Would having all 3 of these candidates on the City Council be good for Clayton?
If you drive around Clayton you may notice these 3 candidate’s signs posted together. You may have also noticed the local newspaper, allies on the planning commission and surrogates on Nextdoor and Facebook endorsing these 3 candidates as a group. And if you happen to drive by Mayor Julie Pierce’s house you will see these same 3 signs on her front yard. What sort of message does that convey?
Even though he likes to say otherwise, Cloven has already shown his pro high-density housing stances by his voting record and public statements. At the last candidate forum Cloven revealed that his solution to making Clayton more diverse is to build even more high-density housing (56:58 in the forum video). This is from someone who entered city government after using his expertise to stop a housing development that was proposed in his own backyard. And while Cloven claims to be “fiercely independent”, seeing this trio campaign together and stake out the same positions makes that claim hard to believe.
Tillman has decided to not reveal where she stands on the high-density housing issue, going so far as to claim she actually has no position on this issue. Instead, she has partnered with Catalano and Cloven. If she has no view on high density housing, we can assume she’d align with her ideological allies on high-density housing issues. Or is she completely independent of Catalano’s and Cloven’s beliefs and only decided to join up with them because it’s politically convenient? Neither reason is good for Clayton.
Having these 3 candidates on the city council would create a 3-person voting bloc, effectively shutting out any opposing voice to key issues, particularly high-density housing.
We already have a pro high-density housing majority on the council and the planning commission. If these three get elected, they will continue to appoint people on the planning commission that support their agenda. There will be no meaningful opposition to high-density housing or any other issue.
City government works best when all views are included, when there is diversity of opinion that represents the diversity of our community. So, the question we need to ask ourselves is, would having all 3 of these candidates on the city council be good for Clayton? The Olivia is one project. But remember, there are many more possible and we know that Jordan will try to maximize units on the adjacent properties that he recently bought. If we don’t want our downtown littered with walls of 3 story apartments, Clayton needs to elect representatives that reflect their views.
This Catalano coalition, that will rubber stamp any developer’s proposals regardless if they are right for Clayton, is not the right group to represent us.