I disagree with Marty Barfowitz’ take on Simon v. Thies. It’s hard to say where Thies stands personally; all his pro-congesting pricing was done as an employee. As Brooklyn Community Board One’s enviro chair, he had a ready-made platform to push the advocacy envelope, but did little more than push Sanitation to reduce street cleaning days so there’d be more parking. Meanwhile the CB-1 area remains challenged by numerous environmental challenges like brownfields, the oil spill and other major issues, and he was a silent voice. So in terms of actually advocating for the community, his record is zero.

Simon’s been around the block a few times and perhaps her age doesn’t appeal to more youthful GenYers, but as a private citizen she’s done a heckuva lot, like helping win the community’s plan for the Gowanus Expressway EIS, pursuing better truck policies, and demanding bridge toll equity for years before Michael Bloomberg ever heard the words “congestion pricing.” I’d suggest taking another good look at her record, which is long, strong and consistent.

I was just pointing out that he is on record on Streetsblog-related issues despite his dumb oversight of failing to return the T.A. q’airre, to the extent that any of these pre-election positions on paper matter.

But Ms. Nomer, what is your point about the LCV board? I know some of the names but am not versed in the inner workings of the Brooklyn Dem machine.

Evan did yeoman’s work during the congestion pricing debate. He and the Pratt Center were some of the only advocates out there actively working to get low income and minority New Yorkers to put their political muscle behind congestion pricing and bus rapid transit. I think Evan and Pratt had some of the best political strategy out there on these issues. Unfortunately, the Mayor’s people and the Campaign for NY’s Future were focused on… asthma. Evan is a Gen X or Y’er. I think that matters. He is of a generation that grew up with environmental concerns paramount. He worked for David Yassky who has been the best Council member on these issues over the last five years. I like that too.

Jo Anne came late to the game on congestion pricing and couched her support in a variety of qualifiers and disclaimers. Likewise, on Atlantic Yards, Jo Anne was slow, cautious and not particularly outspoken until it was safe to be against the project. Jo Anne is closely associated with Joan Millman. They kind of go hand in hand. No State Assembly person was more disappointing and lame during the congestion pricing debate than Millman. Jo Anne clearly did nothing to move Millman on these issues. Years ago, Jo Anne was good on the Downtown Brooklyn Traffic Calming Project and she’s been generally supportive of bike/ped stuff. But those are the easy issues. She strikes me as old guard — more of a traditional, 20th century NYC Community Board liberal than a 21st century, Obama-era, environmental progressive.

So, I think Thies is the clear favorite here. My fear is that Thies and Simon will split the Bklyn Hts / Park Slope vote and allow Vito’s boy Levin to win this in Williamsburg.

If only Evan were Jewish.

Thiess – windy resume, easy rhetoric on transit issues the Council has no influence over. Seems unaware of the project proposed for Adams & Tillary. Good stuff on traffic law enforcement. Says he was a consultant for EDF re: congestion pricing and Pratt re: BRT which is great, but people should definitely put this position on pricing in their files in case the issue ever comes around again. Waffles on issue of parking and zoning in favor of residential parking permit, which strikes me as NIMBY motor-populist and basically not too usefule without a broader policy like pricing to reduce driving. Seems to support current NYCDOT bike/ped work but will be interesting to hear take on Kent Ave.

Abraham – Appears to mainly view traffic issues through old-school cops and fines prism, could use an editor. Opposes congestion pricing, seems to misunderstand zoning/parking question. All power to the Community Boards!

Simon – another windy resume. Most important issue is cross-jurisdictional planning! Hedges on support for city proposal to calm Adams & Tillary. Wants lower speed limit which is great, also seems genuinely engaged with question on public health & walking/cycling. Says she is a big congestion pricing supporter but my recollection is that the Downtown Brooklyn/Boerum hill civic/NIMBY groups she is associated with came very late to supporting Bloomberg’s plan if they were not in fact opposed. Certainly didn’t do jack to kick Millman etc. into gear. Again with residential parking permits. Wants residential and merchant “buy-in” for all NYC DOT projects, reflecting origins in civic groups that want veto over city action. Is this much different from Abraham’s position? Seems misinformed about Montreal bike sharing, which is expanding ahead of schedule.

Diamondstone – it would be nice if these people could provide a one paragraph resume. Bikes as most important issue. Likes city’s Tillary-Adams plan. Seems like he would champion traffic law enforcement, more active lifestyles. Pro-pricing. Answers zoning question well without the diversion into residential permits. Everyone is for BRT which again Sblog readers should file for when the rubber hits the road.

Baer – F and G subway service most important, along with parking permits. Not aware of city’s Adams/Tillary project, needs a spell check. Good on speeding. Would start walking clubs. Worked to advance Bloomberg pricing plan. Straightforward answers on reducing parking zoning requirements and allocating more bike/ped space. Main bike share benefit is exercise/health.

Also, while Levin didn’t respond to the T.A. survey, it’s not the only game in town. He was endorsed by NY League of Conservation Voters and talks about transportation policy extensively in his responses to that org.

My view — wait for the bankruptcy auction, rather than have the governmetn take part of the loss. The auction price should be low enough for the city or its pension funds to get a very high yield on a construction loan to a new developer that would nonetheless be able to rent the units at low price and make a profit. Those low rents will bring down market rents elsewhere. Meanwhile, enforce the building code.