I wanted to do a very comprehensive study of each candidate, but there is clearly no time for that. Instead I am looking at each briefly with this ‘quick and dirty’ version of why to elect or reject.
I don’t come with a partisan preference, but in this election cycle I am looking for sound fiscal policy over ideology. Character carries heavy weight too.
Vrej Agajanian: As a former City Council member he negotiated a lot of values away. He had indicated he did not read some staff reports before making a decision. Upon losing his second election, he did not attend his final council meeting. He lost two runs to return to City Council. Agajanian is actually a very nice person and good television personality, but he does not excel on City Council. NO.
Elen Asatryan: Elen is an actress working the political system. She contributed to the budget deficit that we are currently straddled with, and she sees getting out of her co-created mess on the backs of Glendale taxpayers. She has serious ethical problems, breaking laws and ordinance for personal gain and special interests. Her policy lacks fiscal restraint, and is detrimental to Glendale families who struggle economically. She uses sexism, racism, and other identity politics as motivators for votes while pretending otherwise. Her pretense of ‘women’s advocacy’ generally translates as a hatred of men, stirring emotion without intellect. Sought higher office merely months after being elected to City Council, valuing her political aspirations more than she does the city. Endorsed by supporters and writers of SB 79. NO (double NO).
Dr. Alex Balekian: Dr. Alex is fiscally restrained. One objective is to ‘undo’ some of the costly policies of the current City Council. Most appealing, and possibly doable, is the delay or reversal of our next two electricity rate increases planned for us by the current council (Nov, 2026, and Nov, 2027). He is among the few candidates who have been brave enough to cite corruption within the city government. The one candidate brave enough to highlight Elen Asatryan’s lack of ethics, even as she escaped punishment on a statute of limitations legality. Electing him would reduce wasteful spending of tax payer money. His approach to the budget would be to roll up his sleeves, scrub, and get to lifesaving surgery right away. He would implement policy to punish reckless drivers and loud exhaust with severe fines, simultaneously generating revenue from our greatest offenders. YES
AleK Bartrosouf: Possibly the most over-hyped candidate in this election. Best example is his community garden which is widely rejected by community garden enthusiasts. Similarly, his boast of being an “urban planner” is intended to instill confidence. But his track record in Los Angeles and support of the Brand Blvd. bike lane demonstration project are more a reflection of his ideology than his urban planning ability. Ideology is too expensive in difficult economic times. His support for high-density would translate into higher costs for landowners, and result in costs passed down to Glendale renters. His appearances at City Council have been limited to support of Dan Brotman, who appointed him to do Brotman’s work on two Glendale commissions. Supports SB 79 in concept, but tells voters he doesn’t support it ‘as written.’ NO.
Beth Brooks: The ONLY real grassroots candidate in this election, and the ONLY renter to address renter need in this election. She has been a public speaker at City Council and other important municipal meetings for years. She could bring valuable insight to the Housing Authority (which is made of City Council+2) with her understanding that assisting renters can not come at the cost of land owners. She is not a government insider and is not beholden to any special interests, including campaign donors. She would be an upset to our current government status quo, ans very eager to expose excessive spending and corruption. If your only motivation to vote is to tell the government “up yers,” I say “go for it!” And voting for Brooks is an excellent way to do that. YES
Dan Brotman: Probably most infamous for the Brand Blvd. bike lane boondoggle and his miscalculations on the cost of the Grayson Power Plant Repowering Project which everyone with a utility bill has felt. He spends taxpayer money recklessly. Without a PhD, represents himself as an “economics professor” and economist. His ideologically driven fiscal policy is harmful. He has voted for environmentally destructive projects while claiming to be an “environmentalist.” He has run a very dirty campaign with falsehood attacks and insults on opposition candidates, including disparaging the appearance of women. Endorsed by supporters and writers of SB 79, and a supporter of compact high-density over-development. HARD NO.
Ronnie Gharibian: Primarily known within the Armenian financial business community. Never heard of him before he decided to run for office. Never saw him appear before City Council. He was hand-picked by Ara Najarian, which in itself indicates a problem. He was appointed by Ara Najarian to the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) which spends funds from the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Funds are to be used to provide services to low-income persons and to revitalize low-income neighborhoods, which doesn’t seem to be happening. Unlikely to care about anyone outside his political circle; really just an extension of a departing politician. He is not in the race to serve the general Glendale population. (You’ve been warned.) NO.
Gevorg Grigoryan: An out-of-the-woodwork candidate if ever there was one. An architect who preaches a lot of building. He doesn’t merely come with special interests, he is one. His English is poor, and he primarily campaigns to the Armenian community, not the general community. Early in his campaign, he had to promise “more materials in English” for the majority of Glendale who do not speak Armenian, so not likely to serve the general population very well. Kicked off his campaign with expensive and ostentatious flash and pomp parties, indicating wasteful spending habits unworthy of public tax dollar decision making. Lacks authenticity, built by a public relations firm. Serious desire for power, not a serious voter consideration for City Council. NO.
Dr. Carolyn Kaloostian: An accomplished medical professional primarily recruited as a vote splitter. Very scripted and mostly read her material in candidate forums. Not a lot of platform but it occupies a lot of website space with generalities and some unfeasible or untested ideas. Specific subheadings on her website are not links, just platitudes with no material to read further. She has appeared at City Council a couple of times since declaring her candidacy, but we never saw her prior to that, even to present the ideas that she feels should put her there. She never protested the problems as they were being created, but feels she has solutions. I had some initial hope that she would offer more, but it never materialized. Ran a mostly clean campaign until the end when she used her campaign manager to malign a non-incumbent candidate. NO.
Davit Mnatsakanyan: Depends on expectations that his AI software and programming vision can build efficient government. Regurgitates a lot of Glendale’s known problems, but offers no real address about them other than to promise to solve them. Did not speak at City Council meetings prior to his candidacy. He has been in Glendale for one year only. NO.
Patrick Murphy: Without a doubt, the candidate who ran the cleanest campaign focused on a multitude of issues. As a candidate I liked him from the onset, very reminiscent of the kind of fairness we saw in former council member Paula Devine. He has spoken numerous times on important issues at City Council. He’s budget conscious and can see where the leaks are. With like-minded company on council, he could fix the budget in less time than it took to ruin it. He knows how to study an issue by reaching out to the right people to hear their knowledge. He’s been the target of some of the worst campaign smears while not reciprocating the same. He takes a rational approach to ideas that serve all of the community (evens bike lanes) without feeling a need to pursue them for expensive ideology or ulterior motive. He has a good personal character, and Glendale would be fortunate to have him in office. YES. (beyond any doubt)
Evelina Sarian: Another candidate running as a vote splitter/spoiler against Elen Asatryan. Difficult to audibly understand at times. She came to the race without a platform, instead forming her opinion on community feedback, indicating she stood for nothing specific when deciding to run. If she’s successful at splitting Asatryan’s vote, she’ll have done Glendale the best public service she has to offer. She is worth millions and basically self-funded. The victim of numerous political attacks based on controversy in her personal life. She lacks intricate knowledge of the city’s issues and has not spoken publicly in City Council. NO.
Recent Comments