A Kick-Off Reception that Scored a Touchdown: Candace Andersen for District II Supervisor

To me, Candace represents everything important in good leadership, from the loving children she took the time out to raise to serving her community.

Saturday before last, Councilman Richard Storer and his gracious wife, Sandra, held a reception in their beautiful home for the Honorable Mayor Candace Andersen.

The Veterans and Exchange Club friends hosted a kickoff party in her bid for Contra Costa Supervisor District II. Her reception was hosted by Danville Council Members Newell Arnerich, Mike Doyle, Karen Stepper and Robert Storer, as well as retired Police Chief Chris Wenzel. District II includes Alamo, Danville, Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, Rossmoor and San Ramon.

Candace Andersen has more than 10 years experience in serving on numerous boards and city councils, while also volunteering for many community organizations. She has proven herself to be a good steward, fiscally responsible, and is endorsed by the entire Danville Town Council. Her second term as mayor began on Dec. 6, 2011, and she previously served as mayor in 2008.

Mayor Andersen “holds a degree in public policy, and is an attorney who put her legal practice on hold to serve the community and raise her family." So, in addition to her supporters, Candace has the strong support of her husband Phillip, and her six children: PJ, Elisabeth, Sam, Melanie, Steve, and Michael -- who’s in Guatemala serving as a missionary.

To me, Candace represents everything important in good leadership, from the loving children she took the time out to raise to serving her community. In addition, she brings her legal experience and background to the forefront in serving the city of Danville. Mayor Andersen has everything to offer as Supervisor in serving District II, and she deeply cares about preserving, ensuring, and sustaining the quality of our lives in Contra Costa County.

Her top priorities are as follows:

1. County pension sustainability is a top priority: “Candace will work hard to curb pension abuses and reduce county expenditures.”

2. Candace will ensure public safety by allocating necessary resources to protect our communities and prosecute criminals.

3. Businesses need to be supported and jobs created: “Candace will implement policies to help businesses grow, reduce bureaucratic red tape, and create new jobs.”

4. “Let’s Protect the Quality of Life in Contra Costa We need to continue strong school partnerships, road improvements, and appropriate building within the Urban Limit Line.”

As I left the kickoff reception, for me, I could honestly say she scored a touchdown. As a result, The Honorable Candace Andersen is my “No. 1 Vote for District II,” and maybe yours, too!

If you would like more information about Candace Andersen for Contra Costa Supervisor District II visit http://andersenforsupervisor2012.com/

Kickoff video here.

Editor's note: Do you have something to say? An opinion? A stance on an issue? Or are you just passionate about something and want to tell people about it?

Then you should blog for Danville Patch. Sign up to be a blogger here or get in touch with Danville Patch Editor Terry Parris Jr. here.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Will Ferin March 09, 2012 at 02:55 PM
Great article Mary Ann! Candace, thank you for running. Our county needs strong and capable leaders like you to make the tough decisions that will get us on track.
DanglingParticiple March 09, 2012 at 11:31 PM
"she deeply cares about preserving, ensuring, and sustaining the quality of our lives in Contra Costa County." Who she includes in "our" is debatable.
Carolyn Phinney March 10, 2012 at 01:46 AM
There is a clear distinction between the two candidates running. 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.
Beau Hunk March 10, 2012 at 06:33 PM
Tomi has the stain of voting for the PLA (go look it up if you don't know what it is). Nothing can erase that.
Carolyn Phinney March 10, 2012 at 08:28 PM
Beau, there is much debate about PLAs, Good people fall on both sides of this issue. As a male, I suppose you find this issue more important than a woman's right to choose. I don't. Women's Rights and Gay Rights are more important to me than a highly debatable labor practice.
Summer Hemphill March 12, 2012 at 04:33 AM
Candace is unfit to hold the office she holds now & should be prevented from seeking any office in the future ! As an attorney she of all people should know that every elected official takes an oath to uphold state laws. This means all the laws ,not just the ones you personally agree with ! Attacking the rights of cannabis patients to "safe & legal access" to their medication granted by the voters & legislators of the state of California is an egregious abuse of her authority ! Putting her callous,narrow-minded personal feelings ("I don't see a lot of bloggers supporting dispensaries either") ahead of her duty to enforce the will of California voters is grounds for her immediate removal as mayor ! Anyone who puts their own self interest before the needs of her constituents can't be trusted to ever act in the best interests of others ! Congress allowed Washington D.C. voters to approve medicinal marijuana & under the "equal protection clause" of the U.S. Constitution making federal prosecution (persecution) of those following their state guidelines impossible. No matter how conservative Danville may be the City Council can't pick & choose which state laws they'll comply with,although they obviously believe they can. Only Candace's piosity exceeds her hypocrisy,don't reward her treachery with your vote ! She deserves your contempt for her total disregard for those whom a doctor believes marijuana would be beneficial to treat a variety of ailments & afflictions ! Shame on you !!
Carolyn Phinney March 20, 2012 at 07:16 AM
Positions on human rights issues affect every elected position. Candace is against a woman's right to choose and against marriage equality. This is where it counts, Harald. Tomi's experience working for the county is much more relevant than short term city council experience.
Carolyn Phinney March 20, 2012 at 08:25 PM
For the record, I have met Tomi 3 times in my life, the first being within the last year. I am a long-term human rights activist. I am a life-long supporter of women's rights to choose what happens to their own bodies. I have been a gay rights supporter since the 1970s, when I came to graduate school at Berkeley. I am OFFENDED by the human rights positions of Candace Andersen. I object to electing anyone who believes in discrimination against any minority, which she does by her own letter to the editor. You can call me names and that is fine. I NEVER opposed Gayle Uilkema. In fact, I voted for her and I helped her when the redistricting was clearly gerrymandering, going against the Democratic Party position publicly and in the press to support Gayle and a more rational and moderate redistricting. I am perfectly capable of supporting a reasonable Republican like Gayle Uilkema. Candace Andersen is offensive. Her religious views are relevant when they violate human rights.
Carolyn Phinney March 20, 2012 at 11:30 PM
Hi Harald, Unfortunately, I must disagree with you. Tomi worked as the top aide to Mary Piepho for just under a decade and has hence served the entire San Ramon Valley and county and knows well the issues, inner workings, and needs of the county. Her experience is directly relevant to the job, as she was 2nd in this job for many many years. She adds the experience of a businesswoman and on board of community college on TOP of her many years of policy making and constituent service to the county and specifically to the 2nd Supervisory District. Tomi's values are those of the district. Polls show that the vast majority of this district agrees with Tomi's values on women's rights and marriage equality. We are not living in Alabama or Mississippi. We are a very fair-minded and open population, and treasure these values and fight for them. We simply can not elect someone who thinks that inequality for some minorities is fine. Nor should we elect the less qualified candidate. Tomi has nearly a decade of service as "vice-president" to this "presidency" -- as Chief of Staff to a Supervisor, who I might note is a Republican supervisory. Tomi Van de Brooke is a fiscal conservative and social progressive, like most of this district. Tomi is by far the better candidate.
Carolyn Phinney March 21, 2012 at 04:41 PM
Thanks for the correction Hal, if you are right about the # years Tomi was Chief of Staff for a Supervisor. You have excluded Tomi's service on the Community College Board in Tomi's # of years of service to the county. Nonetheless, Tomi has directly relevant county-wide experience. Candace does not. Are you suggesting that Mary Piepho's campaign had anything to do with the activities of her chief of staff? You know that is illegal. In all elected positions, the campaign must be kept entirely separate from the elected position's staff who may not even answer a campaign phone call. By law, Tomi could not have been involved in Piepho's campaign. Anyone who has met Tomi knows that she is a gracious & kind human being and would never be involved in what you describe. It simply is not her style. Tomi's love when serving as Chief of Staff was constituent service. When I met Tomi, I wasn't sure I was going to support her because she was a Republican at one time. I asked her why she changed parties. She told me that she was a fiscal conservative and that had been determinative until the Republican Party moved further & further to the right socially toward right wing social conservatism and against human rights -- anti-woman's rights and anti-gay rights -- the very positions held by Candace Anderson. I do not want my daughter or my gay friends to be governed by someone who does not respect their rights or my rights as a woman. Hal, perhaps as non gay man, you just don't get it.
Carolyn Phinney March 22, 2012 at 02:03 AM
Thanks for the lively debate, Hal!
Summer Hemphill March 22, 2012 at 09:08 AM
As a member of the City Council Candace obstructed the rights of cannabis patients to "safe & legal access" to medical marijuana as guaranteed by state law. This is a violation of her oath of office & should obviously make her unfit to seek higher office !! The Court of Appeals recently ruled that cities can't use land use or nuisance ordinances to ban dispensaries anymore ! The cities stalling tactics have injured & inconvenienced hundreds of residents & potentially thousands of Contra Costa County voters !! Don't vote for Candace as she has little respect for the law & less respect & compassion for the patients whom doctors believe that marijuana may be beneficial !!
Summer Hemphill March 22, 2012 at 04:42 PM
Medical marijuana dispensaries are legal under state law & the "attitude" & "interest" of "Contra Costans" do not supercede a patients right to "safe & legal access". This unconscionable obstruction of patients rights is nothing more than than an attempt to placate right-wing anti-marijuana zealots at the expense of patients ! As a supervisor Candace would have a vote on the issue of dispensaries in unincorporated areas of the county & have the ability to obstruct the rights of thousands of patients. Did any of you really think that Danville was exempt from abiding by the will of California voters & the legislature ? What were you smoking ? A U.S. District Judge is hearing arguments this week on the ability of the federal government to enforce their marijuana laws on patients & dispensaries here. Since Congress allowed Washington D.C. voters to approve medical marijuana the plaintiffs contend that they were denied this same right. Under the "equal protection clause" Congress must insure that all citizens receive equal treatment under the law. Following this line of reasoning anyone in compliance with their state laws regarding medical marijuana should be immune from federal prosecution (persecution) ! The picnics over folks,dispensaries are legal & they're coming to a storefront near you ! You can put that in your pipe & smoke it Harald !! Candace is just another right-wing poser unfit to hold her present office & certainly unsuitable to ascend to the Supervisor's office !!
Drew D July 12, 2012 at 10:32 AM
Carolyn, And, I'm sorry, but Tomi Van de Brooke got her clock cleaned by Candace on election night, overwhelmingly. It wasn't even close...60% to 28%. That is a 32-point margin. It appears you and Van de Brooke's attempt to make this election a referendum on irrelevant social issues backfired. And finally, we have a real conservative on the Board! I am so pleased.
Drew D July 12, 2012 at 10:37 AM
Carolyn, With all due respect, don't you have anything better to do than rant on Danville Patch about a (potential) county supervisor's personal views on issues such as same sex marriage and right to life? Are you aware that as a county supervisor she has absolutely NO authority whatsoever on determining the legal status of such issues? As a lifelong resident of Danville, I can attest Candace has the experience, judgment and character necessary to not only be an effective county supervisor, but a great one. She has worked tirelessly as mayor of our great town delivering effective leadership and addressing major issues and concerns. And frankly, I am glad she is a true Reagan conservative. We need more of those in this flamingly liberal area. I'm tired of Danville always getting overshadowed by the rest of the county. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors is full of left-wingers and I think it's time that Danville's conservative values are finally represented on the board. You claim "Tomi's social positions on equal human rights are a better match for Northern California"...yea maybe San Francisco and Berkeley, but not most of C.C. County and certainly not Danville. Candace's values match our district. Also, you constantly rail that you're concerned about having the "choice" or "right" to abort a child...well what about the baby's right to live? Clearly you're not concerned about that. You're placing your own self over the life of a child and that's unfortunate.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something