About us:
Edie and her mom, Janet Cox, have been teaming up for years now to put together voter guides. We do our own research, look at other endorsements, have some insider knowledge from years of local political involvement, and host a ballot info party with friends and neighbors to talk it all through before each election.

Our recommendations are also informed by our work. Edie has spent her career doing communications for nonprofits on a range of issues. She’s spent the last eight years focused on transportation and housing policy, currently with All Home working on homelessness and poverty around the Bay Area. Janet spent decades working on water policy and environmental program development in California (among other things); and spent the last 10+ years working with activists across the state on climate action, fossil fuel divestment, and pension finance. Last year she founded Climate Action California, which lobbies for strong climate legislation in Sacramento, and also endorses “climate champions” running for the state legislature. 

Please share this far and wide. It’s fine to disagree, ask questions, or engage in constructive, respectful debate offline or in the comments.

This voter guide contains:

• Federal candidates
• State candidates
• State Proposition 1
• Alameda County candidates
• Alameda County measures
• Alameda County Democratic Central Committee
• City measures
  • Oakland
  • San Francisco

Hot Tip: DO NOT SIGN the petitions circulating to recall District Attorney Pamela Price or Mayor Sheng Thao. These efforts are undemocratic and wasteful of taxpayer dollars, regardless of what you think of these duly elected leaders. They are funded by conservative interests and sore losers, and if they succeed, we’ll just see moreof this nonsense in the future. 

Federal Candidates

President: Joe Biden
We think Joe Biden deserves more credit than he gets for historic accomplishments on climate, infrastructure, and pandemic response with a closely divided congress, avoiding a recession and rebooting the economy so smoothly, solidarity with Ukraine, and going a long way toward reversing the truly destructive policies institutionalized during four years of Trump.  All that said, we are angry and heartsick over his continued support for Israel’s brutal war on the people of Palestine. But we don’t see a different vote here as helpful in any way. Much as Edie is seduced by the fantasy of an open convention…it’s a fantasy, and the re-election of Donald Trump would be a living nightmare. Biden has many strengths, so we’re focusing on those and will do everything we can to defeat Trump. (And send Ukraine everything it needs.)

Full term for U.S. Senate: Barbara Lee
Barbara Lee still speaks for us! Well, it’s not as simple as usual this year, but we believe in Lee’s progressive values and positions, feel she’s represented the East Bay well for decades, and would be proud to send her to the Senate. We appreciate her early and strong support (unlike Porter) for a ceasefire in Gaza, one of the few issues where the Dems running have an important policy difference.

That said, we know that Lee is the underdog in this race, so here is our political calculus: Ultimately, we’re okay with either Adam Schiff or Katie Porter winning the seat, though we’d prefer the more progressive Porter. Much as we appreciate Schiff’s intelligence and excellent work on both impeachment trials, he has some fairly centrist leanings that we’re not thrilled about, particularly on Israel. (Adam Schiff for Attorney General!) Porter is also an underdog, even if she makes it into the top two she’d have an uphill battle against Schiff. And that would be a costly and distracting run-off for California Democrats, who should arguably focus their money and attention on races where we can flip seats from red to blue, or work to defeat Trump. So we’d actually rather see the odious Republican Steve Garvey make it to the run-off with Schiff, who could sail to victory without too much effort or suspense. Splitting the progressive vote between Lee and Porter will make that outcome more likely. 

And finally, doesn’t Lee deserve a landslide victory in her home district?? Let’s at least give her that, even if it may not carry her all the way to the Senate. 

Partial term for U.S. Senate: Sepi Gilani
About this confusing double-race on the ballot: Since Dianne Feinstein’s seat was filled by an appointment after her death, the remainder of her term needs to be decided at the next election—even though the remainder of her term after that election is only a couple of months: November 2024 to January 2025. 

Since all the serious Democrats running are sitting members of the closely divided House of Representatives, and some very important legislative business usually gets done during “the lame duck” session between the November election and the January swearing-in of the next Congress, we can’t afford to pull a single Democrat out of the House during that time. Unlike when Senators resign or leave office early and a Governor can appoint a successor for the remainder of the term, House Reps need to be elected. If Schiff, Lee, or Porter wins the partial term, the Democratic number in the House will be down by one. 

So we’re going with the least offputting Democrat on the ballot, who could warm that seat for a few months and vote with the Dems against the Republicans’ last-ditch attempts to wreck the joint. 

U.S. Congress, California District 13: Lateefah Simon
This one’s pretty easy, Lateefah Simon is an excellent candidate—the type of politician who makes us keep believing in politics. A longtime nonprofit leader and advocate, she has been excellent on the BART Board during truly trying times, standing for access and financial stability, public safety and police accountability, alternatives to uniformed police officers, and more. She’s a single mom, is legally blind (though apparently sees well enough with glasses) and transit-dependent, has been unhoused and knows what it’s like to struggle to get by. She cleared the field of strong competitors remarkably well, so this is a no-brainer and we’ll be lucky to have Simon represent us in Congress. 

YES on State Proposition 1: $6.38 billion issue to build mental health treatment facilities and housing for the homeless

Edie is steeped in homelessness policy, and just about everybody in her professional world is not only supporting Prop 1, but counting on it to help deliver the solutions we need to address homelessness and strengthen mental health care in California. This is reforming and updating the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA), which has been on the books for 20 years.

Major changes include allowing these significant funds (which are already being collected) to be spent on supportive housing for people with complex health challenges who are chronically homeless, or to treat substance use disorders for folks who do not have (other) mental illness, and using some funds for the state’s Homekey Program, which is worth continuing. It reduces (but does not eliminate) the flexibility that counties have to spend MHSA money, and institutes some new accountability and transparency measures, both of which might be a good thing… Edie has heard that Alameda County actually keeps a “prudent reserve” of 50% of these funds, which is significantly more than is legal. Not sure how they’re getting away with that, but we should do better. 

As the Chronicle says in its endorsement, “the measure won’t singlehandedly solve California’s homelessness, mental health and substance abuse crises. But it does take some big steps in the right direction.” To be clear, it’s likely that some existing mental health programs will be cut as a result of this reform, and that will be painful—we wish there was more money for all sorts of mental health care, and for housing people with complex health needs!

We should also note that it’s totally unfair to voters, and in this case to people needing mental health services or housing, to put a 67-page issue on the ballot. The measure probably isn’t perfect because nothing like this could be (the state League of Women Voters is opposed), but we think the status quo isn’t working and the “no” arguments are a bit overblown. 

State legislative candidates

State Senate District 7: We’re splitting our endorsement. Please read!
Here’s a race where our views aren’t quite in alignment… but we hope they are still helpful! In this case, our choices and perspectives are heavily influenced by the work we do (Janet on climate, Edie on housing and homelessness). This gets a bit long because we also discuss the dynamics of the race beyond our choices. 

Janet strongly endorses Dan Kalb
We’ve both known Dan Kalb for years and have a lot of faith in his abilities as a legislator. Janet’s organization, Climate Action California, ran a rigorous review of candidates for the state Senate and Assembly, and has endorsed Dan, a true climate champion from long before he was on the Oakland City Council. We both know he’ll lead on climate in the Senate, where every climate win follows a knock-down drag-out  fight against oil and gas, the Chamber of Commerce, the utilities, and the building trades unions. This seat is being vacated by Nancy Skinner, who is terming out after 12 years as arguably the bravest and most strategic climate warrior in the Capitol. It’s especially important to send someone bold and creative to fill her shoes—we’re lucky that Dan is running.

Dan is a serious underdog in this race, because there’s so much third-party/special interest money pouring into (and/or against) the campaigns of Kathryn Lybarger and Jesse Arreguin—over $4 million according to the Mercury News two weeks ago, and it’s still coming in. (Look at the boxed label naming the groups who paid for whatever mailers are in your mailbox today.) There are no independent expenditures for or against Dan, so he’s flying way under the radar. Janet urges your votes for Dan Kalb.

Edie is voting for Jesse Arreguin
Edie has known Jesse Arreguin since before he ran for office, and she has been impressed with his leadership in two terms as Berkeley Mayor, particularly on housing and homelessness (Berkeley was one of the few places in the region to see a decrease in homelessness after the pandemic), and transportation. He’s also been a capable manager of his staff and the city, and on the regional stage as President of the Association of Bay Area Governments he’s been a bridge-builder and effective on a range of issues. Jesse is the only renter in the race and would be one of very few in the Legislature, where he’d be a champion for tenant protections and emergency rental assistance to prevent homelessness, and also for building more housing. He knows the ins and outs of how to get this, among other things, done. Knowing Jesse for this long, Edie has seen him learn and evolve his thinking on issues, and also stick to his principles under pressure. 

Speaking of which, we have to talk about all the special interest money in this race, which is the most expensive State Legislative race in California. “Independent Expenditures” in an election are funds spent on mailers, robocalls, TV ads, etc. by unions, companies, or PACS without any coordination with or consent from the actual candidate’s campaign (thus “independent”). Special interests can spend as much as they want building up or attacking a candidate or a ballot initiative, as we’ve seen many times before.

As noted above, when you see who’s actually paying for the many mailers you’re receiving, a lot of them are from groups that Edie fights against on housing and transportation issues, such as the California Apartments Association, the California Association of Realtors, and Uber; or from groups Janet is basically at war with because they are on the wrong side of every climate bill, like the building trades unions and PG&E’s Tomorrow California PAC. These groups seem to be trying to elect Jesse (or sometimes Jovanka Beckles), even though Edie trusts Jesse to be more aligned with us than them on the issues we care about. She thinks they really just want to defeat Kathryn Lybarger at any cost (literally). Lybarger is President of the California Labor Federation, a lot of other unions are supporting her campaign, and these bad actors seem to be terrified of her. That might be a selling point as far as we’re concerned, but not enough of one to abandon the folks we’re excited to vote for. Janet believes these hard-ball players will figure they pretty much own an elected they supported with hundreds of thousands of dollars (each). Jesse personally assured Edie that he’s been clear with these groups about his progressive stances and will not betray his principles, and she believes him. 

It’s bad for California that this important state Senate race has devolved into a proxy war for competing unions and corporate interests, but that is what our election laws enable. But hey, at least there are no kidney dialysis issues on the ballot this time!

Assembly District 15: Buffy Wicks
Buffy is strong on climate and housing, among other things, and has carried some significant climate legislation related to refineries. The new Speaker of the Assembly, Robert Rivas, has named her Chair of the Assembly Appropriations Committee, making her, arguably, the second most powerful legislator on that side of the Capitol! Which is good, because Buffy is doing a good job. 

Assembly District 18: Mia Bonta
Assembly District 16: Rebecca Bauer-Kahan 
Assembly District 20: Liz Ortega

Alameda County candidates

Alameda County Registrar of Voters
List of all candidates in the county

Alameda County Superior Court Judge – Michael P. Johnson
At first glance, both candidates seem fine and good. Then we saw the Mercury News endorsement of Johnson, which explained that his opponent actually disclosed his 2022 vote for District Attorney (Pamela Price) during an endorsement meeting of the County Democratic Party, which is a glaring breach of judicial ethics—judges are not supposed to disclose any political leanings or affiliation (let alone about people who will be facing them in the courtroom!). Troublingly, Fickes got that endorsement (another cause for concern about the Central Committee, see below). We’d prefer to play this by the book, which seems to be Johnson’s approach as well. (Though interestingly, both Fickes and Johnson have lots of endorsements from other Alameda County Superior Court Judges, quite a few of whom have endorsed them both.)

Alameda County Supervisor
Edie sees the ins and outs of how much county supervisors impact solutions to homelessness and housing affordability—and they have a lot of power over these issues. Alameda County is not rising to these challenges as well as other Bay Area counties are, and we need more vocal, proactive supervisors to challenge the status quo and demand bolder action. That imperative is the driving force behind our endorsements here. 

Alameda County Supervisor District 4: Jennifer Esteen
Jennifer Esteen is a nurse, mom, and community activist. She has the lived and professional experience to advance solutions to the big problems the county has jurisdiction over, including health care (she’s a psych nurse in a behavioral health ward at SF General), homelessness, affordable housing, and criminal justice reform. For example, she wants to see more mental health resources out in the community, not just at Santa Rita Jail (though she supports better services there, too); and stronger tenant protections around the County than the Board has yet supported. 

The incumbent, Nate Miley, is running to keep his job, which he has had for 23 years. He told the Oaklandside that his experience is needed given all the turnover on the board (with the recent deaths of Supervisors Wilma Chan and Richard Valle and the retirement of Keith Carson), but we would welcome a fresh start with a new progressive majority. The county is actually sitting on a lot of money that they should be spending on health and housing, and we need supervisors who will start spending it. Lots more good context on this race in The Oaklandside. 

Alameda County Supervisor District 5: Nikki Fortunato Bas or John Bauters 
Nikki Fortunato Bas has been strong on the Oakland City Council representing Chinatown and the neighborhoods surrounding Lake Merritt. She championed practical and effective homelessness solutions in her district and has spent her career building power for working people. Since we want a strong leader who will push hard for better solutions and shake things up in this seat, she’s our top pick. She doesn’t support the recall of DA Pamela Price, and neither do we. 

John Bauters, who’s very pro-housing and is also a  transit and biking champion, is also a good choice. He’s an Emeryville City Councilmember who’s a great communicator and has good policy sense. Both Bas and Bauters oppose the expansion of Santa Rita Jail, though Bas sounds a bit stronger (and we agree). Bauters told the Oaklandside that the voters will decide if DA Price should be recalled, which is not the answer we’d like to hear. The Oaklandside did a good summary of all the candidates in this race. 

Alameda County measures

YES on Alameda County Measure A
Change the notification period for civil service examinations? Okay.

YES on Alameda County Measure B 
From Oakland Rising Action’s voter guide (click the link for more details if you need ‘em): The current Alameda Charter Section 62 which describes how a recall is to be conducted is unconstitutional and unfeasible to implement. Measure B would simply align our county charter recall procedures to state election law like every other county charter in California. 

Alameda County Democratic Central Committee

About this race: The Central Committee is each county’s Democratic Party, responsible for endorsing candidates and mobilizing and turning out Democrats before elections. This will only appear on your ballot if you’re a registered Democrat (not decline to state or another party). Edie and Janet both sat on this committee ten years ago, and we were frustrated with the small-time thinking and not-exactly-public support for individuals’ favorite candidates then, and it’s not much better now. So while you can vote for lots of people in these races, our strategy is to “bullet-vote” just a few people whom we know and trust to actually put in work, and put the party before factionalism. And TBH, we don’t know as many of these people as we used to! When you bullet-vote, you increase the vote count (by voting) but concentrate your impact instead of spreading it around. 

Assembly District 14:

• Andy Kelley
• Michael Barnett
• Alfred Twu
• Igor Tregub
• Wendy Bloom

• Assembly District 18: There’s a slate being run by Pamela Price and one by Loren Taylor. We’re not comfortable with either one, though we know a couple good people on each.
  • Sean Dugar

• Assembly District 16:
  • Cheryl Cook-Kallio
• Assembly District 20:
  • Robin Torello
• Assembly District 24: 
  • Vinnie Bacon

City measures and candidates

Oakland 

Oakland City Auditor: Michael Houston

Our wonderful long-time city auditor, Courtney Ruby, went to take a new job in San Diego in the fall. This election is to fulfill the remainder of her term, and there’s only one person running. We don’t know much about Houston, but we’re comforted that he told The Oaklandside he wants to continue on the course set by Ruby. This is an important job and we’ll see how things look when it’s time to elect the full term in 2026.

YES on Oakland Measure D

There’s a dumb rule in CA that caps the amount of its own tax receipts that a city (and the state itself) can spend, without approval from voters. So we keep voting to allow the city to spend its own money on things it has already budgeted for. 

Most of the other city measures on the ballot in the East Bay are school district parcel taxes, which are fine with us. 

San Francisco