Well yesterday's post on the deserted island answers was a surprisingly big hit. Either that or there wasn't much going on today and this was something. But I'll go with the first possibility.
So here we go looking at their web pages. Not any specific policies but just what they have on their websites. I take this as a sign of how serious they are about running. And detailed policy statements count for a lot (again I am not looking at their specific position) as it shows they are thinking through what they would do on the council.
Candidate names link to their website. This time in reverse alpha order to even it out (why should Matthew Appelbaum always get to be first):
Frank Zoldak : C : Frank now has a web page and it's a good first effort. Has the basics including a short blurb on a few issues. Top issue on his site? Prairie dogs.
Ken Wilson : A- : Very well laid out website, easy to find everything, and clear concise policy statements on numerous issues. One nit - put a link on your email.
John Welsh : D- : His "website" is his cigar bar. And nothing on that site about his running. I get the feeling he's not running to win but rather for some free PR for his bar.
Tom Riley : B- : Update - Tom Riley now has a website and it's not bad for the first time. All the key pieces are there although the issues part is very sparse. Very impressive.
Susan Peterson : C- : A single page that says everything is coming (before the election maybe...). I know putting something like this together is hard work, but serving on the council is too. If after a couple of weeks you have nothing up yet - I'm sorry but that is not a credible campaign.
Eugene Pearson : B+ : Ok, this is trying to be the best site of any candidate by far. Very well laid out, all of the issues discussed clearly and concisely, etc. But it has on-line contributions, mail list sign-up forwarding info to your friends, etc. Unfortunately, a number of the pages are "under construction" and says they should be complete June 7 (note: it's June 11 when I am writing this). So A+ for effort and intent, C for execution.
Alan O'Hashi : A+ : Another with all of the issues and more. It's interesting because the website is very plan and the pages run on long. But it's almost like Alan is there having a conversation with you and what I think was something done quickly and simply works very well. In addition he has videos and blogs. It won't win any design awards but I think it's the best site up there.
Kathryn Kramer : C+ : No website. Ok, Kathryn finally has a website. And it lists her opinion on the issues which is the single most important item for the site. However, it's a bunch of questions from the various questionaires so it's not a great guide to what she is impassioned about. Otherwise pretty sparse.
Philip Hernandez : F : No website (but at least it's not an AOL email address). Again, what are people thinking if they put in the effort to run, clearly want to win, in Philip's case have been a campaign manager, and yet has no web presence.
Angelique Espinoza : C- : Apparently Angelique has no position on any issue. Its an ok minimal web-page but no issues and no "issues coming". And for someone who is a part owner of Free Range Geeks she can't claim no web skills.
Shawn Coleman : C- : Almost nothing. A copy of the Daily Camera questionaire and that's it. And Shawn has run before - he should have position statements from the last election to put up. I'm very surprised that his site is this sparse.
Philip Bradley : A+ : Cool website. It's a bit lite in discussing the issues. But he does write a paragraph on a lot of them. And he has a lot of cool features that are useful like a calendar of where he will be speaking, RSS feed, and a poll.
Eric Bodenstab : C- : Ok, not everyone has a friend that can create a cool website and hiring someone costs money. And not everyone is a good writer. But on the flip side, if you are going to run for office it helps. The support needed to win takes many forms. But aside from those side issues - nothing on any policy questions - just that he will bring vision to the post. Eric, you need to tell us what your vision sees. After all G.W. Bush has a vision for the middle east - it just happens to be a mirage.
Matthew Applebaum : B- : This is an interesting approach - he has the Q & A from all of the various interest groups on his site. That does give a detailed view of his policies. But it also strikes me as an easy way to put up what is required for a website. And that is pretty much it for his site. It doesn't even have a bio. And one page has numerous html errors displayed.
So we did a bit better here than the get off the desert island issue. We have 3 A's and 2 B's. Wilson, O'Hashi, and Bradley each did an excellent job. If they approach their council work with the same level of effort and competence they will do a good job.
Pearson and Applebaum show a serious effort to let the voters know what they would do in office. Pearson is worrisome because he aimed high, but didn't follow through on a lot. Applebaum did the bare minimum in the least effort - which has it's good and bad points.
