Part of the Bay Area News Group

CoCo top cops choose Andersen over Van de Brooke

By Lisa Vorderbrueggen
Thursday, March 8th, 2012 at 10:43 am in Contra Costa Board of Supervisors, Contra Costa County, Contra Costa politics.

Van de Brooke

Andersen

Contra Costa County’s top law enforcement leaders have endorsed Danville Mayor Candace Andersen for county supervisor over rival Contra Costa Community College Trustee Tomi Van de Brooke.

District Attorney Mark Peterson and Sheriff David Livingston, along with Deputy Sheriffs Association President Ken Westermann and Deputy District Attorneys Association President Barry Grove, are scheduled to show up at noon today in Martinez at the election office with Andersen as she files her final candidacy paperwork. Friday is the filing deadline.

The four men interviewed Andersen and Van de Brooke at length on Tuesday. Along with most public agencies in the aftermath of the 2008 recession, the sheriff and district attorney’s office have been hit with big budget cuts.

“Both candidates are good people,” Sheriff Livingston said. “But Candace was able to point to a specific record of support for law enforcement in Danville in ways that are quite compelling. With the drastic cuts that public safety has experienced in this county, we have to support a candidate who has a record of supporting public safety.”

Westermann said “the DSA and Candace Anersen share the same values of prioritizing public safety and fiscal responsibility. We are confident she is the best candidate to represent the citizens of District 2.”

Grove said, “After interviewing both candidates, we felt Candace sincerely believes that law enforcement is a priority in the county. We think she understands the issues better than her counterpart. And frankly, I think she brings common sense to the county.”

The deputy sheriffs have settled their labor contract dispute while the district attorneys and the county are still in negotiations.

The same law enforcement coalition endorsed last week incumbent Supervisor Federal Glover of Pittsburg in his re-election bid. Glover’s only potential challenger to surface so far, Martinez Councilman Mike Menesini, has pulled candidacy papers but had not yet filed the final paperwork as of this morning.

Andersen and Van de Brooke, of Orinda, are running for the District 2 seat on the Board of Supervisors in the June 5 election.  Solar energy professor Sean White of Lafayette has also filed for the post. Incumbent Gayle Uilkema is retiring.

If one candidate receives 50 percent plus 1 vote in June, he or she will win outright. If no candidate takes a majority, the top two vote-getters will compete in a run-off in the November general election.

 

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • RR senile columnist

    I back Tomi because she is prettier. Nuff said.

  • Bob Loblaw

    Let me translate.

    “Both candidates are good people,” Sheriff Livingston said. “But Candace was able to point to a specific record of support for law enforcement in Danville in ways that are quite compelling. With the drastic cuts that public safety has experienced in this county, we have to support a candidate who has a record of supporting public safety.”

    We sat down with both candidates and told them what we wanted in our next contract negotiation. Candace said yes to everything, therefore we are endorsing her.

  • R. Matt

    Loblaw:

    Good try at a translation, too bad the Sheriff doesn’t get a “contract”, he’s elected into a fixed salary you dolt. Maybe the Deputy Sheriff’s Union or the Deputy District Attorney’s Union are looking for decent contracts, but guess what, they deserve it. Whatever the reason I think they made a good choice. A Danville Mayor versus a Community College Board Trustee? Are you kidding me? Look how well run Danville is and look how screwed up the junior college system is here in the county. Plus, having the elected District Attorney and the elected Sheriff on your side sure doesn’t hurt.

  • Common Tater

    The cops have made a good choice and I applaud them for it.

    (Tomi is prettier? Come on.)

  • Will Fernin

    Way to go Candace! Your amazing experience, passion for the well-being of our county, and good looks (if we’re going to go there RR Senite) set you apart in this race. We’re with you all the way!

  • John W.

    I don’t know enough about these candidates yet but am inclined to favor Anderson. She has a reputation for fiscal discipline in Danville city government. I don’t agree with Bob Loblaw’s comment above that her “support for public safety” means favoring the unions. Prioritizing public safety in the county budget is not the same thing as giving away the store in contract negotiations. I’ve heard nothing to suggest that she would do the unions’ bidding. If anything, that seems more likely in the case of her opponent.

  • Elwood

    “I’ve heard nothing to suggest that she would do the unions’ bidding. If anything, that seems more likely in the case of her opponent.”

    Van de Brooke is endorsed by the usual dimmiecrat suspects and the firefighters union.

    She is the union and dimmiecrat machine candidate.

  • Elwood

    Van de Brooke is endorsed by the usual dimmiecrat suspects and the firefighters union.

    She is the union and dimmiecrat machine candidate.

  • Elwood

    Oops!

  • Michael

    Candace Andersen has served Danville well for eight years. As the son of a cop I can see why cops back her. She will get the job done! She always has and always will.

  • Mary

    I’ve known Candace Anderson for 13 years. She’s an extremely competent, intelligent woman. She has excellently served the town of Danville in numerous capacities as mayor and council woman. She’s a hard worker who gets the job done. I’m not at all surprised that she is endorsed by law enforcement leaders for the simple reason that she has a proven track record of strong public safety support!

  • rew

    The Contra Costa Times – as part of thier superb coverage of local politics – has provided readers with a web page where you can check out public salaries, including the public salaries of deputy sheriffs.
    From what I can see deputy sheriffs in Contra Costa are doing very well – paywise. When you see how much Deputy Sheriffs are making it, well.. it makes your eyes pop out of your sockets, if you want to know the truth. Sheriffs, for example, get like $36,000 set aside for thier pensions annually – just for thier pensions, that doesn’t include thier salries, health care benefits, vacations, and so forth.
    The benefits and pay for public safety workers in California have become so bloated the Times ace reporter – Dan Borenstien – may win a Pulitizer Prize for his coverage of the pension issue, which many are saying is huge giveaway.
    According to Borenstien, each family in California now owes an average of $30,000 a year for pensions and unfunded health care benefits being provided to retired public employees.
    Given this, I don’t see how Mark Peterson, or Livingston, can argue law enforcement is getting the short end of the stick, if you check out public safety salaries on this web page you can readily see this isn’t the case. Public safety workers are very well compensated in this county.
    The one exception to Contra Costa’s generous public safety salaries I did notice, however, pertained to Mark Peterson. I did notice he – as Contra Costa County District Attorney – is making a lot less than his counterpart in Alameda County, Nancy O’Malley.
    So you’ve got to think he maybe Mark Peterson is doing a slow burn about this – the DA one county over is making bank, while he picks up with the chickens. I don’t want to be a cynic, but I’ll bet the farm Mark Peterson isn’t too happy about his modest salary, so maybe this dramatic endorsement of Candace Anderson – along with Livingston’s – may be linked to thier own unhappiness with thier pay packages. I don’t think Livingston is making as much as Warren Rupf made – I’m sure he isn’t, and we know Peterson isn’t making a lot less than the Alameda DA.
    I think this business of Peterson and Livingston waving the bloody shirt about cuts to law enforcement, needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Are public safety workers poorly paid in this county? Is it possible wages of public safety workers have become so bloated officials at the county can’t find the money to pay for existing law enforcement personell without doing layoffs and leaving jobs unfilled? I think that’s possible.

  • Elwood

    @ #12 Rew

    And your point, if you have one, vis a vis this election is?

    You just sound jealous to me.

    Take a slug in the door post of your patrol car in North Richmond right behind your head and see if you think you’re overpaid.

  • John W.

    Re # 8 “…endorsed by the usual dimmiecrat suspects…”

    Maybe so, but I’m a “dimmiecrat” and couldn’t care less about the political affiliation of candidates for local government offices. I look for pragmatists who can make the trains run on time. That’s why I’ll probably vote for Anderson (a Republican) and did vote for Mark Peterson (also a Republican), and did vote for Wilson (a Republican) for San Ramon mayor but voted against him for State Assembly when he signed Grover Norquist’s pledge and when he ran for city council after terming out as mayor and it turned out he was out to lunch on the city manager’s compensation package.

  • rew

    Elwood, my post is not clear, I would agree now that I’ve re-read it. I guess what I was trying to say is you can’t make a case deputy district attorneys and Sheriff deputies are “underpaid” – they get paid very well, but the county has had to lay-off and not fill jobs in these departments due to budget shortfalls. That’s clear, but this is happening with all govermental agencies up and down state, tax revenue is way, way down due to the awful economy. When the economy improves down the line these jobs will be filled in again – the money will be there. In the meantime I think it’s ridiculous for Peterson and Livingston to be waving bloody shirt on law enforcement cuts. You have to wonder if Peterson’s own modest salary – which county officials tried to cut a few months back, is leading to his campaign to beef up the budget of his department. Clearly we need to fund law enforcement, but the county has a lot of other departments they have to fund too. I doubt anybody on the board, or any county budgetary people, are happy about these cuts to law enforcement, but the money isn’t here, hasn’t been for some time, so you try and make do with what you have. All the county budgets in every department have been whacked due to recession, but some law ennforcement officials – like Peterson and Livingston – appear to think thier departments are sacred cows. I’m confident at a later date law enforcement positions not being filled will be filled in – but waving the bloody shirt like Peterson and Linvingston are doing is just grandstanding at it’s worst.

  • Franklin

    As a long-time Danville resident, I have seen Candace in action in the capacity of both Mayor and City Council Member. She is a woman of her word and highly capable

    An important part of her platform is reigning in out-of-control pensions. This is a huge issue and one on which we should all be focused, as this issue is preeminent in the Contra Costa County budget.

    I trust that she is more likely to move forward in resolving this issue than is Ms. Van de Brooke, so she will get my vote.

  • Carolyn Phinney

    There is a clear distinction between the two candidates running in District II (San Ramon, Danville, Alamo, Saranap, Rossmoor, Walnut Creek, LaMorinda. One is a Right Wing Republican (Candace), the other is a Democrat who is a Fiscal Conservative and and Social Progressive (Tomi). These fundamental value difference permeate decisions. Tomi supports all human rights — women’s rights over their own bodies, marriage equality, etc. Candace does not support these rights. When issues of protecting all medical services to women and gay rights, you can expect Tomi and Candace to cast opposite votes. There is a clear choice here. Let’s not be confused by stories of how nice they are or how many children they have.

    Tomi was the top aide to a Supervisory for many years and has extensive county-wide experience with issues and constituents. Tomi currently holds a seat on the Community College Board, which also services a broad base of the county. Tomi is known for fabulous constituent service. She loves the people she serves.

    Candace has been on the city council of one city, and does not have experience working on all the problems and there are many of the county. City council experience is nice, County-wide experience is better.

    Tomi’s social positions on equal human rights are a better match for Contra Costa County and Northern California. Most people in our community do not support discrimination.

    Candace is a better match for Alabama or Mississippi, in terms of her values and the values of this community.

  • John W.

    Re: #17

    “Candace is a better match for Alabama or Mississippi.”

    Methinks you’re jumping the shark with absurd comments like that. Would you care to elaborate on your observations that she is a “Right Wing Republican?” I.e., with some specific examples that are relevant to the challenges faced by Contra Costa county government? Also, can you point to anything specific to illustrate that Tomi Van de Brooke is a “Fiscal Conservative.” You do know that this is supposed to be a nonpartisan office, right?

  • John W.

    Hmmm! Just discovered that Andersen graduated from the Punahou School (K-12) in Honolulu in 1978. A fella named Obama graduated from there in 1979. We all know from Sarah Palin that Obama “pals around with terrorists.” Comment #17 says Andersen is a Right Wing Republican. But could that just be cover for something more nefarious? Have we seen her long form birth certificate?

  • Jerrold Ulmer

    I support Candance because Gayle U endorces her.

  • RR, Senile Columnist

    Re 20: Gayle’s endorsement and a quarter will get you a cup of coffee in Martinez, maybe.

  • Elwood

    Yo, RR

    Try a buck and a half.

  • John W.

    I would say that I strongly support Candace in spite of that endorsement.

  • Dee W.

    Carolyn Phinney, you crack me up! You call Candace a Right Wing R, while stating that Tomi is a “fiscal conservative”? Just look at who endorses her! George Miller, Mark DeSaulnier, and many others like them. Not haredly fiscal conservatives. Tomi is so conservative fiscally that she led the Contra Costa College district as board chair in handing the construction unions the best Christmas present ever last December in the form of guarantee that all construction workers on district construction will be union members. The District will force all local construction companies to sign a union contract if they want to work for the district, with a well-studied cost increase to the district of 15% on average. And we are going to put this woman in charge of negotiating union contracts for county employees?

  • JohnW

    As a Danville council member and mayor, Andersen helps govern one of the few municipalities in the Bay Area not burdened with self-inflicted structural fiscal problems leading to eventual bankruptcy. It would be nice to have somebody on the BOS who knows what that’s like and what decisions are needed to get there.