California’s 14th Congressional District is in a state of chaos. And the East Bay district’s 750,000-something residents can blame Eric Swalwell, their former congressman.

The Castro Valley Democrat’s run for governor in November created a nine-way contest to replace him in the House of Representatives. That race is on the June 2 primary ballot.

Then, in April amid accusations of sexual assault, Swalwell’s resignation from Congress – following his withdrawal from the gubernatorial race – created an 11-way race to temporarily fill his vacant seat until January. That race is now on the June 16 special election ballot.
Yes, it’s confusing. And if no candidate grabs a majority in either of those races, this district’s voters might have to go to the polls four times. You read that right.
The antidote to this political pandemonium is a known-quantity – a public servant with an established record of already having represented much of this 580-square mile district, which stretches from Hayward and Fremont to Castro Valley and Livermore.

State Sen. Aisha Wahab is that candidate.

Wahab, a 39-year-old Democrat, appears on both the June 2 and June 16 ballots. We support her for both. This district doesn’t need musical chairs. It needs to pick one reliable person to occupy this seat and begin representing Alameda County’s interests in a closely divided Congress.

Proven leadership

D.C. is no place to send a novice. And Wahab isn’t one.

In fact, as the assistant majority leader, she is currently the third most powerful lawmaker in the California Senate, where she has had a front-row seat to the debates affecting the East Bay.

After serving on Hayward’s city council for four years, she was elected to the Senate in 2022. Since then, she has written, negotiated or helped to pass legislation in Sacramento to expand mental health coverage, cap insulin costs, secure down-payment assistance for first-time homebuyers, criminalize organized retail theft, and prop up Bay Area transit agencies, among other priorities.

In interviews with this newspaper’s editorial board, Wahab articulated her agenda at the federal level – strengthening antitrust enforcement, protecting workers from AI displacement and children from predatory social media companies, consolidating fragmented Bay Area transit and opposing funding formulas that short-change California taxpayers.

To be clear, some of Wahab’s Democratic colleagues in the Senate consider her style brusque. Last year, as chair of the Senate Housing Committee, she clashed with some pro-development Democrats, particularly over proposals she viewed as overly favorable to developers without guaranteeing sufficient affordable housing. Critics claimed she was beholden to trades unions, which have supported her run. No one will accuse her of being Ms. Congeniality or a pushover, but it hasn’t kept her from securing the endorsements of many of her Senate colleagues or the California Democratic Party.

Others unpersuasive

Wahab’s eight opponents include, at least, two serious candidates, though none makes as convincing a case.

Virtually all mention affordability as their primary objective; however, few show credible signs of being able to deliver for this district, which is among the most unique in the U.S. (Its homes cost three times the national average; four in 10 people here were born outside the country; poverty is low; incomes are very high; and commutes to work on the I-580, -680, and -880 are far too long.)

Melissa Hernandez has significant experience in East Bay local government and Bay Area transit. Hernandez, 51, is the former mayor of Dublin and is currently president of BART’s board of directors as well as director of health services for an Alameda County supervisor.

However, in an interview with this editorial board, Hernandez struggled to explain how she would use federal levers of power. Instead, she was far more fluent connecting local problems to Sacramento, not Washington. She has amassed a credible war chest, particularly from many East Bay public sector unions and will likely be a formidable challenger.

Conversely, Rakhi Israni had no problem identifying how D.C. can benefit Alameda County. The Fremont lawyer wears many hats: test-prep company founder, Santa Clara County judge pro tem and pro bono lawyer, etc. Israni, 52, is a policy wonk, who provided this editorial board with an agenda to tackle wealth inequality, housing affordability, workforce displacement and beyond.

However, Israni’s record of contributions to Republican candidates, and even fringe right-wing, overtly racist Laura Loomer, raise serious questions about her reliability as a representative of a district, where Democrats outnumber Republicans by nearly three to one. She calls her donation to Loomer a major “mistake.” Though she lacks the institutional support of local parties or unions, Israni’s deep pockets make her a serious contender in both primaries. Her campaign is the most well-funded, in part because she has loaned it more than $1 million.

Dena Maldonado is fighting an uphill battle. She’s one of two Republicans running here. The 37-year-old florist has secured the support of the California Republican Party, giving her a significant advantage over fellow Republican candidate and retired tech executive Wendy Huang. Maldonado has only lived in this district for a year, and her main priorities – such as protecting the 2nd Amendment – don’t reflect the Bay Area’s most central anxieties over the costs of housing, health care and energy.

Other contestants to replace Swalwell, including 54-year-old Pleasanton-based nonprofit director Carin Elam and 41-year-old San Leandro-based graphic designer Matt Ortega have not mounted campaigns at the scale and seriousness required to win here.

What comes next will be convoluted. A June 2 primary; another on June 16. Potential runoffs through August and November.

But the choice doesn’t have to be confusing. There is only one reliable, proven candidate on both ballots.

That’s Wahab. Keep it simple. Vote for her. Twice.

Source (https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2026/05/07/endorsement-elect-aisha-wahab-to-replace-ex-rep-eric-swalwell-in-congress/)

In little over a year, Ursula Jones Dickson has done a remarkable job returning the Alameda County District’s Office to its core mission — standing up for victims, impartially evaluating cases and prosecuting lawbreakers.

The county Board of Supervisors in January 2025 appointed Jones Dickson (https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/01/28/alameda-county-judge-selected-as-new-district-attorney-succeeding-recalled-da-pamela-price/), a Superior Court judge and former deputy district attorney, to replace Pamela Price, whom 63% of county voters ousted in a recall election (https://www.mercurynews.com/2024/11/18/alameda-county-da-pamela-price-concedes-defeat-in-historic-recall-election/) after just two years in office.

Now Jones Dickson is running to fill the post through 2028. And, sadly, Price, who doesn’t know when to call it quits, is trying to get back her old seat (https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/12/04/a-year-after-being-recalled-from-office-pamela-price-announces-new-campaign-for-alameda-county-district-attorney/). A third candidate, immigration attorney Gopal Krishan, fills out the field for the June 2 election.
Gopal isn’t running a meaningful campaign and has never tried a criminal court case. And, like Price when she was elected in 2022, Gopal has no prosecutorial experience. We saw how well that worked out last time. There’s no reason to repeat the mistake.
Voters should elect Jones Dickson, who has restored integrity, fairness and professionalism to the DA’s office after Price’s disastrous tenure.

Transformation

As the manager of 368 full-time employees and an office with a $112 million annual budget, Jones Dickson is getting results, reversing the decline under her predecessor.

To understand the transformation, one first must look at how far things had fallen under Price. As we detailed in our editorial supporting her recall (https://www.mercurynews.com/2024/10/25/alameda-county-district-attorney-recall-pamela-price-editorial/), Price punished opponents, hired allies with questionable credentials including her own boyfriend, insisted on disturbing leniency for violent criminals, undermined public disclosure laws and demonstrated prosecutorial bias about cases.

Data from the office on the outcomes of police case referrals (https://www.mercurynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/POWERPOINT-DA-Early-Budget-Work-Session-04.14.2026-DAO.pdf), released this year, shows in hindsight how prosecutorial work had slipped under Price’s leadership. She was charging fewer felonies and far fewer misdemeanors than her predecessor.

Then, from 2024, Price’s last year in office, to 2025, Jones Dickson’s first year, felony filings increased by 36% and misdemeanor cases by 35%.

The increase is not because Jones Dickson is statistically more likely than Price was to charge each case that comes through the office. Rather, under Jones Dickson, the office has been filing more charges because it’s processing more cases.

In other words, without the drama Price brought during her tenure, with police having the trust to refer more cases and with more experienced staff willing to work for the new district attorney, Jones Dickson is getting the job done. How refreshing.

Police cases

Much has been written about some high-profile cases that Jones Dickson has dismissed — dismissals that some have suggested indicate she is soft on bad cops. The details don’t support that.

These are cases that Jones Dickson inherited from Price. In the one case, involving a shooting by a San Leandro officer, Price’s bias prompted a judge to remove her office from prosecution (https://www.mercurynews.com/2024/03/22/judge-removes-alameda-county-district-attorney-pamela-price-from-manslaughter-case-against-former-san-leandro-police-officer/) and a judge later ruled that the evidence was insufficient (https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/12/12/judge-sides-with-alameda-da-dismisses-manslaughter-case-against-san-leandro-cop-in-death-of-steven-taylor/).

Two other cases, involving inmate deaths at Santa Rita Jail, allege sheriff deputies and clinicians neglected to provide proper care or supervision. In one case, Jones Dickson dropped the charges (https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/09/25/da-ursula-jones-dickson-quietly-drops-charges-against-two-alameda-county-sheriffs-deputies/) against both defendants; in the other (https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/08/21/alameda-da-drops-cases-against-6-deputies-2-clinicians-in-santa-rita-jail-death-of-maurice-monk/), charges were dropped against eight defendants, but three still face prosecution.

In that case, Jones Dickson has promised to “vigorously pursue justice” on behalf of the inmate and his family. And, more recently, she has filed charges in new cases involving police, one against a Hayward cop accused of taking a bribe (https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/03/18/hayward-cop-charged-with-taking-1000-bribe-from-brothel/); another against an Oakland officer for using a confidential law enforcement database (https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/04/20/oakland-cop-charged-with-misdemeanor-for-alleged-misuse-of-law-enforcement-database/) for illegitimate purposes. Thus, Jones Dickson has not shied from prosecuting cops.

Ironically, it was on Price’s watch that prosecutors botched perhaps the most disturbing case against officers in recent years, the fatal and senseless pinning by police (https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/04/30/editorial-alameda-polices-fatal-pinning-of-mario-gonzalez-was-senseless/) in the city of Alameda of a drunken man who posed no danger.

Charges against two of the three officers were dismissed when Price’s prosecutors missed a filing deadline (https://www.mercurynews.com/2024/10/08/involuntary-manslaughter-charges-dismissed-against-two-alameda-officers-in-death-of-mario-gonzalez/), and the case against the third officer fell apart due to inconsistencies by a key witness (https://www.mercurynews.com/2024/12/20/alameda-county-das-office-dismisses-manslaughter-case-against-lone-remaining-officer-charged-in-death-of-mario-gonzalez/).

Ethical obligations

The district attorney is the most powerful law enforcement official in the county. Her prosecutorial decisions must be based on the law, not political animus, even if they might not be popular.

Jones Dickson understands that. “Whether charged suspects are civilians or police officers, our ethical and constitutional obligations are the same,” she said. (https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/09/25/da-ursula-jones-dickson-quietly-drops-charges-against-two-alameda-county-sheriffs-deputies/) “If we are unable to prove a case, we are required to dismiss it.”

That’s in stark contrast to the Price administration, in which the head of her Public Accountability Unit for prosecuting law enforcement and other public officials, reportedly proclaimed (https://www.berkeleyscanner.com/2023/02/08/courts/pamela-price-alameda-county-district-attorney-first-month/) that “I came here to charge cops. They better be ready. They better Google me!”

Jones Dickson understands the gravity of the job; Price never has.

We were reminded of that last month when Price tried to leverage the scandal surrounding former Rep. Eric Swalwell for political purposes — and potentially at the expense of victims.

In a press conference (https://kyma.com/decision-2024/california-politics/2026/04/22/former-alameda-county-d-a-holds-press-conference-on-eric-swalwell/), Price suggested that Jones Dickson was not investigating potential abuses, that she was “leaving victims to fend for themselves.” It was a jaw-dropping accusation, considering that nine days earlier Jones Dickson had announced that her office was evaluating claims surrounding the congressman (https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/04/13/alameda-county-da-evaluating-sex-assault-claims-against-rep-eric-swalwell/).

In addition to lodging unsubstantiated claims that Jones Dickson had a conflict of interest in the case, Price announced that she was opening her own hotline for victims of Swalwell. She was recklessly opening a parallel private agency that could hinder law enforcement reaching victims.

There are only two significant candidates in the race for Alameda County district attorney — one who failed miserably at the job; the other who is successfully cleaning up the mess left behind.

Voters should elect Ursula Jones Dickson in the June 2 election.

Source (https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2026/05/06/editorial-elect-jones-dickson-integrity-alameda-county-da-pamela-price-recall/)