1. Name, age & occupation. How many years have you lived in the district?
2. How much do you plan to raise & spend in this election? Is there anyone you would refuse to accept money from?
3. Should there be a county-wide moratorium on development until the general plan is revised?
4. Should Monterey County provide more affordable housing? If so, how should the county do this & where should it go?
5. Should Hatton Canyon funding be used for other highway improvements in the county?
6. Do you support county level campaign funding restrictions?
7. Should sitting supervisors be allowed to pursue development projects?
8. How would you have voted on the ballot initiative on Rancho Chualar II?
9. Why are you the best candidate for supervisor?
Louis R. Calcagno
1. 61, Dairy Farmer, lifelong resident
2. I expect to raise $45,000 for my campaign & to spend the same amount. I would not accept any money from any party that would be likely to put pressure upon me to favor them in future decisions of the board of supervisors.
3. I don't believe a moratorium is necessary. If supervisors followed our existing general plan, we would not create more problems. Although the plan is older, the actions to amend the plan have caused the greatest problems.
4. Affordable housing will always be needed. It must fit into our general growth pattern. It should be located in cities, where proper services & infrastructure can be provided. We must preserve our agricultural land at all costs.
5. The Hatton Canyon Freeway should not be the number 1 funded transportation project. It ties up transportation dollars that might otherwise be spent to improve state highways in other areas of the county.
6. I do not support funding restrictions because of their questionable constitutionality. A limitation of funding without consideration of a district's size or diversity is unfair to candidates & denies the public the right to information.
7. If a sitting supervisor owns a piece of property & wishes to pursue a development to it, the laws of California & the US Constitution absolutely protect that right. If they apply for major discretionary approvals (subdivisions), they must abstain from voting.
8. As a Monterey County Planning Commissioner, I voted against Chualar II & I would do it again. I believe this project not only desecrates farmland, but places a high tax burden on Monterey County.
9. I have lived & farmed in MoCo all of my life. I have served on the Planning Commission for 17 years & served as chair of the CA Coastal Commission, helped found the Elkhorn Slough Foundation & the Monterey County Ag Lands Conservancy.
1. 45, Agrarian
44 years in the district
2. Plan to spend $1,000 because that should be sufficient. If one can't get one's message to the public without spending $20-30,000, one doesn't deserve electoral confidence to be supervisor.
3. "General plan" should be revised as scheduled. Moratorium on distribution of capital must be avoided. Free enterprise is backbone of our economics & when we meddle in its course, our future is at risk.
4. Government should facilitate in stimulating private enterprise to market affordable housing & encourage economic development. It shouldn't interfere with private investment or with real estate market. Prime responsibility in preserving farmland belongs to growers.
5. Hatton Canyon funding should be used for its allotment. I do not believe in juggling books. Unless a project is scrapped by will of the people or new administration, monies should remain for its intended benefit.
6. Crazyhorse believes in free enterprise...less government regulation needed, not more. Political marketplace must be left to its own devices. Candidates like to billboard their names all over Valley of Eden.
7. Don't we want sitting supervisors to get off their fannies & do something? There are conflict of interest laws to prevent supervisors from abusing their position of authority. We must let free enterprise run its course & let supervisors act out their convictions. Hanta Yo.
8. I favor Rancho Chualar II."If them 165 acres was prime agricultural land, why no farmer come forward to buy it?" Only farmers can preserve farmland; nobody else's business, least of all government.
9. Crazyhorse is nonpartisan; an unencumbered agrarian. Also the only candidate representing working folk & not beholding to vested party leadership. Crazyhorse stand is for capitalism, free enterprise & less government intrusion.
1. Age unknown, business owner
25 years in the district
2. If source expects special treatment, then no!
3. No! Any new projects should be reviewed in anticipation of coming changes to the General Plan.
4. Yes! Look at Districts 1, 2, & 3 to consider development within the cities, close to services. Also consider reducing filing & processing fees.
5. No! Too late...
6. Yes. $50,000 in increments; $10,000 personal donation or loan.
7. Very carefully...very few...with full disclosure in the local newspaper as to their contributing interest in the development & expected revenue.
8. Decline. Moot point.
9. I can take the lead in the water & housing issues. Increase the storage of "winter" water & offer it to North County if they pay to bring it up the last 30 miles. A real partnership between county, city & private developers to build housing.
1. 55, Cattle Rancher
32 years in the district
2. Spending: This falls under campaign strategy & will be revealed in my financial disclosure statements. Refuse money: Yes, there are people I would refuse money from.
3. No, there could be sound development that fits the current general plan & would be very beneficial to the county.
4. The county must determine its own housing needs & not bend to state mandates. When it is determined that there is a need for affordable housing, then that housing must be placed where the low income families are.
5. I would like to see the money moved out of the Hatton Canyon area & be used to improve the conditions in the 101 corridor in the Prunedale area. Unfortunately, this money is allocated by the state & they have to release the money.
8. As a planning commissioner, I voted against Rancho Chualar II & due to the May 3 announcement, there will be no ballot initiative.
9. My varied experience in water & land use issues, many years as a successful cattle rancher & my consistency, honesty & integrity.
Candidate did not return questionnaire.
Candidate did not return questionnaire.
1. 53, Mayor of Gonzales
53 years in the district
2. Raise approximately $10,000. No, with the understanding they have my ear, not my vote always.
4. Yes. Direct growth to cities.
5. That would be ideal. Unfortunately, law prohibits it.
9. I know the issues, work daily on county, city issues. Leadership experience, sit on several county agency boards, travel & tourism, TAMC, emergency medical services, city centered growth, to mention a few.