Long Beach Second District City Council Candidate Questionnaire

13 minute read

In less than two weeks, voters across the state will head to the polls to participate in California’s first ever “Super Tuesday” primary election. While there’s plenty of up-ballot action to be excited for, including presidential primaries, residents in Long Beach’s Second, Sixth, and Eighth City Council districts will be picking new representatives.

We sent out a questionnaire to the Second District candidates and they all returned answers except for Jeanette Barrera.

But before we get to that, a little bit about the district and the state of the race. The Second District includes the neighborhoods of Bluff Heights, Rose Park, and Carroll Park to the east and makes its way west along the shoreline to the southern half of Downtown, including the East Village Arts District and Shoreline Village. It encompasses the Port of Long Beach and is home to the Queen Mary. Its population is about 51,000, according to city estimates. 

The district has a sharp disparity in household income between the northern and southern, more coastal areas.

Homelessness and parking rank towards the top of the list of issues residents will be looking for their new councilmember to tackle. 

The city’s latest point-in-time count found that there were 1,894 people experiencing homelessness in Long Beach. Although the overall numbers have been trending down since 2013, the number of people who said they were experiencing their first bout of homelessness jumped by 9% since 2017. This may be due partly to the fact that Long Beach rents have spiked in recent years as housing stock lags behind—in both the city and state as a whole—while wages for the bottom half of workers have actually declined.

A 2018 study commissioned by the city certified what residents in the district know all too well: finding parking in Alamitos Beach is rough on a good day and damn near impossible on a bad day. Half of the neighborhood’s residents reported that on average they circled around for over 20 minutes before finding a spot. That’s a lot of extra carbon emissions put in the air.

Incumbent Councilmember Jeannine Pearce bowed out from the race late last year. An advocate for progressive causes including worker and tenant protections, she’s been met with stiff opposition from some of the city’s business interests throughout her time on the council.

She’s also had some pretty turbulent stretches resulting from personal scandal. There was an unsuccessful recall attempt and eventual censure by her council colleagues in 2018 stemming from a relationship with a subordinate, which violated the city’s code of ethics. It came to light after police responded to an altercation that broke out between the couple on the side of the 710 Freeway in June 2017. She is also currently being investigated by the state’s Fair Political Practices Commission for not disclosing a conflict of interest concerning the Queen Mary.

Seven candidates with diverse backgrounds have entered the wide-open race for the seat and whoever wins might be sticking around for a while.

Long Beach voters decided in 2018 to give councilmembers a cap of three four-year terms. With the name recognition and fundraising advantage accompanying incumbency, a win on Tuesday could easily turn into 12 years on the council.

Of late, the race has been quite eventful, with an exposé by Beachcomber columnist Stephen Downing (and a follow-up report by the Long Beach Post) finding that establishment favorite Cindy Allen ostensibly sold her advertising firm (which has been awarded over a million dollars in city contracts) to a less-than-reputable fella from Georgia. Allen has now said the sale fell through, which could lead to a conflict of interest should she be elected.

Downing’s article also called into question her residency in Long Beach (though the City Clerk’s Office later stated that Allen has voted in Long Beach since 2008). Downing also cast doubt on her allegiance to the Democratic party, writing that she was a lifelong Republican until switching teams in 2017. This has not been independently verified by FORTHE Media. Her opponents, as to be expected, have seized on the story.

Tomisin Oluwole
Ode to Pink II, 2020
Acrylic and marker on paper
14 x 22 inches

Click here to check out our interview with Tomisin Oluwole, a a literary and visual artist based in Long Beach.

Instead of gunking up our site with ads, we use this space to display and promote the work of local artists.

“My first time running for office I’ve come up and hit head-on with the giant and powerful political machine that operates here in Long Beach,” fellow candidate and vegan YouTuber Ryan Lum took to the platform to say.

Landlord rabble-rouser Robert Fox has also injected his fair share of color into the race, staging a protest along Broadway opposing changes by the city that reduced the number of traffic lanes in favor of adding bicycle lanes. Lum countered by saying the bike lanes made the road safer

Social worker and early-bird candidate Barrera, who is often followed to events by a conga-line of blue-shirted acolytes, has lobbed a few barbs, accusing the Fox camp of nabbing her lawn signs and getting into a sniping match with the incumbent at an Our Revolution endorsement meeting.

Accountant, late-night impresario, and all-around nice guy Nigel Lifsey is running on using his financial acumen to get more bang for the city’s buck. He’s also secured the endorsement of unofficial candidate and reverse centaur Horsey Horseshoe (look him up).

School safety officer Jesus Cisneros has called for a “tough stance” on homelessness and does not seem to be a fan of political correctness, which may be why he took a photo-op next to folks sleeping rough for his campaign’s Instagram page. He’s also falsely claiming to be endorsed by the Los Angeles County GOP. How do we know? Because we checked.

Cal State Long Beach sociology professor Eduardo Lara (who’s sharing Seventh District Councilmember Roberto Uranga’s New York Times-esque endorsement with Cindy Allen) has positioned himself as the foremost progressive candidate, running on economic justice and decrying “trickle-down economics.”

As of publication, Barrera has received $10,823 in total contributions and received donations from the Amalgamated Transit Union, which represents Long Beach Transit employees. Fox has a $60,694 warchest, that is mostly self-funded, but he’s also received numerous donations from small businesses and individuals. Lifsey has raised $2,185 so far, of which $750 came from his own pocketbook. Lum has raised $2,935. Lara received $22,167, including a $3,000 check from himself, a donation from the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (the largest trade union of public employees), and Pearce’s shuttered reelection committee. 

None, however, have matched Allen’s haul of just over $92,000. Contributors include a hodgepodge of politicos, hotels, unions, and real estate interests. On top of that, the Police Officers Association’s independent expenditure committee has put their boot on the scale by spending over $20,000 on mailers in favor of Allen.

The questionnaire we sent to candidates was comprised of eight questions, the first four were written by FORTHE reporters and the last four were provided by community groups who do work in the district. They include: Long Beach Residents Empowered (LiBRE), a tenants rights group; Surfrider Foundation, Long Beach Chapter, a nonprofit environmental organization; Long Beach Transportation And Parking Solutions, a parking advocacy group; and Everyone In (Long Beach), a local affiliate of the Everyone In campaign powered by United Way of Greater Los Angeles, which seeks to end homelessness and the housing crisis by supporting affordable and supportive housing.  

We’d like to thank the six candidates who participated in the questionnaire and the organizations that submitted questions. 

Answers have been lightly edited for clarity.

New changes to the election process in Los Angeles County means voters will be able to cast ballots up to ten days before election day, March 3, at any polling place in the county. The locations can be found here. You can watch a video from the county explaining the balloting changes here.

One of our members, Madison D’Ornellas, did not participate in the editorial process of this questionnaire due to a conflict of interest.

Cindy Allen
Jesus Cisneros
Robert Fox
Eduardo Lara
Nigel Lifsey
Ryan Lum

Cindy Allen

Jesus Cisneros

Robert Fox

Eduardo Lara

Nigel Lifsey

Ryan Lum

Contact The Author

[1] Militarily demobilized. Since WWII—which was both the death knell of European colonial empires as well as the starting shot of the American neocolonial era—Europe has had notoriously scant standing armies, and has been able to consistently slash government military spending domestically and as a percentage of their contributions to international diplomatic bodies such as the UN. This is because nowadays European nations very rarely find themselves in situations where they need to independently send their militaries abroad in order to secure trade routes, foreign resources, or privileges within markets overseas; the U.S. has been fulfilling that hard-power obligation for them for over half a century. The social results of Western Europe’s decreased militarization are striking, especially when contrasted with the U.S.: there is not a single country in Western Europe without universal healthcare, labor rights and welfare systems are strong, value is placed on corporate and financial regulation, environmental policy is lightyears ahead, and, not least of all, there is a robust governmental approach to curbing digital surveillance and reining in tech monopolies. Japan enjoys a similar arrangement with the U.S. in which it, too, is militarily demobilized yet is given full access to, and prominence in, the global economy. In the last decade there has been a reversing trend of remilitarization in some of these nations. That trend was hastened during the last four years as a result of Trump’s ultranationalist politics, but is likely to continue even after his departure in large part due to the growing bipolar geopolitical climate of competition between superpowers.

The “owner” bit of home-“owner” appears in scare quotes throughout the text for reasons that will shortly become apparent.

Nothing signals trouble quite like consensus.

More on them later.

And, anyways, what exactly remains “obvious” in an era “post-truth”?

I take as my starting position that even the “obvious” must be won.

It’s like Lenin said, you know…

Whether directly, or through a chain of investments, or through the wider speculative market in real estate.

I use “banks” in this piece as a stand-in for several sources of income that derive partly through the mortgaging of property and/or investment in institutions that have the power to mortgage property.

That is just its “ideology.”

The Ricardian “law of rent” explains that any location with an advantage over another location, can accrue an economic value, called “rent,” to the owner.

This happens without the owner needing to pitch in to create the advantage.

If the owner does pitch in, then the value accrued from that advantage cannot be called “rent.”

“Rent,” in economic terms, is only, precisely, the value accrued from that portion of the advantage for which the owner is not responsible. That is what we mean when we say, “Rent is theft.”

This does not mean places with lower property taxes ipso facto have higher property prices—and that is because the property tax is only one of the contributing factors. You could have zero taxes on land in Antarctica, for instance, and it would still sell for $0. This is why the introduction to the analogy controls for such variables.

This is the logical conclusion of believing two premises:

(1) All humans have an equal right to the Earth.
(2) Vaginal birth is a lottery system

Prop 13 is rent control for home-“owners.” You can learn more about its history and impact here.

“Hamlet” by William Shakespeare. Act 4, Scene 5

This is why the lobbyists who spend the most money to support the mortgage interest deduction are bankers, mortgagers, and realtors.

Term

Definition