So I'm getting to know the candidates. We've progressed from the first date (or first breakfast) stage and are now becoming better acquainted. I've even had a chance to see them in action.

Last night was my second 39th candidates forum and it was interesting to see how the six male candidates for City Council are shaping up as the campaign heats up. It is only May 6th and the winner-takes-the seat primary is September 15th (there is no Republican candidate in this democratic district. There is, however, a Green candidate). 

It seems that Park Slopers haven't woken up to the campaign yet. I think citizens in Carroll Gardens are a bit more aware of this election because of the many hot button issues in that community at the moment.

In Park Slope, many are even unaware that Bill deBlasio and David Yassky are moving on and that the deadline for ballot signatures is coming up. 

Wake up neighbors: your closest link to government, your city council members (deBlasio and Yassky) are running for new positions (public advocate and comptroller) and a bunch of white guys and one woman (in the 33rd) are running for their seats.

For me the forums are like theater. How will the candidates behave? Will there be ANY conflict? Who's relaxed, who's not? Will anyone be stumped?

Last night was relaxed and convivial and a great opportunity to take a look/see and a hard listen. My husband attended and I grilled him afterward. Who'd you like? Who'd you trust? Who would you vote for? It was interesting to hear his first impressions, which I don't think I will reveal at the moment.

And sometimes the forums are even funny: Josh Skaller made a joke about his proposal for streamlined garbage trucks; there were numerous good-natured jokes about Zuckerman's Zuckmobile and Ken Freeman kept forgetting which district these guys are running in (it's the 39th).

OPENING STATEMENTS

Most of the candidates haven't figured out how to do this. Or they try a different approach each time (depending on the venue). They suffer for it. I think it's important to set the tone right up front and present a strong picture of who they are:

–Bob Zuckerman was too rambling as he conveyed a stand-up vibe, but he does come across as an approachable and friendly person.

–Brad Lander is expert at words that work for the audience he is speaking to; he's good at conveying his longtime experience with affordable housing and community empowerment but he talks too fast.

–Josh Skaller is getting better at presenting a strong, clear message about government reform, and his belief that citizens can govern.

–John Heyer makes a good connection with the audience but needs to present his commitment to constituency politics and neighborhoods more clearly.

–Gary Reilly should lead with his passion for transportation and infrastructure.

–David Pechefsky too often sounds like he's mid-conversation but he is clear about government reform and the core values of the Green party.

YES AND NO QUESTIONS
I loved the yes/no questions because they make the candidates squirm and really put them on the spot. The questions elicited super brief answers that were informative and fun. And many came up with interesting ways to hedge the question and bring in some shades of gray. It was like speed dating.

Here's the tally of yes/no questions:
–Mayoral control of the schools: most said yes "but not how it stands now," Skaller said no).
–Superfund for the Gowanus: all except Heyer and Zuckerman said yes),
–Eliminate cars in Prospect Park: mostly no except for yeses from Reilly and Pechefsky, strong bike proponents)
–Residential parking: all yes.
–Congestion pricing: all yes except Heyer.
–Tolls on East River bridges: all yes except Heyer.
— 2-way traffic on Prospect Park West: all yes, except strong no from Pechefsky.
–Term limits: all yes except Pechefsky who said no. 
–Bloomberg for a 3rd term: All no

ABOUT PUBLIC EDUCATION
I was pleased that there was a real discussion of public education, which all the candidates are, of course, strong proponents of. Lander, Skaller and Pechefsky are public school parents so they have a more detailed understanding of the issues and the schools in the district.

Those who aren't parents do come across as vague though Heyer knows more probably because his wife, Maria, is a public school teacher in Kensington. While Reilly needs to bone up on local schools, he seems like he could be very smart on the issue (hey, he's a smart guy). "There's nothing more important to people than their children," he said simply at one point; he's a strong supporter of universal Pre-K. He and his wife plan to start a family in the next year or so, he said.

Skaller has the tendency to bring all issues back to his core message, which is a strength in a campaign I guess.   "There is a remarkable lack of urban planning. When you build dense and build high, there has been little concern for what resources are required."

John Heyer talked incongruously about Catholic schools as a solution to public school overcrowding.

Lander mentioned his support of a new bill called the Smart Development Bill that would REQUIRE developers to identify classroom space as part of their planning process.

Zuckerman talked about federal stimulus money for schools. "You hear talk about bridges and tunnels. But what is more important than to build more schools?" he said at one point.

Pechefsky, uncharacteristically, tossed out a pie-in-the-sky idea about turning the House of Whimsy, that derelict building on 2nd Street and Seventh Avenue that used to house the Landmark Cafe, into an annex for PS 321.

But I think that represents the kind of thinking that needs to take place. While I don't think that building is possibility what about some of the half-finished condos on Fourth Avenue, the condo towers that the city may need to buy back from bankrupt developers? How about pre-schools and elementary and middles school annexes?

WHAT IS THE BIGGEST REAL ESTATE BOONDOGGLE
The candidates love this question. It's Atlantic Yards, of course as it is now thoroughly safe for politicians to cite this as the big fiasco that it is. I think this question only went to Lander.

Lander cited filmmaker Isabel Hill, who was in the audience, and suggested that everyone watch her documentary, Brooklyn Matters, "to find out everything that was wrong with that project, which collapsed under its own weight. But now the question is: how do we rescue control back of Atlantic Yards, that gargantuan albatross of the state?" .

LOCAL BUSINESS
Lander, who is expert at picking an example germane to the crowd he is speaking to (a good skill), mentioned Park Slope's Buy Local campaign as a great approach to that problem. "There are two scales. The Shop Local campaign proves that if we invest time, money and resources we can do a lot together. But there also have to be policy proposals…"

Zuckerman floated a good idea about tax incentives to landlords willing to sell their storefronts as condos to shop owners.

Pechefsky bemoaned the fact that if want to buy a lamp nearby you can't go to City Lighting or Pintchik anymore but have to go to Target because of tax incentives to big box stores and not to local businesses.

Heyer, whose father owned a trucking business, said, "NYC is not business friendly. It's Wall Street friendly but it needs to make life palatable to small business."

CONFLICT
There were two moments in the forum that were curious and interesting. And the conflict wasn't between candidates but in response to pointed questions f
rom the audience (written on a file card).

There was a question from the audience for Heyer about why he's running in the 39th if his home is actually in the 33rd.

Heyer handled it well and said that he is close to closing on a house in the 39th district (on Summit Street) and that his family home ("where five generation of Carroll Gardeners have lived) is three blocks out of the district. Someone is trying to turn this into an issue; I don't think it will go anywhere if his residency is resolved before a certain date.  "That was really off the wall," John Heyer said good naturedly.

Brad Lander was asked about the City pension fund scandal and its connection with a Park Slope resident and neighbor of Lander's,  whose name I haven't confirmed. Lander looked really mad (the only time I've ever seen him mad) and he called the question "slander." He told the person who asked the question to stand up, which he/she did not. He defended his friend as a very ethical person and a good friend who's only mistake was "giving accurate information."

Whoa. It was cool to see Lander angry. He handled the question really well and showed fire and passion in defense of his friend.

QUESTIONS FOR EACH OTHER

Someone suggested that the candidates ask one question to one of their opponents. They were also given rebuttal time and it was a fascinating section.

As the first one, Reilly was taken off guard but he asked Lander what his top priorities would be in the first year. Lander: "I'm trying to choose between the economy and education."

Skaller asked Zuckerman what exactly were his reservations about Superfund status for the Gowanus ("It's very complicated and I'm just not sure yet.).

Pechefsky asked Heyer if he would approve a City Council budget that included huge cuts to the public libraries.

Brad asked Reilly about why some people opposed an express train for the F-train.

PERSONALITIES

It's interesting to see these personalities in action. As I've said, they display different styles and leadership potential. All seem to agree, for the most part, on issues and core values. But who's the one who will be the best City Council member? Too soon to call but here are my thoughts-in-progress about these men. I'll start with Gary.

Gary Reilly: As the new kid on the block, his local politics and community activism are fueled by a real passion for his newfound home and the ways it could be more livable. In answer to a
question about future goals beyond the council he said he wouldn't have
the stomach for a city-wide election for mayor, but he needs to
have more stomach for this campaign and come on stronger.

Unasked for advice:  Lose the deceptively low key style and come on strong about your wonky passion for public
transportation, infrastructure and livable streets.

David Pechefsky: I call him the insider/provocateur because he's got ten years of experience working in the central office of the NYC City Council under his belt but he he also understands intimately what's wrong with the system and thinks he knows how to fix it. He's smart, provocative and good at framing the argument for reform. He comes across like a great thinker/teacher who has a lot to bring to the table in terms of thoughtful ideas and progressive values.

Unasked for advice: Give the voters a keener sense of small picture solutions and demonstrate your leadership qualities and your passion for local government.

Josh Skaller: He's garnering quite a few impressive endorsements and has the support of those who actively opposed the Atlantic Yards (Daniel Goldstein, State Senator Eric Adams, Norman Sigal, Major Owens, and others). He's obviously working hard on focusing his message: his belief that citizens can govern.

Unasked for advice: A few more detailed ideas would help give the voters a sense that you are really interested in their communities and not just ideological about out-of-whack development and the autocratic policies of Mayor Bloomberg. 

John Heyer: A fifth-generation Carroll Gardener, Heyer, at 27, is probably the closest thing to a Republican in the group. A devout Catholic, he opposes same-sex marriage but thinks that all couples deserve the rights you get from being married. His idea: The State should get out of the marriage business (an idea with merit but not a very realistic one at this juncture). Candid by nature and very articulate, he's been in politics since the age of 14 and obviously knows how to walk the walk with an admirable ability to connect with an audience about his belief that politics is about presence and constituency.

Unasked for advice: Refine your stump speech so that you quickly convey your commitment to the character of neighborhoods.

Brad Lander: His good nature and years of experience creating affordable housing Brooklyn bodes well for his future in the City Council. Just watching Lander interact with the other candidates at the forum, you can tell that he's a pleasant person to work with and a very fair guy. He combines deep smarts, great communication skills, and the ability to listen and learn from others.

Unsked for advice: You talk too fast and sometimes come across as a tad too sure of your front runner status.

Bob Zuckerman: The menchiest of the candidates, Bob isn't afraid to float out-of-the-box and sometimes wacky ideas. His proposed Zuck-Mobile, a mobile office made from a rehabbed Bookmobile, is taking on iconic stature in the campaign; many like his proposal to offer tax incentives to landlords to sell their storefronts as condos to local business owners.

Unasked for Advice: Your good natured, stand-up approach sometimes takes away from the seriousness of your out-of-the-box ideas.