, where he spent the year after graduation working on economic development projects. Mahan spent a year building irrigation systems in Bolivia and then joined Teach for America where he was matched to Alum Rock Middle School in San Jose and taught seventh and eighth grade English and history from 2006 to 2008. In 2008, Mahan joined a tech startup led by Sean Parker and Joe Green. Together, they formed Causes, a for-profit civic technology Facebook application. Mahan became CEO and president of Causes in 2013. In 2014, Mahan launched Brigade with investments from Parker, Ron Conway, Marc Benioff, and others. Brigade was created as a social medium for civic engagement. In 2019, Brigade was acquired by Pinterest and its technology was purchased by Countable. (Wikipedia)

As with the other candidates, I asked Google AI for Mahan’s negatives. Google AI noted that Mahan is often criticized for his heavy reliance on tech industry funding, his late entry into the race, and a centrist platform that has alienated key Democratic power blocks like labor unions.

• • • Management and Policy Criticisms:  (•) Strained Relationship with Unions: Mahan is loathed by some labor unions due to disputes in San Jose over wages and his efforts to tie public employee pay to performance metrics. Critics argue that winning a California statewide office is historically difficult without major union support. (•) Controversial Homelessness Tactics: While he touts a reduction in homelessness, his “Responsibility to Shelter” policy has irritated activists who oppose compelling individuals into treatment or clearing encampments. Some critics also claim he relocates individuals without providing adequate long-term housing solutions. (•) Opposing “Progressive” Measures: Mahan has clashed with party leadership by opposing a wealth tax on billionaires and supporting Proposition 36, which increased penalties for drug and theft crimes—a move Governor Newsom and many progressives strongly opposed.
    • Campaign and Ethical Scrutiny: (•) “Billionaire Puppet” Label: His campaign has been fueled by millions from Silicon Valley executives, leading opponents to label him a “tech favorite” or a “billionaire puppet”. Rivals like Tom Steyer have accused his backers of profiting from data and surveillance while attacking labor interests. (•) Social Media Ethics: He faced “grumbles” at City Hall for using personal social media accounts, allegedly manicured by city-paid staff, to build a brand now used for his gubernatorial campaign. (•) Vague Political Identity: Critics from both sides have questioned his true representation after he was seen at fundraising events hosted by donors with visible “MAGA” ties, leading to claims that his words and track record do not align.
    • Electoral Obstacles: (•) Late Entry and Low Name ID: Entering the race just four months before the primary left him with little time to build statewide organization, especially in expensive markets like Los Angeles. (•) Rift with State Leadership: His frequent criticism of Governor Newsom is viewed as a “difficult place to start” in a deep-blue state where Newsom remains a party standard-bearer.

For me, the major negative of concern is his connection with the tech billionaires (and his subsequent seeming to eschew taxes on billionaires and limiting AI). Although not mentioned, another billionaire supporting him is Rick Caruso, who I abhor. If Caruso is for Mahan, I’m against him.

I’ll note that I debated whether Mahan belonged in Tier 2. Ultimately, I decided to include him because the major news organizations have included him in all the debates. He’s polling close to Porter, and I consider (and most consider) Porter a major candidate.

Mahan’s positions are detailed on his campaign site, although in a form that is harder to link. I disgree with some of them, especially stopping the gas tax. But overall, I can live with his approaches. I’m also not sure he has the state level experience necessary, but I guess running San Jose is sufficient.

In terms of debate performance: He came off as knowledgeable and had a command of his accomplishments. He did a fair amount of attacking and interrupting. I don’t believe he was disrespecting Porter.

He has a fair number of endorsements. There are a lot of local Bay Area elected officials. The only major organization is ThriveLA. There are no unions supporting him, nor Democratic clubs or organizations.

Katie Porter (D)

Katie Porter served as a U.S. representative from California from 2019 to 2025. Porter graduated from Yale University and Harvard Law School and has taught law at several universities, including the University of California, Irvine, the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and the University of Iowa. In 2018, she was elected to Congress as part of a Democratic wave in Orange County, flipping the 45^th district. In 2022, after redistricting, she was reelected in the 47^th congressional district. In the House, she was deputy chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and received media attention for her questioning during congressional hearings. She was noted for her use of whiteboards and other visual aids, and she gained a reputation as a fierce questioner. In 2023, Porter announced her candidacy for the U.S. Senate, forgoing reelection to the House of Representatives. She was defeated after failing to advance from the nonpartisan primary won by Adam Schiff and Steve Garvey. (Wikipedia)

As with the other candidates, I asked Google AI for negatives. Google AI noted that Porter has faced significant criticism regarding her temperament, workplace management, and past political rhetoric. These issues have notably impacted her standing in recent polling.

• • • Toxic Workplace and Staff Allegations.  (•) Viral “Get Out of My Shot” Video: In late 2025, a 2021 video surfaced showing Porter swearing at a staffer for entering her frame during a remote interview. Porter has since released a campaign ad attempting to poke fun at the incident, which critics labeled as “contempt” for mistreated employees. (•) “Bad Boss” Reputation: Former staffers have described a pattern of abusive behavior, including berating aides until they cried and using “cruel” tactics such as referring to underlings in the third person while they were present. (•) COVID-19 Controversy: Leaked text messages from 2022 showed Porter scolding a staffer for allegedly giving her COVID-19 and subsequently firing the staffer, though Porter’s office maintained the staffer was a fellow whose term had naturally ended. (•)
    • Temperament and Media Relations. (•) Combative Interview Style: In October 2025, Porter faced backlash after a heated interview with CBS Sacramento’s Julie Watts. She threatened to end the session early due to persistent follow-up questions, leading rival Betty Yee to call her “unfit to lead California”. (•) “Unhappy Experience” Comment: During the viral exchange, Porter stated she didn’t want to have an “unhappy experience” on camera, which critics argued signaled a lack of transparency and an inability to handle the scrutiny required of a governor.
    • Past Political Controversies.  (•) “Rigged” Election Claim: Following her loss in the 2024 U.S. Senate primary, Porter drew sharp rebuke from fellow Democrats for claiming the election was “rigged by billionaires”. Critics condemned the language as echoing Donald Trump’s rhetoric, though Porter later clarified she meant the influence of “dark money” rather than vote counting. (•) Allegations of Personal Conduct: Opponents have pointed to decade-old restraining order allegations filed by her ex-husband involving claims of verbal and physical abuse, including an incident where she allegedly dumped mashed potatoes on his head. Porter filed her own cross-claims of abuse against him during their divorce.
    • Policy and Electoral Challenges. (•) Healthcare and Immigration Stance: In 2026 debates, Republican rivals like Steve Hilton attacked her support for providing state-funded healthcare to undocumented immigrants, framing it as a fiscal burden on an already strained state budget. (•) Polling Decline: Following her viral outbursts, Porter’s support dropped significantly, with a November 2025 poll showing her trailing Antonio Villaraigosa and several other candidates as voters expressed being “less likely” to support her due to the controversies.

Of these, none are particularly major. Many, especially those regarding her behavior, would be perfectly tolerated if it was a male politician behaving that way. There’s often a double standard for female politicians, expecting them to be softer and sweeter, and calling them to task if they are hard or gruff. What is also notable is that Porter has generally acknowledged her behavior in these incidents, apologized, and worked to change her behavior.

Porter has a specific set of priorities on her website. I generally agree with her priorities, and I don’t recall anything from the debates I disagree with (except, perhaps, suspending the gas tax).

The debates demonstrated that she has a command of the facts, and that she has a calm demeanor under pressure (which goes against what the negatives are saying). She was much more respectful of the other speakers. She made cogent arguments, and notably none of the other debaters was really attacking her past.

She has endorsements from a large number of groups, including the Sacramento Bee. Lots of unions. Environmental groups. Womens groups. There are much fewer elected officials.

 Thomas Steyer (D)

Thomas Steyer is an American businessman, philanthropist, and environmentalist. Steyer is a graduate of Yale University (BA) and Stanford University (MBA). After graduating from Yale, Steyer began his professional career at Morgan Stanley in 1979 and spent two years there. Steyer worked at Goldman Sachs from 1983 to 1985 as an associate in the risk arbitrage division, where he was involved in mergers and acquisitions. Steyer also worked for San Francisco-based private equity firm Hellman & Friedman. He is the founder and former co-senior managing partner of Farallon Capital. Following his departure from the company in 2012, he became an advocate for climate action and founded NextGen America. His book, Cheaper, Faster, Better: How We’ll Win the Climate War, appeared on The New York Times Best Seller list in 2024. He also founded Galvanize Climate Solutions, a climate change-centered investment firm.  A billionaire, Steyer has been one of the largest donors in American Democratic Party politics, using his wealth to fund both environmental causes and political campaigns. In 2020, he ran for the Democratic nomination for president of the United States. After spending $253 million on his campaign, he withdrew from the race in February 2020 without having received any pledged delegates. In 2025, Steyer announced his candidacy in the 2026 California gubernatorial election to succeed term-limited governor Gavin Newsom. (Wikipedia)

The Wikipedia article noted some aspects of his time at Farralon that are relevant to his negatives. Wikipedia notes that Steyer made his fortune running Farallon, which was managing $20 billion by the time he left the company. Steyer is known for having taken high risks on distressed assets within volatile markets. In October 2012, Steyer stepped down from his position at Farallon in order to focus on advocating for alternative energy. Steyer decided to dispose of his carbon-polluting investments in 2012, although critics say he did not dispose of them quickly enough and noted that the lifespan of the facilities he funded would extend through 2030. A 2014 New York Times article said coal-mining companies that Farallon invested in or lent money to under Steyer had increased their coal production by 70 million tons annually since receiving money from Farallon, and that Steyer remained invested in the Maules Creek coal mine. Prior to Steyer leaving Farallon, a student activist group called UnFarallon criticized the company for investments in companies with anti-environmental policies. In 2016, some critics noted that Farallon had also invested in private prisons while Steyer was leading the hedge fund. According to SEC filings, Steyer was at the helm as the hedge fund purchased nearly $90 million of Corrections Corporation of America stock (5.5% of the company’s outstanding shares).

As with the other candidates, I asked Google AI about Steyer’s negatives. Google AI noted that Steyer faces significant criticism regarding the source of his wealth, his campaign spending, and his lack of prior governing experience.

• • • Past Business Investments. (•) Fossil Fuels and Coal: Critics, including Democratic rival Katie Porter, argue that Steyer’s $2.4 billion fortune was built partly through his former hedge fund, Farallon Capital, which invested heavily in fossil fuels and coal plants. While he claims to have divested from these industries over a decade ago, recent reports suggest his personal portfolio retained complexity and exposure to these legacy investments. (•) Private Prisons and ICE: His former fund also profited from investments in private prison companies, such as CoreCivic, which now operate ICE detention facilities. Opponents use this to challenge his credibility as an anti-ICE advocate, with some calling his current stance hypocritical.
    • Campaign and Electoral Issues. “Buying the Election”: Steyer has faced immense backlash for his prolific self-funding, having spent over $150 million of his own money on the 2026 race—far outspending all rivals combined. This has led to accusations from both parties that he is trying to “buy” political office through a massive advertising blitz. (•) Lack of Government Experience: Unlike leading rivals like Xavier Becerra or Antonio Villaraigosa, Steyer has never held elected office. Critics argue he lacks the practical managerial skills required to lead the state’s complex government and that his failed 2020 presidential bid demonstrates a history of unsuccessful political campaigns.
    • Policy and Political Critique. (•) Policy “Flip-Flopping”: Steyer has been accused of reversing his stance on single-payer healthcare, which he once opposed but now champions as a centerpiece of his platform. (•) Economic Concerns: Business groups like the California Chamber of Commerce have attacked his plans for a billionaire tax and higher taxes on oil companies, warning they could drive investment out of the state and worsen the affordability crisis. (•) Democratic Establishment Friction: Steyer has a history of disagreements with party leadership, who often view his wealth-driven involvement in various races as disruptive rather than collaborative.

Some of his negatives don’t bother me. People can learn from their mistakes, and I believe that Steyer has divest from the problematic past business investments. Further, people often invest in funds that then invest in something they don’t believe it. It is hard to find well performing socially relevant funds (I know, I’ve tried). I don’t think such investments are disqualifying.

I have more of a problem with the campaign and electoral issues. I’ve had it with billionaires who buy their way into office. I didn’t like it with Trump and I don’t like it with Steyer. I also don’t like his lack of experience, even as I like his policies. Will he have the patience to work with the legislature, or will he try to be like an executive and force his policies?

As for the policy and political critique: He clearly learned on single payer, and the billionaire tax will be going to the voters.

He has a broad issues page, with lots of details and specifics to address each issue. Whether he could get all of this through the legislature remains to be seen.

His debate performance was strong, although he kept repeating the same slogans and platitudes (such as “look at who is funding the attacks on me”). He did tend to overattack a bit.

He has an incredibly large set of endorsements. Unions. Significant organizations. Significant elected leaders. His website could sort and present them better, but the quantity and quality of his endorsements are heads and shoulders over the other candidates.

Tier 2: Valid Candidate, But No Chance, Candidates

The Tier 2 candidates fall into two bunches. First, there are the well-known candidates that were considered in the top group, but then later withdrew from the election. Their names are still on the ballot due to timing issues. These folks have an instead of the ballot indicator ◯. The other folks have been generally polling at 5% or lower. They have been included in some of the debates, but that all depends on the percentage threshold used by the organization holding the debate. They really do not have sufficient votes to really have a chance, unless there is a significant change. Note that with the major candidates, I’m going to be using Google AI to provide a summary of the negatives of the candidates.

Tier 2.1: Withdrawn

Eric Swalwell  [Withdrawn] (D)

Swalwell was the Congresscritter representing Congressional District 15 between 2013-2023, and District 14 between 2023-2026. Swalwell attended Campbell University and played soccer on a scholarship for the Campbell Fighting Camels from 1999 to 2001. He lost his scholarship in 2001 after breaking both his thumbs. He transferred to the University of Maryland, College Park and interned for U.S. Representative Ellen Tausche between 2001 and 2002. He graduated with a Bachelor of Arts in government and politics in 2003. In 2006, he received a Juris Doctor from the University of Maryland School of Law. From 2006 to 2012, Swalwell worked as a deputy district attorney in Alameda County. He served on the Dublin Heritage & Cultural Arts Commission from 2006 to 2008 and on the Dublin Planning Commission from 2008 to 2010 before winning election to the Dublin City Council in 2010. (Wikipedia)

For the longest time, Eric Swalwell had been my favorite candidate. But then, more than a dozen women came out with allegations that he made them uncomfortable. And then, even more accounts of problematic behavior came out. None of the allegations have been proven in court yet, but the damage is done. The accusers were viewed as credible, and the general thinking was that multiple women would not come out with the accusations unless there was something behind them (because of the potential damage the accusers would cause to themselves). After the accusations had been out there a few days, Swalwell suspended his campaign. A few days after that, he resigned from Congress. He has not subsequently endorsed any of the candidates for the office.

As Swalwell withdrew after ballots had been printed, his name could not be removed from the ballot.

Betty Yee  [Withdrawn] (D)

Betty Yee served as California State Controller from 2015 to 2023. Yee previously served as a member of the California State Board of Equalization from 2004 to 2015. In 2024, Yee announced her candidacy in the 2026 California gubernatorial election. She graduated University of California, Berkeley with a Bachelor of Arts in sociology in 1979. In 1981, she graduated from Golden Gate University with a Master of Public Administration. Yee worked for the legislature and was then governor Gray Davis’s chief deputy director for budget. She then became the chief deputy to California State Board of Equalization member Carole Migden. She was appointed to fill the seat when Migden vacated it after being elected to the California State Senate.

On April 20, Yee dropped out of the race for Governor. In her message, she indicated she couldn’t see a path to get donors and additional support from undecided voters with six weeks left before the primary: “It was becoming clear that the donors were not going to be there. Even some of my former supporters just felt like they needed to move on as well.” At the time she left the race, she was polling in the low single digits, at the bottom of the second tier of candidates. She subsequently endorsed Tom Steyer.

As Yee withdrew after ballots had been printed, her name could not be removed from the ballot.

Tier 3.2: Below 5%

◯ Tony Thurmond (D)

Tony Krajewski Thurmond is currently the California State Superintendent of Public Instruction (since 2019). He was a member of the California State Assembly from 2014 to 2018. Thurmond attended Temple University, where he served as student body president, and went on to earn dual master’s degrees in law and social policy and social work from Bryn Mawr College. In the mid-2000s, Thurmond was the executive director of Beyond Emancipation, a social service agency providing aftercare services to youths leaving the child welfare and juvenile justice systems in Alameda County. Prior to being elected to the Assembly in 2014, he was a member of the Richmond City Council. Since 2004, Thurmond has pursued seven different elected offices: he ran unsuccessfully for Richmond City Council in 2004, was elected to the Richmond City Council in 2006, lost an election for State Assembly in 2008, won an election to the West Contra Costa School Board in 2008, created an exploratory committee for a potential State Senate campaign in 2009, was elected to the State Assembly in 2014, was re-elected to the State Assembly in 2016, and announced his campaign for State Superintendent in 2017. (Wikipedia)

I asked Google AI to summarize Thurmond’s negatives. It indicated that Thurmond has faced criticism regarding his management style, Department of Education leadership, and student performance during his tenure:

• • • Management and Workplace Allegations: (•) Toxic Workplace Allegations: In 2021, reports emerged from POLITICO and other outlets alleging that Thurmond created a hostile work environment. Former officials claimed he humiliated and intimidated staff, contributing to a high turnover rate of nearly two dozen senior aides. (•) Questionable Hiring Practices: He faced backlash for hiring a deputy superintendent who was living in Philadelphia while working for the California Department of Education, which critics viewed as a lapse in local accountability.
    • Educational Performance and Policy: (•) Student Achievement Gaps: Critics point to persistent struggles in California’s education system, noting that over half of students are not meeting standards in reading and math. While scores have shown some post-pandemic improvement, his record has been criticized for failing to significantly close long-standing achievement gaps. (•) Pandemic Response: His leadership during the COVID-19 school closures was frequently questioned by those who believed he lacked a clear, proactive strategy for helping districts navigate re-openings and learning loss. (•) Past Board Record: During his time as a trustee in the West Contra Costa Unified School District (2008–2012), critics noted that student performance deteriorated relative to state averages and facilities for at-risk students were poorly maintained.
    • Recent Political Challenges: (•) Power Struggle with Gov. Newsom: In early 2026, Governor Gavin Newsom proposed shifting oversight of the Department of Education away from the superintendent and toward the State Board of Education. While framed as “modernization,” the move was widely seen as a public reduction of Thurmond’s authority. (•) 2026 Gubernatorial Standing: As of May 2026, Thurmond has faced pressure from some party leaders to exit the governor’s race due to low polling numbers, which he has dismissed as a “waste of time”.

Thurmond has only been in one debate (KCBS), but everything I’ve read assessed his performance as very impressive. I would tend to agree. However, that performance has not been sufficient to move him up in the polls.

I reviewed his priorities page. His priorities are good, but they need more detail. I really think the folks that are citing “single payer health care” would clarify their position, because it does not mean free medical care. Even with Medicare, people are paying premiums (often, they are deducted straight from Social Security). It is just there is a single centralized source for claims and payments, which reduces a lot of the processing infrastructure and overhead. He really needs to provide more specifics about his proposals.

He has a larger number of endorsements than Villaraigosa in some areas. He has a smaller number of construction unions (3),  but he has California Faculty Association. He has some Democratic clubs, and some black affinity organizations. He has more elected officials, notably Barbara Lee and Pilar Schiavo (our assemblycritter), and a fairly large number of local elected leaders and school-related leaders.

I liked Thurmond based on his debate performance, but he is so far behind in the polls he won’t be able to recover.

◯ Antonio Villaraigosa (D)

Antonio Villaraigosa is an American politician who served as the 41st Mayor of Los Angeles from 2005 to 2013. A member of the Democratic Party, he previously served as the Majority Leader from 1996 to 1998 and Speaker of the California State Assembly from 1998 to 2000. Antonio Villaraigosa overcame a troubled youth, including being expelled from high school, to earn a Bachelor of Arts in History from UCLA (1977) and a Juris Doctor from the People’s College of Law. He attended East Los Angeles College before transferring to UCLA.

I asked Google AI to summarize Villaraigosa’s negatives. It indicated that Antonio Villaraigosa’s career has been marked by significant personal scandals, ethics issues, and political losses, most notably a 2018 third-place finish in the California governor’s race despite high spending. Key negatives include an extramarital affair, consulting for a controversial company (Herbalife), and criticism regarding a “red-carpet” focus.

• • • Affair and Divorce: In 2007, Villaraigosa’s marriage ended amid a widely reported extramarital affair with a television reporter. He faced severe public backlash for his handling of the situation, with critics labeling his actions “smarmy and self-serving”.
    • Ethics Violations: He was forced to pay over $42,000 in fines in 2010 for accepting excessive free tickets to prestigious events like the Oscars and Lakers games while mayor.
    • Herbalife Consultation: After leaving office, he worked as an advisor to Herbalife Nutrition, a company criticized as a pyramid scheme that targeted Latino communities.
    • 2018 Governor’s Race Loss: Despite spending $32 million, Villaraigosa finished third in the 2018 California gubernatorial primary. Critics noted he entered the race late and failed to gain traction with key Latino voters.
    • Perception of “Red Carpet” Focus: Editorial criticism from his time as mayor suggested he was more focused on the perks of office—such as rubbing shoulders with celebrities—than managing city operations.
    • Questioned Legislative Record: While he highlighted a drop in crime, some critics argued that he took credit for citywide trends that were occurring nationwide, arguing that his business-friendliness ratings remained low.
    • Time Away From Office: As of early 2026, critics have also pointed to his time away from office, as he has not held a government position since 2013, making it difficult for him to build momentum in new campaigns.

I do not have a high opinion of Villaraigosa, as I remember well his stint as Mayor. He was better than his Republican opposition, but I don’t remember significant improvement in the city under his watch.

He has detailed issues information available on his campaign page. I’m sure we’ve all heard them well: he has covered them during the KCBS, NBC 4, and CNN debates. Many of the Democrats have similar positions on the subjects; the truth of the matter is that any of the top Democrats would make a good Governor. There are some notable areas of concern in his positions:

• • • Crypto: He seems to want to protect the use of Crypto.
    • Gas Prices: He seems to believe that drilling for gas locally will lower gas prices. That’s not true: It won’t change the price of a barrel of oil because that’s based on market prices. What will lower prices is increasing refinery capacity and potentially using the same blend as other states (although that has air quality issues).

His behavior during the debates really didn’t impress me. I still remember his characterization as “All of the Above”. He was doing a lot of attacking of other candidates, often to the detriment of actually answering the question. At times, he also seemed a bit more hesitant.

He has a very small number of endorsements. Notable elected official endorsements include Karen Bass and Barbara Boxer. He has six construction unions, and the Police Officers Research Association. That’s a pretty light slate of unions.

Tier 3: Hopefuls, Kooks, and Nuts

Any political season draws a number of candidates for office who realistically have no chance of winning, especially under California’s “jungle primary” system. Some of these fall into the kooks and nuts category. Some are more broadly hopeful. Some are angry at the system and are expressing that anger by running for office, hoping to change the system. Some just want to change the system because of some injustice that they see, or because they believe their unique view isn’t being heard. So I’ll do my best to summarize their view (and if I can’t, I might as Google AI to give it a try). They may represent traditional parties, or they may represent parties that don’t meet the thresholds for state recognition, or they might be truly independent (truly hating the party system). These folks have a number of things in common. First, they are polling below the level of significance (typically, below 1-2%). Second, they have no endorsements (unless I note otherwise).

So why do I take the time to go through them all? First, being on the ballot is a form of speech. I may disagree with their speech (and for some I disagree strongly), but they deserve to be heard. Isn’t that all what we are striving for—to have someone hear us? Second, this is a ballot deep dive, and that means I need to explore every candidate on the ballot. It would be intellectually dishonest to do otherwise.

I’m going to break this tier down a bit further to separate the more “grounded in reality” candidates from the kooks and nuts.

Tier 3.1: Below Viability Candidates with Complete Positions

◯ Larry D. Azevedo (D)

Azevedo earned and Associate Degree in the Auto Diesel Industry from the Arizona Technical and Trade School in Tucson. Following his technical education, he converted a barn on his family’s property into an auto and truck repair shop, which he continues to operate. In the Cotton Industry, he worked his way up from a Yard Man at the Dos Palos Co-op Gin to become a Head Pressman and Assistant Ginner. In the Tomato industry, he served as a state grader for tomatoes during the harvest season. He also started a trucking company (later sold to his brothers), and has invested in real estate.

His campaign website has three distinct issues pages. The first issue page provides his positions on the Economy, Education, Tech Innovation, Infrastructure, Income Inequality, Immigration, Racial Inequality, the LGBTQ+ Community, and Women’s Rights. The second issues page covers healthcare, mental health, social security, climate change, gun control, and criminal justice. The third (and last) issues page covers civic engagement, agriculture policy, energy, international affairs, and homeland security. His materials are presented in large text blocks, which make them hard to read and digest. They seem to be reasonable ideas, but do not provide details on how they would get through the legislature, or how they would be funded.

His candidacy provides an interesting perspective on progressive ideas through a central valley lens.

◯ Carolina Buhler (D)

Buhler is an undergraduate at UCLA studying Earth and Environmental Science. She has done a internship at NASA Glenn Research Center, tutored physics and computer science in the Riverside Community College District, and interned in plant cell biology at UC Riverside. Her campaign is building on her history of civil rights advocacy.

She collects her policies into what she calls a Dignity Policy Bundle. The Statewide Core Protections (The Dignity Spine) are: (1) Rent Rebate Program; (2) Wildfire Prevention; (3) Abolish Racial Raids and End State Targeting of Immigrants in California Enforcement; (4) End ICE Detention in California; (5) End Mass Incarceration; (6) Mental Health Crisis Teams; (7) Tiny Home Villages; (8) Ultra-Wealthy Tax Reform; and (9) Total: 5.9 billion surplus /year. For each, she identifies what it does, who pays, and the impact.

Her candidacy is driven by her passion for civil rights.

◯ Elaine Culotti (—)

Elaine Culotti, a/k/a “Lipstickfarmer”, is the former owner of PortaBella, and is now involved with something called 559 FARMTRAIN. Her personal webpage describes her as “Real estate developer, interior designer, founder of House of Rock, and farm to table farmer, Elaine Culotti currently stars on the second season of the discovery+ reality series “Undercover Billionaire””

On her campaign page, she has published policy positions in the following areas: 01 Criminal Justice & Public Safety; 02 Immigration & Workforce; 03 Economy, Jobs & Industry; 04 Agriculture & Land Use; 05 Healthcare; 06 Civil Rights & Culture; 07 Voting & Governance Reform; 08 Education & Youth; 09 Environment & Energy. Her positions appear to be somewhat progressive. For example, under 06, she writes: (•) Support gay rights and equal protection under the law; (•) Oppose gender transition medical procedures for minors; (•) Personally against abortion but support a woman’s right to choose; (•) Strong protection of First Amendment free speech rights. Voting rights is another mixed area: She supports Voter ID, but opposes Citizens United. Her education one is similarly mixed, but with a little dogwhistle thrown in: “Promote teaching diverse viewpoints while preventing political or ideological indoctrination”. She’s across the board. She does provide links to full details of her positions.

It is hard to know what to make of her candidacy. On one hand, she’s a reality TV star with no political background. But she also provides a reasonable set of policies that whipsaw between progressive and Conservative. She’s confusing that way.

◯ Randeep Dhillon (R)

Dr. Randeep S. Dhillon, Ph.D., is a Punjabi-American Economist, Farmer, and Sociologist. He immigrated from Punjab, India, to California in 1986. He earned his bachelor’s, master’s, and Ph.D. in finance and economics in California.

He’s running as a Republican, but oddly the key emphasis of his campaign is government funded healthcare, and in particular, free healthcare for every Californian. That’s more of a progressive position.

He wants to reform the AB5 ABC test. For those unfamiliar with that test, it is the one that determines what makes someone like a Lyft or Uber driver an independent contractor vs. an employee. Given the 18-wheeler trucks he shows in his ads, my guess is that he is concerned about that test being applied to truckers. There are a large number of Indian truckers based in the central valley. Dhillon is based in Bakersfield, CA.

His website details a broad set of policies across a wide set of areas. Many of them are farm and agricultural based. Many of his policies are on the progressive side, other than his emphasis on fossil fuel development and his opposition to tax increases.

His candidacy appears to be based in central valley concerns: improving the life for farmers and those involved with the food systems. He is not as rigidly into the social issues as other Republicans… however…

Dhillon is behind the MASA movement. The MASA Movement, which stands for Make America Safe Again, is a grassroots organization based in Bakersfield, California founded by Dr Randeep S. Dhillon, who supports Donald Trump, and advocates for restoring safety and security in the United States. The movement has gained significant momentum, with hundreds of thousands of supporters voicing their concern about family safety, neighborhood well-being, and personal security.

◯ Sophia Edum-a-Sam (D)

Sophia Edum-a-Sam is a landscape designer for the Baltimore City Recreation & Parks Department. Befor that, she was a staff landscape architect for Dewberry, an entry level landscape architect for Morris & Ritchie Associates, a Junior Landscape Designer for Bob Jackson Landscapes, and an intern at Cayuga Landscape Company. Most of this was in Maryland. She has a degree in Landscape Architecture from Cornell University, and a degree in Landscape Architecture from The Ohio State University. (and, yes, this is the correct bio as her LinkedIn page shows a “Sophia Edum-a-Sam for Governor” banner)

She does have a detailed issues and plans page. She starts with 3 pillars: (1) Lowering the cost of living and building economic security; (2) Expanding opportunity through equity and investment; (3) Building a resilient and sustainable California for the future. She then has specific plans within each pillar to achieve those goals.

She also has a detailed healthcare plan. It too has multiple pillars: (1) Affordable Access; (2) Prevention Focus; (3) Mental Health; (4) Integrated Care; and (5) Cost Reduction.

Her “Why I’m Running” page has even more policies buried in it. These focus on AI-driven job loss, and public safety and police reform. She indicates she is pro-choice, pro-trans, and pro-same-sex marriage.

She does note that she has used AI to develop her policies, writing: “As a one-woman campaign for most of this journey, I personally met every single person who nominated me, listened to their real concerns about rent, healthcare, jobs, and mental health, and researched solutions right away. Because I’m building this mostly alone, I’ve relied heavily on AI to scale outreach, analyze data, and draft policy, but I never lose sight that AI is a tool, not a replacement for human connection.”

Her page, however, fails to answer the key question: Why California? After all, her life and experience are in Maryland. Her family is out that way. So why isn’t she running for the Governor of Maryland. Why California?

Her candidacy is driven by something I see common in immigrant candidates, and that she expresses well on her website: “I truly believe people like me, immigrants, daughters of single mothers and everyday workers need to be in leadership positions.” There are so many immigrants or children of immigrants who run based out of this drive.

◯ Serge Fiankan (—)

Serge Fiankan is a Global Sales Consultant, CEO and Founder of Wateule Wamungu LDA, a biomimicry-drive real estates development firm. He is a real estate broker at Akwaba Real Estate, and was formerly with Century 21 Troop Real Estate in Moorpark. He has a BA in Broadcast Telecommunications from San Francisco State. He previously ran for Governor in 2022, receiving 0.1% of the vote.

He’s running for a reason that seems common for these underdog candidates: “because too many Californians feel the system is no longer working for them. Families work harder yet fall further behind. Housing is increasingly out of reach. Government programs lack transparency, accountability, and measurable outcomes. He believes leadership should be grounded in lived experience, honesty, and results, not slogans or party talking points. SF is running to restore trust in government by making every program measurable and public; to bring affordability back into reach for working families; and to build a resilient California whose energy, water, and infrastructure systems are sustainable, reliable, and locally driven.”

His platform is built in three layers: five core pillars, twelve vision areas, and detailed plans. The pillars are (1) Honest, Open Government; (2) A Livable California; (3) Real Paths to Opportunity; (4) A Future that Works; and (5) Stronger, Safer Communities. These are then broken into the 12 vision areas: 1. Families First; 2. Economic Independence; 3. Healthcare & Family Security; 4. Government That Works; 5. Energy & Environmental Resilience; 6. Technology & Access; 7. Tax & Infrastructure: Fair Funding for California’s Future; 8. Public Safety & Preparedness; 9. Seniors & Tax Relief; 10. Parental Rights & Education; 11. Homelessness & Housing Solutions; and 12. Risk Mitigation & Governance

I reviewed his details in these areas, particularly looking for problematic dog whistles. I started with parental rights. He does mention “Parental authority pilots”, but has no mentions about curriculum content. His family first policy is progressive, and makes no mention of “traditional” family stuff.  Overall, his plans look good; he expands upon them in a detailed plans and policy hub.

Overall, I like his approach. Unfortunately, he doesn’t have the vision or support to get much further. Visionaries often don’t. Additionally, his lack of government experience raises the question of whether he would have the ability to get his plans successfully through the legislature, or be able to perform the budget magic to pull them off.

His candidacy seems to be drive by a desire to fix the direction of California.

◯ Max Fomin (—)

Max Fomin appears to be the owner at No Bold, a company specializing in Scalp Micropigmentation SOlutions, as well as the owner at Plainsurgar. Befor that, he was managing sales and branding projects for MST, FER, and ICDC colleges. He did business development at ParkMe, and sales at ReneSola. He has a BS in Marketing from CSU Dominguez Hills.

His campaign website, calls “newmericans”, indicates that he aims to tackle the “California Tax” on everyday life. He writes: “From freezing utility rate hikes to cutting the red tape that makes housing so expensive. My goal is to make sure middle class and low-income families can actually afford to live in the state they love.” His plan, at a high level, is to “Will veto California’s milage tax, suffocate homelessness, assassinate unemployment, nuke crime, house the unhoused, prosecute statewide corruption, invest in profitable industries, will investigate Veil of Secrecy bill, will retire SB947 & Prop 36, like my coffee iced out.” His website provides links to plans addressing Public Safety, Homelessness, Housing, Roads, Immigration, and Growth.

Being a Highway Guy, I took a look at his page on Road, which actually links to a page titled “Economy“. His solutions are very high level: “we will say no to foreign investments coming from China, Quatar, and other countries that could destabilize our local and state market. We will focus on creating manufacturing hubs funded by state to train our future workforce that will increase the number of jobs available for Californians. One of the biggest steps that we will undertake will be completely rebuilding California’s aging infrastructure, making it more futuristic and efficient. ” He needs more details on what he specifically wants to do.

I took a look at some of his other plans. They are similarly single paragraphs, and they are similar to proposals made by other candidates (for example, going after large corporate owners of housing). His plans are somewhat moderate; they don’t appear to veer into the traditional progressive. I don’t see anything particularly novel in them.

His candidacy seems to be driven by a desire to improve California, although his approach is naïve.

◯ Derek Grasty (D)

Grasty is a School Board Trustee for the Mt. Pleasant Elementary School District (elected in 2024 and 2020). He is also a Mentor/Coach for the Santa Cruz County Office of Education, and Past President of VVP Productions. He has Bachelors and Masters of Music degrees from University of Michigan.  He also ran for the East Union High School District in 2018 (6.3% of the vote) and 2016 (6.65% of the vote)

His campaign website lists the following areas of policy: (1) Strategic Action on Homelessness; (2) Education: TK–14 and Beyond; (3) Business and Labor: A Strong, Fair Economy; (4) California Strong: Equity, Power, and Progress; (5) Healthcare That Works for All; (6) Housing and Fiscal Accountability; and (7) Climate. In each area he lists 3-5 things he plans to do. They seem reasonably progressive.

He does have a specific thrust on education. He proposes a specific resolution to increase the qualifications of superintendents. He has a large number of supporters for this resolution.

He also has a proposed penal code amendment to protect Californians from kidnapping by unidentified agents without proper credentials. His solution is to (1) Require Proper Identification: All law enforcement must display visible identification including name tags, badges, and proper credentials during arrests.; (2) Mandate Visible Credentials: Prohibit face coverings and plain clothes during arrests without proper warrants signed by a judge; and (3) Protect Citizens’ Rights: Guarantee citizens’ right to verify authority and seek peaceful relief from potential kidnappers. This amendment has a large number of supporters.

He has a few personal endorsements.

Based on the specific amendments on his campaign website, his candidacy seems to be driven by concerns he has seen in his Elementary School District and by the abuses of ICE. He then built this into a larger campaign.

◯ Lewis Herms (—)

Not much is known about this fellow. His bio on his website says a lot without saying much. He did fill out the Ballotpedia profile. In that profile, he writes: “As the “Anti-Politician”, I will lead California with a no BS approach. I founded ScrewBigGov.com and Freedom In Action to expose the truth and motivate We The People to take action. My family and I have sacrificed immensely in this battle to free our planet from tyrannical control. Even through all these hardships I have lead with perseverance and will NOT yield until every man, woman and child is rid of this Globalist death grip! With God’s guidance I will always put “We The People” first and will NOT cave to political pressure, bribes or threats. Our team will lead the charge against the globalist agenda. This is not just a movement; it is a rallying cry for patriots everywhere, a symbol of resistance against tyranny.”

When I did the search for him, Google indicated that people who searched for him also search for Don Grundmann, the fellow who did the antisemitic screen in the candidate statements. That could be because both are running for Governor. It could also be because both are antisemitic nut jobs. The latter is a possibility because of Herms’ fights against the “globalist agenda”. The American Jewish Committee, in their hate speak directory, notes that “globalist is a coded word for Jews who are seen as international elites conspiring to weaken or dismantle “Western” society using their international connections and control over big corporations (see New World Order)—all echoing the destructive theory that Jews hold greed and tribe above country.” When you read a politician’s page complaining about globalists or globalism, it is often this dog whistle in use. The More You Know.

He had a GiveSendGo funding page that was batshit crazy, indicating that he is an Independent Conservative and running as such because his “intent to expose the parasitical controllers that run California” is not limited to one party: “This is NOT limited to the Democratic party of Gavin Newsom, Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff and Maxine Waters. It also includes the Parisitic Rebublicans that pretend to be your Allies while stabbing We The People in the back all to line their pockets with millions of dollars.”

His campaign website is a bit more normal. It does present a limited platform focusing on some common Conservative conspiracy areas: (1) Human Trafficking Networks; (2) Poisoning of the Food Supply; (3) Restoring Effective Education; (4) Reducing Abortions. His solutions page has additional positions: (5) Making Housing Affordable Again; (6) Addressing Homelessness; (7) Exposing and Eliminating Government Waste; (8) Ending a rigged economic system; … and there’s lots more.

I started out thinking this guy is batshit crazy, and belonged in Tier 3.3. Now I think he is just a heavily Conservative candidate, at the level of MAGA-crazy, not kooks and nuts. Sometimes it is hard to drawn the line.

His candidacy seems to be driving by hatred of the direction he sees California moving.

◯ Matthew (Chase) Levy (D)

Levy is a scientist with a Ph.D. in Physics from Rice University and experience as a researcher at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. He was the first American physicist awarded the Isaac Newton International Fellowship. He was an honorary fellow at Wolfson College, Oxford. He is the founder and chairman of NobleAI, a company found to create scalable AI technology. He is also the founder of Blue Capital, a VC think tank. He has a Masters from University of Oxford, and a PhD in Physics from Rice University. He evidently did his undergrad in Physics at UCLA.

Reading his “Meet Matt” page, he gives off vibes similar to Tom Steyer. It notes: “Matthew believes that those who have been fortunate owe something in return. In 2022, he founded the Baruch Spinoza Scholarship at the University of Oxford in honour of Sir Isaiah Berlin, the philosopher who founded Wolfson College. The scholarship supports graduate students pursuing knowledge for its own sake – the kind of curiosity-driven work that often leads to the biggest breakthroughs. In 2023, he founded AE Blue – a venture capital fund dedicated to giving back to science, technology, and clean energy communities.”. He goes on: “He is running for Governor because he sees California at a crossroads. The state still invents the future, but it is losing its ability to build it. Housing is unaffordable. Energy costs are rising. Wildfire seasons grow longer. Too many families are one emergency away from crisis. And too often, Sacramento responds with promises instead of plans.”

His page identifies six policy areas: (1) Cost of Living and Housing; (2) Education and Job Pathways; (3) Innovation and AI; (4) Land, Water, and Environment; (5) Clean Energy and Security; and (6) Uniting Californians. He then has a full roadmap to implement them. Each has multiple pillars, identified measures of success, and a specific plan to pay for them. It is all very impressive and well thought out.

I’m impressed with this guy. Alas, he’s in the group at the bottom of the polls.

His candidacy comes from a clear desire to give back to California.

◯ Daniel Mercuri (—) (R/MAGA)

According to Ballotpedia, Daniel Mercuri was born in Santa Ana, California. Mercuri served in the United States Navy from 1998 to 2003. He earned associate degrees in broadcast and communications from Los Angeles Valley College in 2006. Mercuri’s career experience includes co-founding a production company and working as its CEO, as a partner and chief financial officer of a private investment group, an advertising professional, an author, a Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu professor, and a boxing coach. Mercuri has been affiliated with Veterans in Media and Entertainment (VME).

He ran for Governor in 2022, receiving 0.5% of the vote. He also ran in the recall election for Gavin Newsom, receiving 0.1% of the vote. He also ran in the 2020 Congressional District 25 special election, receiving 1.6% of the vote. In the general primary election that same year, he received 0.6% of the vote.

Although he is supposedly independent, he takes a MAGAish stance, with quotes like: “American ascendancy and self-governance has been despoiled by a single locution, progressiveness to which California is praised for.” and “Prison is the solution for corrupt government representatives. Nothing less will do!”.

His policies page details policies in a large number of areas (yes, he uses all caps): TAXES, GUN LAWS, CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING, POLICE REFORM, HOMELESS, CLIMATE CHANGE, HEALTH CARE, VACCINATIONS, ABORTIONS, ILLEGAL ALIENS, EDUCATION, SOCIAL MEDIA, MEDICAL BOARD, CALIFORNIA VETERANS, FARMERS AND WATER, ELECTRICITY BLACKOUTS, and VOTER ID. Sampling some of these policies: he is very strongly pro gun, and wants California to be a “stand your ground” state. He wants to end all forestry and fire fighting D.E.I programs. He has this doozy when talking about fire prevention: “All plans that are cloud seeding, chem-trailing California skies or blocking out the sun will be escorted to a military base or shot down. Let God’s green earth and its weather take its natural course. ” He is strongly anti-vaccine in many, many ways; this is perhaps the mildest: “Remove and nullify ALL vaccine CA. State mandates, policies and regulations….permanently! Government has no authority to control the behavior of the people.” He is strongly anti-abortion. He is strongly anti-immigrant and would cooperate with ICE. With respect to what he calls “working aliens”, he believes “the vast majority have done nothing but abuse and take advantage of our systems, showing zero loyalty to America”. He wants mandatory Voter ID with the rolls purged every 2 years so people must reregister. Those are just some highlights.

His values clearly (IMHO) do not resonate with the bulk of California’s values (although it is up to the voters to decide). Still, he doesn’t quite fall into the “kook” category, as his values would be perfectly acceptable in a place like Indiana or Alabama or Wyoming.

His candidacy is driven by conspiracy theories and a hatred of things that don’t fit his notion of whitebread America.

◯ Leo Naranjo IV (R)

Leo Naranjo IV is an office worker in the Federal Government for 6 years, after which he retired. He says it was a quiet job that kept him busy. Before that, he was an Eligibility Specialst in the Department of Human Assistance in Sacramento for 11 years, a Key Data Operator at the Franchise Tax Board, a Private Security Officer for organizations such as Kaiser Permanente, and a Sergeant E-5 in the US Army. He has a general education degree from University of Maryland, Overseas Branch.

He explicitly notes on his webpage that he held a clearance and what that clearance was. I was taught, when I got my clearance, that you don’t give the details of your clearance to anyone that didn’t need to know it; you certainly don’t post it publicly.

He makes odd statements on his campaign site (although I guess they are typical for Republicans these days): “After 30 years of watching my State being led blindly down the path of Socialism”.

Reviewing his Key Points: He seems to be on the edge, if not centered in, MAGA views. He starts off with “end Sanctuary Status in California; end the components of SB-54 for our Law Enforcement officials”, which is something I’ve heard from Biancho. He has a forceful approach; for example, for the homeless, he says “Assistance refusal will no longer be the option”. He is using MAGA dog whistles: “We will instill Parental rights, support our Teaching staff, insist on Education not indoctrination”

He is endorsed by a small number of private individuals.

His candidacy seems driven by a sincere desire to implement his views (MAGAish). It is unclear the extent to which he understands the full workings of state government.

◯ Mauro Alberto Orozco (—)

Ballotpedia notes that Mauro Alberto Orozco earned a high school diploma from Manual Arts High School and an associate degree from Compton College in 1996. He also attended William Penn University. Orozco’s career experience includes being a small business owner. He has had a number of jobs: Car Washer/Detailer at Felix Chevrolet; a uniform delivery man; a Uber/Lyft driver; doing event and mall security; doing maintenance at William Penn University; being a baseball coach at Warren High School; being a Water Delivery Man; working the deli department at a HyVee supermarket in Iowa; being a truck driver.

His campaign webpage lists a number of priorities: (1) Addressing Government Fraud and Spending; (2) Addressing Homelessness; (3) Supporting Second Amendment Rights and Concealed Carry Permits; (4) Oil Independence; (5) Eliminating the California Air Resource Board; (6) Addressing Wells Fargo and Unresolved Consumer Fraud; (7) Elimination of the notion of Eminent Domain; and (8) Addressing the Cost of Living. A number of his ideas are radical or problematic, such as “address homelessness by relocating all homeless individuals to newly constructed rehabilitation centers”, or “the complete elimination of the California Air Resource Board (CARB) to reduce bureaucracy and lower costs” (which would require the legislature’s consent). He does not provide specific details regarding how he would achieve all of these goals, and doesn’t seem to have a clear understanding of how the state government works with regard to the legislature and state agencies.

His core message has the following points: • Public safety with accountability and compassion; • Economic growth that helps workers and small businesses; • Respect for family, freedom, and local communities; • Independent leadership that puts California ahead of party agendas; and • A practical approach to reform without losing order or stability.

His candidacy seems sincere, and he does care about the issues. He also seems a bit naïve.

◯ Thunder Parley (D)

Thunder Parley is a Software Engineer at Google (18 years); before that, he was a Software Engineer at HP. He has a BS in Computer Science/Math from Pepperdine. He wants a safer and more affordable California for our children, elderly, veterans and all of the Golden State’s hard-working residents and business owners.

His main focus is tackling the affordability problem in California. This is made clear on his campaign page. His priorites are the affordability crisis, jobs and the economy, public health and safety, and education. He does have a full platform that details problems and solutions.  Most are reasonable. He wants to do loads of fiscal audits, and wants to increase the use of AI. I’m surprised he doesn’t suggest AI to do the fiscal auditing. The problem I have reading through his proposals is that I don’t think he has a deep understanding of how the state government, state budgets, and the spending process words. As such, they come off a bit simplistic. However, the basic ideas are reasonable starting points for the development of policy.

He has also specified three policy plans. Examples includes (1) Pushing Teachers to the LIMIT; (2) The MATH Plan: The Most Equitable Tax Code in California History; and (3) Play: The Sacramento Shakedown.

His candidacy seems a sincere attempt to get his ideas across.

◯ Raji Rab (D)

Ah, Raji Rab. A perennial candidate here in Southern California. He ran for US Senate in 2024 getting 0.2% of the vote; for CD 32 in 2022 getting 1.8% of the vote; for CD 30 in 2020 getting 4.7% of the vote; for LA CD 12 in 2019 getting 1.5% of the vote; for CD 30 in 2018 getting 5.3% of the vote; and for CD 30 in 2016 getting 5.8% of the vote.

He is an aviator, educator, and an entrepreneur. He graduated with his commercial pilot license from Laverne, CA, and then became a flight instructor, chief pilot, owned and operated a flight school, an airline, and now a computer infrastructure and training facility. He served over 25 years in civil rights, human rights, community events, charities, toy drives, mentoring students, serving food to the homeless, supporting schools and law enforcement programs to build bridges with the community.

His campaign website is annoying. Pages start playing audio upon loading. They are laid out strange and hard to navigate. The best way to characterize it is that the layout is too busy. As I recall, they’ve been that way throughout his campaigns.

He does have an issues page. After the annoying audio and a number of annoying graphics, you get to the heart of the page where he states his high level plans. He covers the following areas: Economy; Global Investments; Healthcare for All; Education and Student Relief; Environment; Housing Welfare, Homelessness, and Poverty; Rescue Ranch; Equality and Social Justice; Women’s Right to Choose; Fund and Support for Seniors; Film Credit; Strengthen Social Security and Tax Relief; Public Safety, National Security, and Gun Control; Immigration Amnesty; Constitutional Rights; Tourism and Foreign Relations; Partisan Political Climate; Improve Parks and Recreation; Drought; Protection of Animal Rights; Corruption; Democracy – Elections; and (whew) COVID Recovery. As you can see: quite comprehensive. He has lots of ideas. He doesn’t have a lot of details, nor does his describe how he would work with the entities of state government to achieve everything.

His candidacy seem to be driven by a sincere wish to give back to the public sector (I’ve noticed this is common for immigrants that have found success). He’s never quite made it, but he keeps trying.

◯ Ramsey Robinson (P&F) (Socialist)

Ramsey Robinson is a mental health social worker, organizer, and revolutionary based in San Francisco. A graduate of California State University, Los Angeles, where he earned his Master of Social Work, Ramsey has consistently merged his academic expertise with grassroots activism.  Ramsey’s organizing spans multiple fronts. As a key member of the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) and the Peace and Freedom Party of California, he has been instrumental in campaigns demanding justice for victims of police brutality. He founded and supports a Student Socialist Club at the high school where he works, empowering youth to organize Know Your Rights trainings for their community amidst the growing threat of ICE raids on undocumented communities.

His proposed program has the following thrusts, each of which has more detail behind it: ★ A government for the people, not the wealthy ★ Housing is a Human Right: Homes for People, not for Profit ★ Free Universal Healthcare For Everyone, Covering Everything ★ Fully Fund Public Schools: Free Quality Education for All ★ Full Rights for Immigrants: No Deportations ★ Save our planet from capitalism ★ Guaranteed Union Jobs and Living Wages for All ★ End the War on Black America ★ Defend Women’s Rights, Full Equality for LGBTQ People ★ Divest from Israel: Free California from Complicity.

As always a reminder of the difference between Socialism and Democratic Socialism (think Bernie Sanders) is appropriate here. Democratic Socialism is a philosophy that advocates for a democratic political system alongside a socially owned or regulated economy, aiming to meet public needs over private profit. It seeks to achieve social justice, economic equality, and worker empowerment through democratic, electoral means rather than revolution, differentiating it from authoritarian socialism. Socialism, on the other hand, is an economic and political system based on public or collective ownership of the means of production, rather than private ownership. It focuses on reducing inequality through social control of resources, with production geared toward human use rather than profit. It often involves state regulation or planning of the economy.

He is endorsed by the “Vote Socialist” movement.

His candidacy is driven by revolutionary zeal.

◯ Reza Safarnejad (—)

Reza Safarnejad is a Criminal Forensics Data Scientist/CTO at 2nd Logic. Before that, he was CTO in the Medical Science and Computing Office at NIH/NLM/NCBI. He was also an IT Program Manager for Lockheed Martin at NIH/NCI, a Senior Software Engineer at Lydian Trust, and an IT Manager at NASDAQ. He has a Bachelors in Computer Science from University of Maryland.

His campaign page lists a set of eight priorities: (1) Housing Reform; (2) Affordability; (3) Homelessness (4) Public Safety; (5) Education; (6) Environment; (7) Healthcare, and (8) Fire Prevention. Each has a lot more details behind it, with specifics solutions detailed. Common themes across his solutions and priorities are detailed audits of government spending; breaking up monopolies across the board; treating the homeless like humans; holding lawyers responsible; backing law enforcement and fully funding police departments; paying teachers better; addressing disparities between poor and rich neighborhood schools; breaking up medical monopolies or institute single payer; improve infrastructure for clean energy; break up insurance monopolies. He does have some interesting lines, such as “Bring back public and individual responsibility; Condoning harassing behavior such as loud pipes on cars and street take overs has resulted in spread of social decay.”

Although he is running as an independent, he is clearly leaning towards the progressive side.

His candidacy seems to be driven by a desire to get his particular solutions into the public arena.

◯ Christine Sarmiento (—)

According to Ballotpedia, Christine Sarmiento earned a high school diploma from the Del Pilar Academy, an associate degree from Pasadena City College in 2010, and a bachelor’s degree from Western Governors University in 2024. Sarmiento’s career experience includes working as a registered nurse. Her website indicates she has dual backgrounds as an Operations Manager in the private service industry and a Public Health Nurse in community healthcare.

She has a realistic campaign website, although it doesn’t have a lot of details. She identifies two key highlights: (1) Lowering the cost of living with affordable housing, lowered fees, and ending costly bureaucracy for all Californians; and (2) Top down accountability and transparency. Eliminating waste, improving efficiency, and making sure every dollar works for the people.

An article for a nurses organization expresses her views a bit more: the working class should represent themselves rather than rely on traditional politicians to do it for them. Sarmiento has stated, “For the longest time, politicians have been telling us and promising us that they will speak for us, the working class. But after all these issues with affordability, I think it’s time that we speak for ourselves.” This article notes that her campaign emphasizes addressing homelessness, improving healthcare access, promoting education and infrastructure, and fostering unity across political lines. These are policy areas directly tied to her professional experience managing public health systems and coordinating complex operations.

Her candidacy seems driven by  a desire to improve things.

◯ Gretha Solórzano (R)

Solorzano is a retired scientist with 30 years of experience in the energy sector. She has a BS in Nuclear Engineering from UC Berkeley. She characterizes herself as a “moderate conservative” — socially progressive and fiscally conservative. She also writes that she is a Christian, a Zionist, a scientist, and a change agent.

She has a policy page that details her policies. In general, they are a mix between stuff you might see on the progressive side and traditional conservative policies. No excessive MAGA philosophy or dog-whistles. She favors a flat tax. She wants to respect women and let them make their own decisions about their bodies. She wants limited government. She wants to cut the gas tax. She isn’t against high speed rail, but wants the project audited. She wants to reform the business tax system. She wants to reintroduce nuclear energy and modernize the grid to handle solar, wind, thermal, and batteries. She thinks addiction and mental illness are the key drivers of homelessness. She wants school choice, but doesn’t use the more MAGA references about parental choice or indoctrination. She supports privatized healthcare. She has normal Conservative public safety views. As I said: All across the map, mixing conservative and progressive stances.

She has a strange webpage that includes images of printed manifestos. She appears to be self-funding and not asking for donations.

Her candidacy seems to be driven by the desire to get her views out there.

◯ Margaret Trowe (—) (Socialist Workers Party)

Trowe was the 2000 United States VP candidate for the Socialist Workers Party; she also appeared as their VP candidate in 2004 in those states where official candidate Arrin Hawkins was excluded from the ballot for being constitutionally ineligible to serve as vice president. Trowe ran for United States Senator from Iowa in 1998 and received 2,542 votes. She also received one write-in vote for President of the United States in the 2004 election. In 2006, she was a candidate for Florida’s 18^th congressional district. In 2020, Trowe once again ran for a seat on the United States Senate. She was a candidate for Mayor of Louisville, Kentucky in the 2022 Louisville mayoral election.

Trowe is a hotel worker and member of UNITE HERE. She’s using her campaign to build solidarity with union struggles.

She does not appear to have a campaign website. Her candidate statement hews the Socialist line. She calls for union-backed fight for amnesty for undocumented workers to build working-class unity. She is against racism, for women’s rights and against Washington’s wars, from Vietnam to Venezuela. She defends Israel’s right to exist and defend itself, and stands against antisemitism. She supports the Cuban Revolution. She defends free speech, due process, other Constitutional protections. She believes workers need to take political power—the only solution to world capitalist economic, political, and moral crisis and the only way to stop the capitalist rulers’ march to World War III. As I said: Normal socialist stuff.

For all those who are complaining about the Democratic Socialist candidates out there, saying that they are socialist: Trowe is much more along the lines of the real socialists. You’ll notice she says nothing about Medicare for All, or social services for all. Her focus is the workers and revolution. As I’ve said before, and I’ll say again: Democratic Socialism is a philosophy that advocates for a democratic political system alongside a socially owned or regulated economy, aiming to meet public needs over private profit. It seeks to achieve social justice, economic equality, and worker empowerment through democratic, electoral means rather than revolution, differentiating it from authoritarian socialism. Socialism, on the other hand, is an economic and political system based on public or collective ownership of the means of production, rather than private ownership. It focuses on reducing inequality through social control of resources, with production geared toward human use rather than profit. It often involves state regulation or planning of the economy.

Her candidacy seems driven by Socialist passion (which is common for those with that alignment).

◯ Tom Woodard (L)

Based on his “about” page, Woodard’s experience is all over the map. Literally. Luckily, the Libertarian website has a more succinct summary. Woodard has a BS, Business Administration (Management), San Diego State University, 1979. He was Co-Founder & CEO of a Private Nature Preserve on the Sea of Cortez (Loreto, Baja California Sur, Mexico), 2006–2023. He was Founder of Floresta USA / Plant With Purpose, 1984. He was Founder of a Los Arbolitos commercial tree nursery. He was a Surgical Equipment Specialist, Consultant, at Allergan Surgical / Advanced Medical Optics, 1992–2005. He was a Regional Diagnostic Equipment Specialist at Allergan Humphrey, 1988–1990. He was a Sales Representative / Sales Manager at America Forklift Company (San Diego), 1979–1981.

His positions generally hew the Libertarian line: Humanely ending homelessness, law and order, conservation, ending government waste, water abundance, etc. A common theme seems to a striving for unity, and getting rid of the dividing polarity in politics. But his overriding approach is expressed in his Libertarian philosophy: “The non-aggression principle is absolute: no individual or government may initiate force, fraud, or coercion against peaceful people. You own your life, body, labor, choices, and property. The government’s sole legitimate role is to protect individual rights, defend against external threats, and provide only those essential functions that must be met collectively. All government programs overreach, stifling prosperity and driving California’s decline, creating sky-high living costs, energy poverty, housing shortages, wildfires, youth exodus, and job flight, all fueled by excessive taxes, mandates, regulations, and cronyism. Libertarian solutions unleash freedom: personal liberty, free markets, minimal government, and voluntary stewardship. The result: lower costs, abundant resources, explosive innovation, and opportunity for everyone.”

His candidacy seems driven by the Libertarian view, which isn’t captured well by the other parties. Democrats agree with individual rights (mostly, but they don’t go as far as Libertarians), but believe in more government. Republicans agree with the market views and personal freedom (emphasis on the “personal”), but don’t agree with individual rights.

◯ Nancy Young (—)

Young was the Mayor of the City of Tracy between 2020 and 2024, having been a council member before that, first elected in 2012. She was also a project manager at a company that provided nannies. She also worked at JP Morgan and a temp agency. She has a BA from UC Berkeley in Mass Communications/Media Studies, and a PhD in Theology/Theological Studies from Good News Seminary and Bible College.

She ran for the San Joaquin Board of Supervisors in 2024, receiving 29.4% of the vote.

Her priorities are broad: Unity; Transportation; Strengthening communities; Supporting Small Business; Affordibility; Safer Neighborhoods. The first priority, “unity”, seems to be the broadest and strongest, for she writes on her campaign website: “partnership over polarization, practical solutions over party agendas, and leadership that serves everyday people — not political machines”. She does not provide more details behind her priorities or how she would implement them.

Her candidacy seems sincere.

◯ Leo Zacky (R)

Zacky s part of the Zacky Farms poultry family. His great grandfather, Samuel, immigrated to California over a century ago in search of the American dream. Together with his three sons, they started a small chicken business. Leo’s grandparents, Robert and Lillian Zacky, expanded the business through vertical integration of Zacky Farms. The family worked hard through the years to survive and thrive during the good times and bad times. As a teenager, Leo would accompany his grandmother to Sacramento and Washington, D.C. as she lobbied for the agriculture industry. Later, he would become a lobbyist as a member of the California Poultry Federation (CPF). In 2012 there was a major global recession and the business was in trouble. At the age of 20, Leo decided to leave college, determined to do his part to help save the family business. He literally rolled up his sleeves and started at the bottom to learn every facet of how to run a business. Alas, in 2019 the family business collapse; Leo blamed government overreach. Since then, Leo has worked in the energy and food production sectors. He has a degree in Business Administration and Management from the University of Arizona (2012).

Zacky first ran for Governor in 2021 as a potential replacement candidate for Gavin Newsom during the Newsom recall attempt. He ran again in 2022.

Zacky is clearly pissed at the Government for the loss of his family business, writing on his campaign website: “California is being run into the ground by crooks, cowards, and globalist sellouts. They’ve taxed us to death, flooded our streets with chaos, and turned our schools into propaganda mills. Everything they touch gets worse because they don’t care about us. I’m not here to manage their collapse. I’m here to blow it up and rebuild it.” Reading through his positions, they are generally MAGAish. There’s a lot of anger and broad statements; there isn’t a lot of specifics of how he would do anything. There are also some troubling statements, such as “No more globalist garbage”; for those unfamiliar with dog whistles, mentions of globalism are often (but not always) veiled references to antisemitism. There is also clear conspiracy theory language: “We’ll protect medical choice and expose the censorship and collusion that silenced the truth” or “stop pretending climate extremism is science”.

His candidacy seems driven by anger at a government that done him wrong.

◯ David Zickefoose (R)

Zickefoose’s campaign website doesn’t say much about who Zickenfoose is, other than the fact that he “is a proud California native, born and raised in West Covina, who built his life raising a family in Chino Hills and now resides in Huntington Beach” and that he is “a self-made real estate entrepreneur”. I did some Google search to see if I could find educational background or the realty company, but I couldn’t. His wife is a realtor, and his son is a realtor, and possibly another son is a realtor, so it appears to run in the family.

He appears to support significant tax cuts (10% income tax, 5.5% C-Corp tax, 0.5% property tax, 5.5% sale tax), although the Governor cannot unilaterally lower taxes (especially sales and property taxes, where rates are established at the county and city level). Other policies appear to toe the older moderate Republican line. There is not a MAGA tilt that I could see. His policies are more at the platitude or broad idea level; there are no specifics.

His candidacy seems driven by a hatred of taxes and similar economic issues.

Tier 3.2: Below Viability Candidates with Incomplete or One-Note Positions

◯ Akinyemi Agbede (D)

Agbede is a Nigerian-American mathematician and educator. He attended Baptist Academy Obanikoro for his Higher School Certificate and later studied Mathematics at the University of Lagos. Additionally, he attended the Redeemed Christian Bible College.  He earned a PhD in Mathematical Analysis from the University of Cambridge. Agbede ran for Senator in 2022 (1.0% of the vote); and was disqualified or withdrew from the battle for Congress in District 28 in 2020. He ran for Governor in 2018 (0.1% of the vote); for Senate in 2016 (didn’t make it onto the ballot); and for Governor in 2014 (0.9% of the vote).

His campaign page does something odd, giving the routing and checking account number for people to make donations. That makes the cybersecurity guy in me cringe. He also gives Zelle information for donations. I’m not sure that either approach meets the FEC standard for political donations.

His campaign page identifes three main areas: Housing and Homelessness; Economic Growth; and Public Safety. There’s one sentence for each and no further details. His site has a banner indicate a 7-point agenda, but this doesn’t appear to be on the website.

In his candidacy, we have another perennial candidate. It is unclear why he keeps running.

◯ James Athans Jr. (R)

Athans is a businessman and realtor. He appears to be associated with Keller-Williams Realty in Rancho Palos Verdes. His LinkedIn indicates his education is the Grace School of the Bible. He also has a podcast.

The Bible reference fits well when you review his campaign website. It has a specific page for a “Bible Dugout”, and indicates that Athans is a minister. He also has a pro-life pledge on his website.

His platform is based on the notion of “Prosperity Zones”. I asked Google AI to summarize the page, as it was complicated. They summarized it as follows:

The webpage for Jim Athans’ California Gubernatorial campaign details a “City Revitalization Plan” and a “10-Block Business Community Model” designed to transform economically depressed areas into “Economic Prosperity Zones” (EPZs).City Revitalization Plan. The plan is structured into three primary phases focused on infrastructure and policy:

1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Phase 1: Planning & Policy: Establishing a “Master Development Corporation” to oversee the zones, implementing flexible zoning for mixed-use developments, and securing federal/state funding.
            2. Phase 2: Infrastructure: Acquiring blighted properties, modernizing utility grids with “Smart Grid” technology, and improving streetscapes to be more pedestrian-friendly.
            3. Phase 3: Housing: Utilizing prefabricated and modular homes (approx. 700 sq. ft.) to reduce construction costs by 20% and accelerate the development of mixed-income communities.

The 10-Block Business Community Model. Athans proposes a specific urban layout that mixes national anchors with local services to foster civic engagement and employment:

1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Anchors: High-traffic national chains like Vons, McDonald’s, 24 Hour Fitness, and Taco Bell to provide essential services and entry-level jobs.
            2. Local & Essential Services: Includes laundromats, auto repair shops, community gardens, and senior care services.
            3. Innovation & Finance: Features business incubators/coworking spaces, tech training programs, and a community credit union to provide microloans and financial literacy.
            4. Economic IncentivesTo support this model, the plan offers façade improvement grants, flexible lease agreements, and technical assistance for small businesses. It also mandates local hiring requirements to ensure neighborhood wealth-building.

Athans also proposes a CA-DOGE, a specialized state agency designed to modernize operations, eliminate redundant processes, and rigorously audit state spending to prevent and address waste and fraud. This looks to be modeled after the Federal DOGE effort.

However, Athans’ proposals are incomplete, failing to cover many of the issues and areas of concern that need to be addressed within the state.

Athans candidacy appears to be focused on bringing many conservative ideas to state government.

◯ Joseph Cabrera (—)

Cabrera makes it easy as he has a detailed bio site, by virtue of being an Assistant Professor, University of La Verne (2014-present). He is also Asst. Vice Provost for Undergraduate Programs and Faculty Affairs. Previously, he was an Assistant Professor, Marywood University (2011-2014); a Licensed General Contractor & Green Builder, LI#901367 San Diego, CA (2006-2011); Adjunct Faculty, Pima Community College (2002-2004); a Graduate T.A., University of Arizona (2000-2005); and a Yoga Instructor (NY & AZ) (1999 & 2002). His research areas are Community development, Social Capital, Social Networks, New Urbanism, Inequality. He has a PhD from University of Arizona (2010); an MUP from CUNY-Hunter College (2000); and a BA from UC Irvine (1997).

His campaign website indicates that his key priorities are: (1) Affordable Housing, Health and Mental Care; (2) Social Justice; (3) Supporting Small Businesses; (4) Efficient Government; (5) Veterans Care; and (6) Affordable Clean Energy. He does not provide any specifics. He does mention one interesting thing in his introduction, which could be the driver for his campaign: “Finally, we must restore and revamp the Donahoe Higher Education Act. I will return our public universities to the merit-based, accessible model that once made California the envy of the world. By auditing “ghost projects” and redirecting interest savings, we can fund our schools and clinics without raising your taxes.”

He has endorsements from a number of local businesses.

◯ Jon Henderson (—)

Henderson is a CRP®, CRPC®, CBDA and Founder and CIO of Echo45, a Financial Advisory Firm. His business site bio says he “launched Echo45 Tax and Estate to provide integrated tax preparation, estate planning, and wealth management services.” His LinkedIn profile gave more information: He has been at Echo45 for over 6 years; before that, he was a Wealth Management Advisor and Senior VP at Merrill Lynch Wealth Management. He has a BA in Communication from San Diego State. He has licenses and certifications in blockchain and digital assets, as well as retirement planning and financial planning.

His campaign website makes a strong plea for an independent stance (but not from the hatred direction of some of the other independents): “He believes in a simple principle: the Golden Rule for the Golden State. Treat your neighbors the way you want to be treated, even when you disagree. California is too diverse, too dynamic, and too interconnected to survive on contempt. We do not need to think alike, but we do need to respect one another and learn how to disagree better. Jon believes that when we put our differences aside and focus on building something together, something powerful happens. Shared goals lead to shared effort. Shared effort leads to real accomplishments. And those accomplishments foster respect.”

His campaign website does heavily market his book, which appears to be the impetus for his running.

He does have a solutions page, but the set of solutions proposed seems incomplete. Therefore, I’m putting him in Tier 3.2.

His candidacy seems to be driven by his book.

◯ Dawit Kellel (—)

Kellel was born and raised in Abyssinia, and is a 20 year Navy veteran.

His campaign website contains a large things he stands for, and they are across the map:

• • • Pro Choice
    • Pro Second Amendment
    • Pro Freedom of Expression
    • Pro Veterans: My vets, don’t screw this up. It’s a no brainer!
    • Pro Farmers
    • Pro Law and Order
    • Pro Strong Borders
    • Pro Voter ID
    • Pro Prop 50
    • Pro Business/Anti-Monopoly and Plutocracy
    • Pro Free Market Capitalism/Anti-Socialism
    • Support the US Constitution as Amended
    • Against California Off Shore Drilling
    • Cut State Gas Tax, Income Tax and Corporate Tax
    • Keep Prop 13, Protect Individual Property Rights
    • Reform Healthcare Services
    • Invest in Infrastructure, Education (STEM), and Law Enforcement
    • Utilize California State Owned Buildings and Lands to Combat Homelessness. Housing affordability improves when supply grows. Supply grows when we cut red tapes and rein in excessive fees!

Some lean towards MAGA, some lean towards progressive goals. For each he had 1-2 sentences about the goal, but no more details about how he would implement them. However, his priorities page gives more information, but it doesn’t cover all the areas.

Reading his pages, it feels like he is unprepared for the job. His planning is incompleted.

His candidacy seems to be driven from the immigrant experience.

◯ Alicia Lapp (R)

Lapp has a Bachelors Degree in Criminal Justice from Cal State Chico, and an AA degree in the Administration of Justice from Butte College. Her campaign site, however, says “I earned four college degrees”, without saying what they are.

Her website details her story: “I am a mother who was failed by the California family court system. I watched as a domestic violence abuser (A Green Card Holder)—someone I had an active restraining order against—was granted guardianship alongside a person fresh out of prison. I watched as police reports of child abuse were barred from the courtroom. I didn’t just walk away; I went to work. I earned four college degrees to find out why this happened. What I learned in those years of study was the most chilling truth of all: My nightmare isn’t an accident. It’s “normal.” The system knows exactly how to fix these failures, yet it chooses not to. I am running for Governor because our family units are being destroyed, and our children are paying the price. I am not backed by special interests, corporate donors, or political machines. I am here for the Village only.”

She doesn’t link any policies on her campaign page. I did uncover some policies via Googling:

• • • A “Homelessness” policy that Google found,  but it doesn’t say much or have any depth.
    • A “Law and Order” policy. However, it mostly has to do with court IT system consolidation and has nothing to do with achieving law and order.
    • A “Power Independence” policy. Her basic plan is to get rid of investor owned utilities.
    • A “Fire Safety and Tree Army” policy. The basic idea is using the National Guard for fuel reduction.

Her X page is very MAGA: “Californians FIRST! Deport ALL illegals, END homelessness, PROTECT parental rights, RESTORE law & order, GUT fraud, END judicial discretionLet’s Take back CA”, and has a large “America First” banner.

Her policies seem incomplete and naïve.  She doesn’t seem to understand state government.

It is clear her candidacy is based in anger from her experience with the Family Courty system.

◯ Duane Loynes Jr. (—) (American Solidarity)

Duane is a recent graduate of Loyola Marymount University with a B.A. in Screenwriting and a minor in Asian Studies.

He is a candidate of the American Solidary Party. I’d never heard of them, so I looked up their platform. At the front is this statement: “The American Solidarity Party is based in the tradition of Christian democracy. We acknowledge the state should be pluralistic while upholding a vision of the common good of all and of each individual informed by Christian tradition and acknowledging the primacy of religion in each person’s life.”. This leads them to be “pro-life” and pro-“natural families”. But it also leads them to social justice and pro-environmental platforms.

His website provides platforms on abortion, homelessness, and housing. I think we can guess the abortion platform. His homelessness platform is problematic: “Families of the homeless should be provided with a reunification program for their unhoused relatives”. Of course, this completely ignores those that are fleeing abuse from their families. His housing policy is interesting, going after corporate landlordship: “Tax policy should reduce the hoarding of single-family homes by corporations. In order to discourage holding multiple properties and keeping homes off the market, escalating taxes should be placed on each additional home. “

The abortion position is interesting. Unlike most Republicans, who only care about the foetus before it is born, they have a whole-life approach. They feel that if life is important, it should be important form birth to death. Even though I disagree with them regarding abortion (as I don’t believe they should be able to foist their religious views upon someone who believes different), I do agree with the whole life perspective.

His candidacy seems to be driven through a party-based religious zeal.

◯ Amanda Martin (—)

Amanda Martin is an Ojai local currently running for Governor of California. She is the founder of Renewal Revolution, a sustainable general contracting and construction social enterprise based in Ojai. She frequently participates in local Ojai events, such as the Ojai Valley Land Conservancy’s garden tours and wildfire resilience workshops. She is a mother who often speaks about how her daughter, who has Down syndrome, has shaped her perspective on unity and community. According to her Renewal Revolution bio, Amanda has earned multiple degrees and extensive experience as a Nurse, Executive Medical Coordinator, Teacher, Marketing Coordinator, Solar Consultant, Solar Designer and Construction Project Manager. She began the growth of Renewal Revolution during her second year of pre-med studies when she decided she wanted to open a wellness center that treated individuals as a whole and not just a symptom, this clinic would be a social business model and as such would treat everyone, regardless of insurance or income.  She later felt the need to not only give back to her community and the planet but to run outreaches in other countries.  After getting into the solar field on a whim and then building contracting with solar, she realized if she wanted to see her dreams to fruition she had to “be” her goals on every level. Amanda is a wife of a Physician and mother to two children, one bordering the spectrum and the other with Trisomy 21 (Down Syndrome). Amanda attended Ventura and Santa Barbara counties WĒV (Woman’s Economic Ventures) Program and graduated with honors, as well as sits on the Central Coast Green Building Council (CCGBC) a chapter of the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) as a board director as well as being the VP of diversity and inclusion and the Ventura Regional Chair. Amanda is also a Regional Leader with United States Hemp Building Association (USHBA), she Co-Leads Region 2 which consists of CA, NV, and HI. Amanda is one of a handful of contractors in the Nation who is licensed, with experience building permitted hemp structures as she built the first permitted Hemp ADU in California.

Her website is odd. Some pages, such as her Narrative, feel oddly generic, like the website hasn’t been completed. Others, such as her stances and beliefs, are more fleshed out and give specific proposals. She wants to audit state spending and reduce waste, which is a stance that seems a bit more conservative. However, the rest of her stances are more … what I might call people stewardship or people centered. They aren’t broadly progressive, but they are putting people first and bringing services to people. However, they are also very high level and don’t provide specific details as to how they will be achieved with the legislature.

Then, when you get to her “Make It Make Sense” page, things turn conservative again: halting non-essential state spending until an audit, halting Atmospheric Geoengineering Activities (i.e., “chemtrails”), eliminating the gas tax and VMT, giving people the right to go off grid. This page does give more specifics, but it is hard to see how they would be implemented.

Her candidacy seems to be driven by a mix of sustainability and conservativism.

◯ Satish Rao (D)

Rao is a professor of EECS as UC Berkeley. According to the Daily Cal, Rao, who teaches discrete mathematics, probability and pedagogy in the electrical engineering and computer sciences department, said his decision to run stems from growing frustration working in public education and public service. Rao’s platform mainly centers on education reform and administrative efficiency. He is bringing his internal fight with the UC Berkeley administration to the state level. He claims that administrative costs have ballooned while academic spending remains flat in his 10 years analyzing university spending. According to Rao’s analysis, UC Berkeley’s administrative spending increased by $50 million between 2021 and 2024. Rao’s platforms also focus significantly on K-12 education. Drawing from his four years researching Berkeley High School, Rao criticized the state’s current curriculum, such as the 1,000-page California math framework. For Rao, the campaign is less about political ambition and more about injecting “the truth” into public dialogue.

His campaign website has the subtitle “Sure. Why not.”, alternating with “Shrug. Worth a look.”. It does cover some other issues, but also has some explicit pandering videos. Like a typically professor, his website works by asking questions, together with “What do you think?”

His website also includes a course curriculum on California Government.

His candidacy seems driven by a single issue of education reform, particularly in Berkeley.

◯ Sam Sandak (—)

Sandak has a BFA from New York University. He was a writer for Hasbro, and a writer and editor for Sega of America, working on “Sonic Boom”. He has also written for Netflix (“Legend Quest: Masters of Myth”, and for DC Comics. Currently, he is a VP and Co-Producer at Bad Hat Harry Productions. His father, Bill Freiberger, is a comedy writer. His mother, Beth Sussman, is a Juilliard-trained classical pianist. More at IMDB.

His main philosophy is captured on his campaign page: “California is a place where titans like Francis Ford Coppola, George Lucas, David Lynch and Quentin Tarantino could make their movies their way. Those are the types of films California should be funding: Movies that come from filmmakers with original ideas. Just this week, California announced “The Simpsons Movie 2” will be getting $22 million in tax incentives, while another $11 million will be given to a “13 Going on 30” reboot at Netflix. That sum of $33 million isn’t creating jobs. The success and viability of those IPs created those jobs. California does not need to subsidize The Simpsons 2. California taxpayer money needs to create new films, with new ideas; jobs that would not exist if not for the tax incentives.”

He has specific actions to support this manifesto: (•) Add to film incentives; the 750 million dollars currently allocated by the state will be increased to 1 billion dollars; (•) Require productions to hire crew for a minimum of 30 days in order to qualify for incentives; (•) Dismantle “FilmLA” once and for all; (•) Establish “California Canon” as an official designation for movies acknowledging the importance of the original creators. Only George Lucas’s Star Wars stuff counts; (•) Add filmmaking to the curriculum in public schools; (•) Ensure that actors are held liable if they shoot a gun on set and it kills someone.

His website lists no other policy objectives.

His candidacy is built around this one note: he wants to bring filmmaking back to California.

Tier 3.3: Kooks and Nuts with Incomplete Positions

◯ Louis De Barraicua (D)

Barraicua is a story director at OptomystiK, which is a Web3 portal accessible through an interactive story. Before that, he was an English and Film Teach at LAUSD (Henry Clay MS, Vist MA) for 24 years. He was also a Market Researcher for Nissan Motor Company. He has a BA in Creative Writing from USC.

His website is strange: “Story Premise | A teacher discovers the school system is controlled by corporations so he creates a story that leads citizens becoming playable character in a parallel reality he incepts by becoming Governor of California.” Uhhhhhhh….. What he seems to be doing is promoting public policy through this weird game. As he puts it: “Golden Road | a 9-step Onboarding Process a Game Lobby That Organizes Citizens into a Story a Mission-Focused Narrative”

He describes his game OptomystiK as follows: “Since 2019, Louis has been researching how to create a decentralized micro-economy concept to solve the unmet needs of California. OptomystiK is a chapter-by-chapter narrative that simulates a process in a story that incentivizes communities to collaborate, like in a story. The process is enabled through an interdimensional technology, the YBR. At the hands of a pirate captain, the YBR becomes the interface for decentralized communities. “

His “What?” page details his plot line: (1) Step #1: Implement a 3D Tools that Changes Behavior (2) Step #2: Incentivize Locals (3) Step #3: Engage Learners. Then, on his “Power the Narrative” page, he cites Ezekiel 25:17, which Google AI indicates is “a declaration of divine judgment against the Philistines and other nations hostile to Israel, focusing on God executing “great vengeance” and “wrathful rebukes” so that they will know He is the Lord”

His candidacy seems to be some warped promotion for his online video game.

◯ LivingForGod DeMott (—)

Yes, that is his name. It’s on his tax return and everything. He appears to be a chaplain and member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. He evidently was in the pest control business before becoming a chaplain.

He has a platform that addresses five areas: (1) Faith & Family Values; (2) Economic Freedom; (3) Educational Financial Freedom; (4) Responsible Stewardship and State Integrity; and (5) Constitutional Sovereignty. That last one intrigued me the most.  I was worried it was going into sovereign citizen territory, but it wasn’t: “California has the inherent authority and the moral obligation to ensure that the constitutional rights of its citizens are never compromised by federal violations. The Constitutional Sovereignty platform asserts that the Bill of Rights is not a suggestion, but an ironclad shield that is there to protect every Californian, regardless of unconstitutional violations. This means that no entity—be it a federal agency or a state department—has the authority to engage in warrantless surveillance, illegal seizures, or unconstitutional impersonation. By standing on the principle of the Tenth Amendment, California will assert its right to protect its people from any policy that undermines individual liberty. We will maintain a state-level watchdog system to ensure that every resident’s right to due process, freedom of movement, and personal privacy remains the highest priority, securing a future where the sovereignty of the state is there to PROTECT THE PEOPLE.” It still is strange.

His faith platform is more problematic: “By anchoring governance in the unifying principles of faith”. That always makes me, a non-Christian, nervous.

His candidacy seems to be driving by some sort of religious manifesto. So is he a poorly defined realistic candidate or does he fall into the kook category. It’s a close call, but the structure and layout tends to push him into the latter.

◯ Lukasz Filinski (—)

His campaign website gives no background information, and he does not appear to be on LinkedIn.

His campaign website is strange. The opening image is a big Christian Cross with “67”, and a bear and the Golden Gate bridge, with the word “HOLD”. His philosophy is to “HOLD the Line for Families, Truth, and a New Golden Era”. He says that, as Governor, his first official act will be “to introduce the HOLD Amendment to the California Constitution and immediately launch the Truth Budget Dashboard. This will be a transparent real time public online tool that tracks every major state spending item, its actual outcomes, and waste metrics.” The amendment would requires that “every major decision and budget item must pass the HOLD Test: Does this strengthen families, protect children, honor truth, and treat people with dignity? I will veto any bill that fails this test unless it is overridden by a 67 percent supermajority of both houses. In the spirit of the New Fway 67, we move beyond narrow 51 percent victories and instead seek broad consensus so that major decisions serve all Californians.”

His website offers plans to address the homelessness and improve the housing situation, as well as building a family renaissance. He wants to make California the best state in America to fall in love, get married, and raise a family. He does this by providing grants to newly married families. He does not indicate the source of the funding. He also wants to rebuild education, and create a “Human First AI State”. He wants tax and budget relief, and to bring back joy through something called “Peoples Coachella”.

Lastly, he wants something called “Rebirth of Gods Creation – A New Covenant with Californias Wild Heart”. This is something called California Reborn, an ambitious, decade long initiative to: plant 1,000,000 native trees, restore major watersheds and wetlands, expand public access, and create a youth stewardship corps.

He writes odd things, such as “This is not my plan alone. This is our covenant. I have carried the cross through the hills of San Francisco and felt what it means to be nailed down by pain and fear. Yet love held stronger. That same love can heal and lift California if we choose to carry it together.”

His candidacy seems to be driven by a strange religious zeal.

◯ Don Grundmann (—) (Constitution Party)(National Justice Party)

Ah, Don Grundmann. The candidate I’ve most hesitated to investigate because he penned a virulent antisemitic, anti-zionist, and hate-filled screed in the Candidate Statements. A screed that required the Secretary of State to put a disclaimer that it didn’t represent the position of the SOS’s office. A screen that started a debate about whether it should have been published at all. For example, JNS notes that Elizabeth Barcohana, chair of Jewish engagement at the California Republican Party, told JNS that Grundmann’s statement is “abhorrent and not in touch with the concerns of California families.” The Times of Israel noted the protest that this has raised in Jewish groups, noting that Jewish groups said Grundmann’s statement violated candidate guidelines that said that the statements “shall be limited to a recitation of the candidate’s own personal background and qualifications” and that they needed to have a declaration from the candidate “that the statement being submitted is true and correct.” The Jewish Journal noted that Members of the California Legislative Jewish Caucus also condemned the inclusion of the statement and said they are exploring legislative responses, urged California Secretary of State Shirley Weber to issue a public apology and remove the statement from the voter guide website.

The thing is: He’s done this before. Grundmann ran for Senate in 2022 (0.1% of the vote) and 2024 (0.1% of the vote), and had similar statements published then (I remember commenting on his 2024 in my ballot deep dive then). He ran for Congress in Swalwell’s district back in 2020 (1.2% of the vote), and for Senate way back in 2018 (0.2% of the vote) and 2016 (0.2% of the vote). He even ran for Senate way back in 2012. He’s not a new nutjob.

His hatred isn’t limited to Jews. He organized numerous Straight Pride festivals, including one in 2019. He links to the National Straight Pride Coalition in his screed (I’m not including the link). So he hates gays as well. He supports the Constitution Party, the National Justice Party, and Christian Nationalism. He’s a White Pride supporter (this is made even more clear in his 2024 screed).

This guy is about as far right as one can get.

He may have had a candidate website (fight-the-power (dot) org), but the site is unreachable and hopefully is down for good. The Google summary of that site says “is a website associated with Don Grundmann, a Bay Area chiropractor and political activist who has frequently run for public office. Grundmann uses the site to promote his views, which include anti-transgender sentiments and calls to dismantle the IRS and U.S. Department of Treasury. He is also the founder of the National Straight Pride Coalition, intending to host “Straight Pride” rallies, and chairman of the Constitution Party of California, which he states is an affiliate of the Christian Nationalist Party (CNParty (.) org), a party he founded. Critics have described his rhetoric as hateful and radical.”

His candidacy seems to be based on a deep-seated hatred.

◯ Brent Maupin (—)

Maupin was born and raised in Redding, California, and is a fifth generation Californian. He is  a licensed Civil Engineer, Architect and, for many years, a licensed contractor in California, and has worked on projects up and down the state, as well as many projects in neighboring states, including Arizona where he lived prior to relocating back to California.

His website is a bit odd, saying “California has reached a “tipping point”. The power of change lies in becoming who God made us to be, thus ushering in the Kingdom. Together we can: • End All School Shootings • End All Mass Shootings • End All Sex Trafficking • End All Sex Trafficking of Children • End Pornographic Availability to Children • Have Better Wildfire Mitigation • Have Healthier Food Products • Better Manage Our Water Resources Including to build a Desalination Plant in Southern California, not a 350 Milelong Pipeline from Northern California’s Already Taxed Rivers. • Provide 200,000 Transitional Housing Units for the Homeless • Educate People as to Why We Have the Homeless Problem.” It is the “ushering in the Kingdom” that tingles my spidey senses.

He doesn’t give any more details on how he will do this except for that “as governor I intend to implement the Theory of Constraints (TOC) into each and every department within the state government. This will streamline the efficiency of each department with a goal of a 25% minimum improvement.” Basically, what he was is “Dancing in the Desert: The Spiritual Overthrow of Government”. He goes on to say “use our “Phantasia” along with our “Yetsirah” to bring about the paradigm shift that California desperately needs. This is especially true when we receive a calling from God to do so. An important part of this is to become far more aware of the universe around us and our role in it. In my book, The Freeing of One Billion Souls, I tell of one such experience. As Governor of California I hope to tell many, many more stories. Stories about supernatural healings, drastically reduced crime, and ultimately a story of making all of Californias’ cities the safest and most economically successful of all the cities within the United States.”

He goes on with the oddities, saying “Have you ever asked yourself why has the homeless problem in California gotten so far out of control? I have, and the answer I got was eye opening. In the next video I describe how subliminal messages of “Death to America” chants from various countries around the world has impacted our most vulnerable citizens.”

His candidacy seems to be some sort of odd spiritual journey for him.

◯ Frederic Schultz (—)

Per Ballotpedia: Frederic Schultz was born in Fort Bragg, North Carolina. He earned a bachelor’s degree from Columbia in 1990 and a law degree from the Georgetown University Law Center in 1994. His career experience includes working as a human rights attorney, voting rights attorney, and stock trading. Schultz helped found the Academy for Jewish Religion and has served on the board of directors and the founding academy council. He also ran for Governor in 2022.

As you enter his campaign website, the first thing that hits you is the statement “State of Emergency” for Human Rights. That seems to be the thrust of his message. You see it in his Candidate Statement: “Please elect me governor, to save our rights/lives. We’re in an Emergency: I’ll declare a State of Emergency, to save us! Murderous government thugs kill us daily, for the “crimes” of seeking asylum, documenting attacks, protesting. California arrests 800,000 annually, most for unconstitutional victimless/consensual “crimes”, enslaving 200,000 daily, without telling jurors we can always vote “not guilty”.”  You see it in his website, with statements like “I’m the only candidate who will save our lives, b/c I’m the only candidate who recognizes we’re in a “state of emergency”, so I’ll enact one to save our lives and freedoms from unelected Trump’s tyranny! […] I’m only one who will close the camps, fre most of the slaves in jail for unconstitutional victimless “crimes”, etc! Our bodies our rights! No victim no crime!” (this was originally ALL CAPS).

He does have a few economic policies: “$10K basic income/ adult and $5K/ child and $25K school vouchers, no lockdowns ever again, and all human rights now! Free the people! ” (again, originally ALL CAPS)

He then goes on with long writings that appear to say muchly the same thing. He really doesn’t have broader policy points or a serious governing platform.

His candidacy seems to be driven by an abiding concern for human rights, but there is an odd obsession within it.

◯ Barack D. Obama Shaw (D)

Obama Shaw was born into the Cecil Shaw family as Cecil L. Shaw III before legally becoming Barack D. Obama Shaw through an inspired vision in 2013. Obama Shaw studied music and taught private lessons to aspiring artists. He was the State Chairperson of the Ring of Truth Political Party and ran for Mayor of the City of Alameda CA in 2022. Obama Shaw served in the U.S. Army Reserve from 2008 to 2016. Obama Shaw earned a high school diploma from M.B. Smiley High School. His career experience includes working as a business owner.

An article about his 2022 run for mayor said: “The third candidate in the race is Barack D. Obama Shaw. No, that’s not his birth name. He says he legally changed it in 2013. He also says he’s a business communications consultant. He has little knowledge of city issues and has never run for office before. He told us he wants pay raises for school teachers and to keep children safe in school, which suggests that he should be running for school board, not mayor.”

His campaign website starts with an odd screed. Some excerpts:

• • • California needs a uniter, not a fighter. That approach is not working. Let’s work together and win big and win often.
    • Instead of casting stones at one another, we should gather up all those stones and start building houses to eradicate homelessness and have renters to become homeowners.
    • Political Parties are the highways that get us from point a to b. I don’t love the highways. I use the highways and love the people. Let’s stop fighting over parties and start supporting new candidates. I am an American who has primarily voted Democrat and I am not a Democrat. I am a American who is on the Democratic ticket. When I travel to other countries, I introduce myself as an American and I am recognized as an American.

He does have some high level priorities (but no specifics). Some are what you would expect: school safety, teacher pay, homelessness, job security. Some of them are a little more “out there”:

• • • Interdependent City: It’s Easier to Climb than to Wait. Why wait for someone to come along and fix the problem? You have talents, skills and intelligence. All it takes is a little initiative to have people work together to resolve the challenges in our neighborhoods.
    • Cities with Purpose: An Identity is Key. Every city is purposeful.
    • Patriotic Music and Art: Music Unites. We need to engage in unity, music, art, and activities that inspire the inner being.

His candidacy seems to be driven … I can’t put it into words. I want to say a kooky form of love for people? He’s clearly down towards the kook end of the spectrum, but there’s a little more sense behind it.

◯ Scott Shields (D) (Blue Dog Democrat)

Shields has a Bachelors (Finance and Insurance) from Illinois Weslayan, and an unspecified degree in Economics from University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He claims to be a Chief Strategy Officer, and that he is “Well Known in Certain Circles”. He writes “The strategic planner identifies the knowns; the Chief Strategy Officer acknowledges the knowns and finds the unknowns”.

This is one of the kooks. A key statement on his website is this winner: “Peace On Earth Will Only Occur When The Centuries Old Mind Virus Of Atheist Marixism Is Eradicated Within Every Human Being”, I’m still not sure what that is saying, but his website says that statement clicks with all those not indoctrinated with the mind virus. He also writes: “I Am Just The Man In The Phone Booth”. By the way, he loves initial caps. They are all over his website.

Shields claims to be a “Blue Dog Democrat”. AI notes that the Blue Dog Coalition is a caucus of moderate-to-conservative Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives formed in 1995 to promote fiscally responsible policies, strong national defense, and bipartisan compromise. Often representing swing districts, they bridge ideological extremes, functioning as a “common sense” voice within the party. This led to a larger group that echoes these “Blue Dog” values. This shows in Shields ramblings. He also seems to strongly support crypto.

He has this strange endorsement on his website: “Think About It – Maybe Scott Should Be Elected Governor” — Scott’s Friend.

His website is rambling, with large blocks of text put up as images. It jumps back and forth from some form of political philosophy to occasional policy ideas to off the wall non-sensical screeds. It is unclear what is overall point is. The only thing that is clear is that this fellow should not be elected Governor.

His candidacy seems to be an excuse to spread his ramblings.

Tier 3.4: The Unknowns

◯ Mohammad Arif (D) (Peace & Freedom) (Democratic Socialist)

Arif is President and CEO at ARifCO in Bakersfield. He previously was an Executive Manager at a Law Office. He may have a law degree from Abraham Lincoln Law College.  He has a Facebook page, but it doesn’t provide much information. He ran for Congress in the 20^th District in 2024 under the Peace and Freedom flag; his website from that run is still up. He ran for Lt. Governor in 2022 (2.7 percent of the vote, under the P&F flag), and for Senate in Arizona in 2020 (Democrat, Write-in, 0.0%); and for Arizona State Senate District 18 in 2018 (1.1% of the vote); and for California State Senate District 16 in 2013; and for the P&F nomination for Governor in 2010.

As you can see from his experience, he has bounced between the Democratic Party and Peace and Freedom. This year, the posters on his website indicate he is going with the Democratic Socialist subbanner within the Democratic party. No specific positions or platforms are given.

Arif seems to be perennial candidate. Perhaps he is driven by the immigrant desire to give back to the adopted country; I see this often doing the writeups. It is hard to tell with so little information.

◯ Naomi Bar-Lev (—)

Bar-Lev is owner as Chris Karl Reynolds (Red Flag) publishing. She was a musician at “Diet Bunny”, but her writings on her LinkedIn page are strange about that: “UPC codes of our work being stolen, a Zendesk hacker which means the government thug, Lt. Jon Dungan, also on the Brady list and to be sure behind a number of the IP Addresses on my computer as I write, is in charge follows us around through platforms, all. 859784637373 …”. She has a BA in Economics from UCLA. She ran as a Republican for State Assembly in 2010 and came in last in the Republican primary. In 2010, she was described as “Miss Naomi Bar-Lev is a homegrown San Diegan. She is also a graduate of U.C.L.A. with a degree in Economics (1993) and has attended the M.B.A. program locally at San Diego State University. She has had her own company since 1996. Through her company she has been involved in restoration of a number of properties in the district. As a small business owner graduated from one of the finest schools in economics, she is keenly aware of the problems facing small business owners.”

She seems to be a bit paranoid. On her FB, she writes: “Recall the first trick they played was leaving out my contact info. By the way I found out some of the things they did while continuously breaching all my accounts. They have butchered my reels. First changing all the covers. I cant even make heads or tails on what each reel is and I am pretty sure once again Lt. Jon Dungan has removed specific data about him. It also butchers my freedom of speech onc more. His antisemitic sermon, I cant even begin.” It appears she believes she is being targeted by AWS (Amazon Web Services), and that someone from AWS is modifying her writings.

Her paranoia seems to have gone so far as the US Supreme Court, where she has filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari. Reading through the Writ, it seems in many ways similar to what is being posted on her Facebook. She also appears to have had something in front of the Bankruptcy Court.

She does not appear to have posted any positions, policy statements, or platforms other than what can be inferred from her ramblings.

Her candidacy seems to be driven by her mental state

◯ Patricia De Luca Basualdo (R)

Patrizia De Luca Basualdo is a realtor with RealtyOne Group in Campbell, CA.

She does not appear to have a campaign website, although there is a campaign website for a Dominico DeLuca, who does not seem to be connected.

◯ Rafael Hernandez (R)

Not much is known about Rafael Hernandex, or Rafael M. Hernandez, as he is listed in the Candidate Statements. Here’s what we do know:

1. 1. 1. He has an Instagram for his campaign. It says he is a “Businessman,Book&SongWriter” without providing more details. It looks like he has a large series of short posts where he makes various statements, but he doesn’t have a published text platform, or policies, or a plan.
         • He has one particular post while he talks about gas prices. It basically states he wants $3 gas by opening wells in California.
         • He has another Instagram post where he indicates he wants to build 5 million homes for low and medium income families. He doesn’t say how he will do this.
         • He has yet another Instagram post where he says “We need a big change in our government. The accumulation of wealth cannot be in the 1% of the population.”
      2. He has a YouTube video with a song, “California Governor 2026”, about running for Governor. It is all in Spanish, however, so I’m not sure what it is saying, other than it is about the governor’s race because I keep hearing “Gobernador California Veintiséis”.
      3. There was a Rafael M. Hernandez who ran for Mayor of Oxnard in 2024, willing 9.1% of the vote.

That’s about it. It is unclear what his candidacy is about: (•) Publicizing his music? (but if so, there would be more of his music on the internet) (•) Making statements about what California needs? In any case, it doesn’t appear to be a serious candidacy.

◯ Joel Jacob (D)

He does not have a campaign website. He may have a TikTok site, but I can’t get to it.

◯ Gary Kidgell (D)

Per the Personal LinkedIn page listed on Ballotpedia: Kidgell is owner of Piao Liang America. Piao Liang is primarily a streetwear brand offering apparel like hoodies, tees, and truck hats, often featuring graphic designs and logos. The brand maintains an active online presence for updates and sales, such as on Instagram and via their official Big Cartel shop.  However, the campaign’s FB page says “Kidgell brings over 15 years of experience as a building consultant and four+ years of statewide consulting, Gary brings practical expertise to the issues that matter—affordable housing, public safety, and infrastructure resilience.” His Instagram page says he is the founder of UFORI. UFORI is a trademark for clothing goods and services, which fits with Piao Liang America.

His campaign has a campaign page here, but his SEO and communication is so bad that Ballotpedia doesn’t know about it. They list only  a Facebook page, an X page, and an Instagram page. This doesn’t provide a lot of information. It appears he funded his campaign with a GoFundMe. On the GoFundMe, he describes himself as “My experience spans construction, infrastructure planning, public health policy drafting, campaign compliance, legal strategy, and community outreach. I’ve built things you can touch — and systems you can trust. I’ve worked with labor, navigated government filings, and stood up to bureaucratic barriers that shut everyday people out. I know how California works because I’ve lived inside its machinery.”

Now, there could be two Gary Kidgells out there. But Kidgell owes the voters a clear description of who he is, his work history, and his qualifications for the position, including his education.

He looks to be posting his policy as a series of FB/Instagram posts, such as this one on Clean Energy. This is not an effective way to communicate policy to the voters. It does mean you can get his policy by wandering through his Instagram. It looks like has has posted 5 of 15. He has also posted 15 design principles for his policies: (the ALL CAPS are his)

• • • HOUSING – MAKE HOUSING AFFORDABLE AGAIN
    • GAS / ENERGY – MAKE GAS & ENERGY AFFORDABLE AGAIN
    • HEALTHCARE – MAKE HEALTHCARE AFFORDABLE AGAIN
    • JOBS – MAKE WORK PAY AGAIN
    • EDUCATION – MAKE EDUCATION AFFORDABLE AGAIN
    • COST OF LIVING – MAKE LIFE AFFORDABLE AGAIN
    • PUBLIC SAFETY – MAKE CALIFORNIA SAFE AGAIN
    • WATER – MAKE WATER CLEAN AGAIN
    • SMALL BUSINESS – MAKE BUSINESS THRIVE AGAIN
    • FAMILIES – MAKE LIFE AFFORDABLE FOR FAMILIES AGAIN
    • CHILDCARE – MAKE CHILDCARE AFFORDABLE AGAIN
    • INFRASTRUCTURE – MAKE CALIFORNIA BUILD AGAIN
    • TRANSPORTATION – MAKE TRANSPORTATION AFFORDABLE AGAIN
    • INNOVATION / AI – MAKE CALIFORNIA THE FUTURE AGAIN
    • ENVIRONMENT – MAKE CLEAN ENERGY AFFORDABLE AGAIN

He has a “Day One” plan, 110 pages, available on his website… for $1000. He has a collection of letters he wrote to Congress on sale… for $250. He has California logo wear for sale. Is his goal marketing?

The campaign website lists an affordability plan, but it is very high level; about the same level as the flyers on Instagram.

His candidacy feels like a vanity project.

◯ Anne Komarovsk (—)

I took a look at the linked in profile for KomarovsK. It shows “Fourth Estate Elementary”, where she learned to tie her shoes, and “College Preparatory” for grades 902, where clases are “Getting out of Prep School 101” and “Basket Weaving 102”. She is supposedly President/CEO of SayRabbit LLC, and President of UniSat (Universal Satellite Communications), and was Engineer in Charge of Field Operations for Tribune Media. She was also a Documentary Cameraperson/Producer at Lambert Enterprises.

Her campaign page is strange. It has a “My Governor is an Idiot” flag. It calls itself “4th EstatE NewZ”, with a (202) phone number. It says (sic) “does not accept government-bought entitlements. Additionally, we do not use ‘Cookie”.

It links to a bunch of statements and reports, but states no positions of the candidate. These are things like Caltrans District 7 meetings, “No Kings” day reports, Brown Act reports, the Voter Guide. It seems to be connected to something that delivers Malibu news.

This does not seem to be a credible candidacy.

◯ Tim Nelson (R)

Nelson was born in San Diego, raised in Orange County, graduated from USC, arranged events for the Pacific Council from San Francisco to Mexico City, became an expert on Russian Affairs at Oxford, and worked along the way in restaurants, as a hotel evaluator and manager, school and SAT prep teacher, and backend banker before beginning his diplomatic career. He was a political officer in the Russian Affairs Office at the US Department of State for 23 years, serving in DC, at the US Embassy in Tel Aviv, in Bucharest, and in Toronto. He has a M.Phil in Russian and East European Studies from St. Antony’s College at Oxford, and a degree in Russian from St. Petersberg State University.

He believes that Californians are exhausted and demoralized by the past decade of hyper-partisan politics. He wants to help remedy that by standing up for State’s rights against federal overreach, for all Constitutional rights, and for economic prosperity and hope to be restored.

His campaign website gives no other issues or plans. It does say he is running for Governor of California to secure and unite our state and states; to enhance international trade and grow our economy; to lower the tax burden with accountable oversight; to improve our infrastructure; to conserve our beautiful natural resources; to prevent corruption, crime, and insecurity; and to expand housing and affordability. That’s as close to a platform as it gets. There is no evidence of MAGA ties; he appears to be closer to moderate traditional Republican.

His candidacy seems to be driven by a desire to get past partisan politics, but the rest is really unknown. He doesn’t have enough passion to give more specifics, and he states he is independent, but has registered as Republican.

◯ Erin Zezulak (D)

Erin “Zez” Zezulak, RN, IBCLC, MPH is a nurse, educator, smallbusiness owner, consultant, and mom. She has set up an ActBlue fundraising site, but does not appear to have a campaign website.

As she doesn’t have a website, the only clue to her positions is her candidate statement. She appears to want a unified, equitable healthcare system for all people living in California; equity for all Californians in education, safety, and protection; and protection from discrimination and unconstitutional practices. She wants to keep ICE out of California if they keep using their present tactics. She wants to enable affordable housing for all; she has water management plans to eliminate the drought/flood cycle that impacts California’s farming. There does not appear to be more specifics behind her plans posted.

Conclusion

Whew. That was a lot to go through all these candidates. Let’s start with the easy part. We can dismiss all the Tier 3 and Tier 2 candidates, and the two Republican candidates from Tier 1. The Tier 3 and Tier 2 candidates don’t have a chance, and my values do not align with Hilton or Bianco.

Next, we go to the mantra of this election: Perfect is the enemy of Good Enough. All of the remaining Democratic candidates have policies I can live with, even if they aren’t perfect candidates. What is most important is to get a Democrat into at least one of the top two positions, given the nature of jungle primaries in California. That means a vote for a candidate who is polling at roughly 14% or lower may just be serving to siphon enough votes away from top polling Democrats to make the general election between two Republicans. There are two strategies to address this. First, we need to get Republicans to settle on one candidate, mostly likely Steve Hilton as he has Trump’s endorsement. We need to get them to flee from Bianco. Second, all Democrats should plan to vote for the top polling Democratic candidate as of May 15 or later, to ensure a Democratic candidate gets into the General election. You can’t go wrong with any of the top tier Democratic candidates. We can’t get a perfect candidate; good enough will do.

Now, if you push me to select a favorite candidate, it is Katie Porter. I liked her when she announced, and I still like her. Alas, she is not polling that well, and she’ll likely land below the cutoff where I’ll be able to vote for her. My second choice is Tom Steyer. I don’t like the fact that he is a billionaire or his lack of experience. But I still think he’ll be better for California than Becerra.

Conclusion: This is a bit complicated:

1. (What I’ll do) Vote for the top polling Democratic candidate as of May 15 or later.
2. (My favorite of Tier 1) Katie Porter (D)
3. (My likely vote from Tier 1)  Thomas Steyer (D)

https://cahighways.org/wordpress/?p=17601