Home NEWS Government Glazer, Bonilla Emerge As Frontrunners In 7th District Race

Glazer, Bonilla Emerge As Frontrunners In 7th District Race

SHARE
Intrigue, some skullduggery - it's Special Election Day in The Numbers!

Voters turned out to decide who will represent the East Bay’s 7th Senate District, a seat formerly held by now-Rep. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord.

The top two candidates in the four-way race will face off in a special general election on May 19.

LATEST RESULTS: With all precincts counted: Glazer 32.22%, Bonilla 27.18%, Buchanan 21.08%, Hertle 16.45%, Kremin 2.70%

The winner of the State Senate special election will fill an abbreviated term, the remainder of DeSaulnier’s four-year term set to expire at the end of 2016.

Three local Democrats campaigned for DeSaulnier’s seat: Assemblywoman Susan Bonilla, D-Concord, former lawmaker Joan Buchanan, D-Alamo, and Orinda Mayor Steve Glazer. Other candidates include Concord Democrat Terry Kremin and Pleasanton Republican Michaela Hertle – who ended her campaign weeks ago to endorse Glazer and trigger widespread discussion about her motives.

Bonilla is a member of the Assembly, where Buchanan served from 2008 through last November. Glazer, a former aide to Gov. Jerry Brown and Orinda mayor, and ran unsuccessfully to succeed Buchanan in the overlapping 16th Assembly District last year.

Earlier this month, the state Republican Party sued a group purporting to support Hertle, claiming trademark infringement in the group’s use of a party logo.

Glazer maintained the group, the Asian American Small Business PAC, is a shadow organization created to keep him from advancing to the May 19 runoff.

Lawsuits, threats of lawsuits, and big money has been flowing in recent months. We’ll see where it pushes things, or influences outcomes at all, as we provide election results as we get them.

10 COMMENTS

  1. Haven’t been able to get any candidates or elected officials to answer my one question – Will CA offer any tax incentives to convert to artificial lawns? I’ve converted some of my lawn and would like to do more but it’s quite expensive. A tax break would make it more affordable and help save water.

  2. @Tom
    When you say artificial do you mean one of those syntheitic lawns?? We removed our lawns two years ago and replanted with drought tolerant natives and rock and have been happy with the result. Low water bills and LOTS of butterflies!!!

  3. @fridja – Yes. A synthetic lawn. I like the look better than rock and drought tolerant natives. The state offered rebates for solar panels but is doing nothing for lawns, despite our drought. This makes no sense.

  4. Some sort of incentive would be nice. Everytime I walk down our street sprinklers are going with most of it going into the gutter. We’re pretty extreme conservationists – it would be nice to see some sort of reward for the effort.

  5. @Casey – Agreed. Solar incentives were nice but solar power wasn’t critical. We have no water. Giving incentives to get people to use less water ought to be a top priority. It just makes no sense that there’s not a some incentive program in place.

  6. Wherever possible in the state shouldn’t we be diverting water from agricultural use to residential use before we impose draconian rate hikes / usage controls? In aggregate, agriculture is generates a lot of economic activity from water, but I’m positive that the efficient outcome here is to have fewer and more expensive artichokes and heads of lettuce and be able to take normal length showers and not kill residential landscaping.

    Also, lets cut off some of the 30-40% of our total water supply that is diverted from human use (residential and agriculture) so it can be used to “restore wetlands.” This is a recent and ill-advised policy, especially when NOT coupled with additional storage capacity.

Comments are closed.