EDITORIAL: In their words: The chemist, attorney and ex-Palantir exec fighting an expensive war to represent Silicon Valley, Alameda County in Senate
May 8-Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
The fight for Aisha Wahab's seat representing Santa Clara and Alameda counties in the California Senate is a crowded race. Voters in the 10th District, which Wahab has represented since 2022, will have the choice of six candidates. As part of our editorial boards' endorsement process, we asked several contenders a series of questions in April to understand their qualifications and visions for representing this overwhelmingly Democratic district, which includes northeast San Jose, Fremont and Hayward.
Recently, only three candidates have emerged with enough money and endorsements to run viable campaigns:
- David Cohen, 57, is a San Jose City councilman, Berryessa School Board member and a chemical engineer.
- Anne Kepner, 57, is a Santa Clara-based attorney and trustee at West Valley Mission Community College District.
- Scott Sakakihara, 41, is a Union City councilman, active U.S. Navy reserve officer and former senior finance executive at Palantir Technologies.
To help voters understand more about these candidates, here is a curated selection of our questionnaire.
(Their answers have been edited for length and clarity.)
What are the top three problems you're seeking to solve if elected SD 10 Senator?
Cohen:
1. Housing affordability: Help make it less expensive to build housing.
2. Accessible health care: Address the gaps in service that are caused by the federal cuts of H.R. 1, which put hospitals and community health centers at risk.
3. Climate change: Electrify our economy to reduce carbon emissions.
Kepner:
The top three problems I would help solve are:
1. Lack of affordable housing
2. Lack of opportunity and preparation for well-paying, skilled jobs
3. Lack of affordable health care, particularly for our aging population
Sakakihara:
1. Affordability: especially housing, but also childcare, health care, energy, insurance and the basic cost of living in the Bay Area.
2. Government execution: People need to trust their government, which is built through competent follow-through.
3. Protecting and expanding opportunity: That means strong public schools, a stronger safety net and standing up for vulnerable communities at a time when immigrants and other communities are under direct attack from Donald Trump and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Why are you uniquely qualified to address the three problems you've identified above?
Cohen:
Over 20 years of elected service, I have brought people together to address the biggest needs in our community. I built bridges as a school board member, developing relationships that resulted in the creation of the East Side Alliance. For 13 years, I visited one school per week and had lunch with staff and visited classrooms so I knew what the needs were on the ground. During my first year on council, I brought the city together with Santa Clara County to settle the lawsuit that had stalled housing development in North San Jose for nearly a decade.
Kepner:
I served on the Housing Loan and Rehabilitation Committee in the City of Santa Clara and reviewed applications for grants and zero-interest loans to help persons on fixed incomes remain in their homes. As a college trustee, I have worked to expand educational programs, internship opportunities and partnerships with governmental agencies and private companies. I have also advocated for the expansion of community colleges to offer baccalaureate degrees in nursing. As an attorney working to protect the elderly from abuse and exploitation, I am uniquely aware of the support needed to allow our seniors to age in place.
Sakakihara:
I was born and raised in this district. I've helped approve housing, balance budgets, support public safety and move projects through local government. I serve as vice chair of the Housing Authority of Alameda County, so I understand the regional side of the housing crisis as well. Professionally, I have managed large budgets and complex teams in the private sector, which matters because a lot of California's biggest problems are execution problems. And my Navy service has reinforced in me a simple principle: leave no one behind. That is the lens I bring to this work.
What differentiates you from your most serious competitors for this seat?
Cohen:
Serving on the city council and school board has helped me bring reforms and meaningful change. It's also made me a target of several powerful groups, who now support my opponents. I can take the heat. I'm doing this to solve problems, not to be popular. I have experience at multiple levels of government, bringing both education and municipal governance to the Senate. As an engineer, I worked at major companies in both San Jose and Fremont. My experience as a senior manager in tech gives me a deep understanding of the primary economic engine of this district.
Kepner:
As a small business owner, I know the realities of meeting payroll. As an attorney, I have stood up to bad corporate actors to successfully advocate for people who have been harmed due to toxic exposure, elders who have suffered abuse and represented people who suffered devastating losses during the Coyote Creek floods. As a local elected official serving as a college trustee for 12 years, I am aware of the incredible potential of our local agencies to affordably train the workforce of tomorrow.
Sakakihara:
What differentiates me is that I pair progressive values with a track record of actually delivering. I am not running as an abstract commentator on the district's problems. I have spent years governing in this district - building housing, strengthening public safety, supporting workers and navigating tough budget and land-use decisions. I also think voters want someone who understands both the East Bay and Santa Clara County parts of this district, and who can speak honestly about what the government can and cannot do. I am a local candidate with a regional perspective, financial experience and a clear sense of purpose.
What Senate committee would you most like to chair, if given the opportunity? And how would that position serve your constituents?
Cohen:
There are several committees I would like to chair that are all important to Senate District 10. Energy, Utilities and Communications is important in addressing cost-of-living issues, since high utility costs are squeezing many of our residents. I have served on various water boards as a council member and chairing the Natural Resources and Water Committee would allow me to address the issues with water management and availability. Finally, the Privacy, Digital Technologies and Consumer Protection Committee is key to this region as we work to balance the explosion of AI with our safety and the future of our workforce.
Kepner:
With the significant turnover in the Senate, there is a real opportunity for freshmen legislators to serve on significant committees next year. With that in mind, the Education Committee interests me the most as I think we can expand the role that our community college system plays in preparing the workforce of tomorrow. Success in this area will depend on the integration of the K-12 system and four-year colleges.
Sakakihara:
Housing. The housing shortage is the central economic problem facing this district. It drives rent, home prices, homelessness, commute times, school staffing challenges and whether young families can live here. If I had the opportunity to chair Housing, I would use it to push faster approvals, smarter financing, stronger accountability for cities that refuse to meet their obligations and a more serious public sector role in producing below-market housing. Chairing that committee would let me work directly on the issue that touches almost every other problem families in SD 10 face.
You're running to be a lawmaker. If you were going to be remembered for writing and passing one law, what would it be?
Cohen:
If I were to be remembered for one law, it would be the Local Flexibility and Housing Accountability Act, designed to address our housing crisis with both urgency and realism. This law would shift the model by setting clear statewide housing goals while giving local governments the flexibility to determine how best to meet them. Accountability would remain strong, but the approach would emphasize incentives over punishment. Communities that meet or exceed their housing goals would receive infrastructure funding and planning support, while those that fall short would face state intervention.
Kepner:
Well-paying local jobs. I would like to be remembered for passing a law that modernized vocational pathways to help more people receive degrees and certificates in the community college system. Not everyone is interested in receiving a four-year university degree, and today, not every family can afford one. We need to train a new workforce of specialists, from climate technicians focused on electrification, renewable energy and infrastructure resilience to engineering, firefighting and nursing. We also need to assist California with its health care and safety needs now, while transitioning to a carbon-neutral economy.
Sakakihara:
I would want to be remembered for writing and passing an accessible housing accelerator. Conceptually, I'd like to incorporate elements from models in places like Vienna and Singapore that could realistically work in California to support mixed-income renters and homeowners, and authorize 3- to 5-year government-backed construction loans to help the public sector, nonprofits and mission-driven partners build large amounts of mixed-income, below-market housing. The basic idea is that California cannot rely entirely on private developers and tax-credit syndication to solve the housing crisis.
You're running to replace Sen. Aisha Wahab. What has Sen. Wahab done right while representing this district?
Cohen:
Addressing the needs of the most disadvantaged members of our community.
Kepner:
Sen. Aisha Wahab has led many significant efforts with which I agree. As a mother of three and a legal advocate, I especially admire how she has been a fierce advocate for foster youth, requesting a state audit of the Alameda County Department of Children and Family Services. She also introduced legislation proposing a pilot program to extend foster care services to non-minor dependents up to 22 years of age if they are experiencing or are at risk of homelessness.
Sakakihara:
She has been very focused on helping the most vulnerable in our communities. That is why I'm running for State Senate: to make sure no one is left behind.
How has Sen. Wahab failed this district? And what would you do differently?
Cohen:
I think our differences are more stylistic than anything else. Sen. Wahab in my experience tends more toward strict, progressive decision-making, and I tend toward principled, relentless and imperfect progress. I have also heard that several cities in the Senate district haven't felt as if Sen. Wahab has delivered for them. It will be important to me to be a visible partner in every city from Sunnyvale to Hayward and deliver state assistance tailored to their local needs.
Kepner:
I am not interested in calling the work of other public servants failures. There are always critiques. One I have heard from some parts of Senate District 10 is from those who do not feel Sen. Wahab has been as accessible or present as they had hoped her to be, noting she has not met with constituents or quickly responded to some urgent community concerns, particularly around safety. Though District 10 covers a large geographic area and covers two counties, if elected I will be intentional about meeting with constituents in both counties on a regular basis.
Sakakihara:
We have failed to support adequate housing production and to keep health care, childcare, energy and insurance costs from growing much faster than wages. The state Legislature has been focused on these issues the past couple of years, but some of these crises, especially the housing shortage, have been decades in the making and were never going to be solved overnight. I want to bring a sense of urgency and execution to the work. I would be relentlessly focused on housing production, practical affordability measures and long-term cost control, while making sure state programs actually deliver results on the ground.
What solutions would you support to reduce housing costs in your district? If that's increasing supply, explain the policies you'd support.
Cohen:
The state should make sure that local governments don't have overly burdensome planning processes that delay projects from moving forward. I will look for ways to create standards that put limits on the permitting timeline, improve the efficiency of the California Environmental Quality Act for infill projects and make sure that impact fees are set appropriately to support local services without making housing too expensive to build. I will also support programs for the state to offer low-interest financing for developers so they can move their projects forward in a difficult cost environment.
Kepner:
We must increase the supply of housing in Senate District 10 and I support building more dense, affordable housing. In addition to promoting transit-oriented development, I believe we need to explore development of housing in more government-owned property with an affordability focus, continue to streamline the approval process for new housing projects and ensure the utilities infrastructure is improved to accommodate new developments.
Sakakihara:
I support more infill housing near transit, jobs and schools, faster approvals for projects that meet objective standards, restrictions on fees, adaptive reuse of underused commercial and government-owned sites and targeted California Environmental Quality Act reform so environmental review is used to protect the environment, not to block housing. I also support a more significant public sector role in housing production, including the kind of housing financing model I described earlier. I support building enough housing to ease pressure on rents, but also because I support strong protections against unfair evictions, price-fixing software and abusive practices that exploit tenants.
Why should renters who live in your district vote for you? (If you think you've addressed this in prior answers, then note that.)
Cohen:
At the city level, I've worked to unlock long-standing gridlock with the county that was holding back housing development. We've been able to clear a path for new housing projects to move forward. That progress is critical because increasing housing supply is the key to easing pressure on rents and giving renters more choices. I've consistently supported strong renter protections, including the legal right to counsel. My approach is straightforward - protect renters today, while building the housing we need to make our communities more affordable tomorrow.
Kepner:
For renters, I believe it is far better, and much more cost-effective, to help keep people housed. I am a proponent of programs like Keep Oakland Housed and the Santa Clara County Homelessness Prevention System - and will advocate for greater state assistance for such local organizations that are effectively preventing homelessness.
Sakakihara:
I support stronger protections against unfair evictions and abusive practices, and I believe renters deserve safe housing, a fair process and a government that takes their side when the market is badly out of balance. But I also think we have to be honest - we will not make renting more affordable unless we build a lot more housing. That means more multifamily housing, more affordable housing, more housing near transit and jobs and a state government that stops letting delay and dysfunction make the crisis worse.
Why should first-time homebuyers vote for you?
Cohen:
I'm the only candidate with a record of significant results in expanding housing opportunities here in this district. The State Capitol could use more expertise and more independence. Those qualities are essential for achieving real progress on California's most pressing issues, especially housing affordability. In addition to expediting the building of new housing, I support state programs to provide down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers.
Kepner:
I am supportive of first-time home buyer programs in California that provide down-payment assistance, silent second loans and specialized mortgages. We need to support more people being able to afford homes in our communities as permanent residents contribute to the health and well-being of our neighborhoods.
Sakakihara:
Buying a home has moved from difficult to unrealistic for too many. My approach is to build a lot more housing and reduce the costs that government adds through delay, dysfunction and scarcity. I've made affordability and housing central priorities. Also, first-time buyers need a state government that is actually on their side, not one that treats housing as an abstract debate. That means supporting more homes of all types, being open to new public financing models that can create below-market housing at scale and making sure insurance and energy costs do not price people out even after they buy.
What actions would you take to tackle homelessness? Do cities and counties need more control over the problem or does the state need to demand more coordination and accountability? How are your policy prescriptions different than what's already been done?
Cohen:
As a senator, I will advocate for the state to provide consistent and significant Homeless Housing and Assistance Program (HHAP) funding, so that local governments know they have a reliable revenue stream to provide services. The state should also help developers move housing projects forward by offering low-interest financing and streamlining permitting. A comprehensive solution also includes making sure the state, counties and cities are aligned to collectively offer physical and mental health care, addiction services, case management, transitional housing and job training. The state should define the roles and encourage better cooperation between different levels of government.
Kepner:
As mentioned, I think offering assistance to keep people housed is critical. Working with the housing insecure population is best handled by local agencies who are aware of and connected to support services. However, if the state is providing resources to these local agencies, it is appropriate to require data and tracking information to determine best practices. There are examples of specific strategies that are showing positive results and thus we must learn how to scale and replicate these successful programs.
Sakakihara:
My approach would start with housing: more permanent supportive housing, more interim shelter that is actually safe and usable and a focus on preservation and prevention so fewer people fall into homelessness in the first place. We also need to provide more mental health care, substance use treatment and better reentry support. The state also has to be tougher about outcomes. If taxpayers are spending billions of dollars, we should have common metrics, transparent reporting, regional coordination requirements and consequences. What I would do differently is put much more emphasis on prevention, regional coordination and outcome-based accountability.
Bay Area counties will lose billions in coming years as a result of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. These federal cuts, particularly to health care, are expected to hit Alameda and Santa Clara counties' residents hard. What actions, if any, would you support to protect these counties' budgets, in general, and health care services, in particular?
Cohen:
We need to be extremely careful and disciplined about our budgets, making sure that core sectors like health care are properly supported and protected. That means safeguarding funding for public hospitals, clinics and safety net programs that our most vulnerable residents rely on, even if it requires scaling back or delaying spending in other areas. We have to be willing to make hard decisions. That could include reallocating local and state resources, strengthening regional collaboration between counties and finding efficiencies wherever possible. The goal is clear - to preserve access to healthcare and ensure that our communities can weather this moment.
Kepner:
As unpopular as it may be, I think we must increase revenues, at least for the next five years, to backfill the significant losses we will experience in Alameda and Santa Clara counties and throughout the state. I am supportive of AB 1790, designed to eliminate a tax filing option that allows multinational corporations to exclude foreign subsidy income from California state taxation, an increase in graduated corporate tax structure and limits on business tax credits.
Sakakihara:
My response would have three parts. First, I would fight to protect core health services, especially Medi-Cal, public hospitals, community clinics and behavioral health programs, and I would be open to targeted state backfilling where necessary to prevent catastrophic service loss. Second, I would support fairer revenue options and closing loopholes if that is what it takes to keep people covered and counties solvent. Third, I would push for much tighter state oversight and prioritization so limited dollars are focused on essential services and measurable outcomes, not spread thinly without accountability.
Should California have a single-payer universal health care system? Explain.
Cohen:
In an ideal world, yes. I have long believed that a single-payer system would be a promising way to boost health care efficiencies and bring overall costs down. I will continue to explore what paths forward there might be, but I recognize that we do not live in an ideal world and it will be very complicated to make the transition. It's also very hard for California to go it alone if there is no support from the federal government.
Kepner:
Our health care system is broken and not working for far too many people. And, unfortunately, the cuts resulting from H.R. 1 will make health care inaccessible to millions and at the same time make it much more costly for those who are insured. We must begin the process of moving towards a single-payer system. While it is unlikely we will have a federal partner in this effort for some time, we must continue to push for universal coverage in California. In the interim, I am broadly supportive of any effort to help reduce costs and improve access statewide.
Sakakihara:
I support the goal of a single-payer universal health care system. I also think we should be candid: Getting there is hard, and it requires both financing and federal coordination. My position is that California should keep pushing in that direction while also taking immediate steps that strengthen access right now: protect Medi-Cal, lower prescription drug and out-of-pocket costs, improve behavioral health access and defend coverage from federal cuts.
Why should your district's commuters vote for you?
Cohen:
I sit on the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) and Caltrain boards, and I bring that experience into the decisions that shape how people move through our region. With environmental stewardship as a top priority, I believe investing in reliable, efficient transit is essential not just for reducing emissions, but for improving quality of life. At the same time, we must address the challenge of affordability. Too many commuters are paying more than they should, and we need to find ways to use and strengthen our existing systems rather than relying on costly external solutions.
Kepner:
I am one of them! I know what it is to sit in your car daily, and I am supportive of investing in our mass transit systems and, in particular, solving the challenge of the "last mile" so our public transportation systems will work better for more commuters and thus relieve pressure on our roadways.
Sakakihara:
Given the district's high number of commuters, mobility is directly tied to quality of life. People in SD 10 need transit that is reliable, safe and financially sustainable. They need roads that are maintained and housing policies that reduce the need for punishing super-commutes in the first place. I have supported transit and active transportation locally, and I believe the Bay Area needs practical regional leadership to make commuting less expensive, less stressful and less time-consuming.
Do you think BART has made enough of the difficult financial choices to right-size the agency? Do you support the proposed sales tax on the November ballot? If not, what should BART be doing to stabilize the transit system?
Cohen:
While it is important that BART show fiscal restraint in order to keep the system solvent, I also believe that public transit can only be successful if the systems have enough frequency and convenience to serve riders well. So there is a crucial balance between cost-saving cuts and the creation of a death spiral. With less service, ridership drops, exacerbating the financial distress and eventually leading to the failure of the system.
Kepner:
We need a system that will move people where they want and need to go. In the Bay Area, there are 27 transit agencies and coordination amongst them is challenging, but necessary. Having lived and traveled in cities like San Francisco and Portland, Oregon, I know firsthand that people use public transportation when it is practical to do so. I am supportive of the 2026 ballot measure as I think our climate requires us to improve our system so that it functions and reduces the number of personal vehicles being driven each day.
Sakakihara:
No. I do not think BART has yet made enough of the difficult financial choices required by the post-pandemic reality. I also think it would be a major mistake to let the system spiral into severe cuts, station closures and a broader collapse in regional mobility. I support the November transit measure, but only in tandem with real reform and accountability. I do not support writing a blank check. I do support preserving the backbone of the regional system while requiring a more credible long-term operating model.
Please list Bay Area transit governance reform legislation that you would support?
Cohen:
We have to consider some level of consolidation across the Bay Area to more efficiently manage and coordinate the systems. Programs like Seamless Bay Area are important in order to make sure fare structures, schedules and transfers are convenient enough. I am open to discussions about electing boards, but I don't think that is a panacea, as it is clear that BART's elected board doesn't insulate it from financial distress. And VTA is more responsive to all communities in the county by virtue of a board structure that guarantees representation from all portions of the district.
Kepner:
I think our system calls for consolidation and centralization of the decision-making for rider-facing services, particularly mapping and coordinating schedules.
Sakakihara:
I would support legislation that: - creates truly seamless regional fares and free or low-cost transfers across major operators - requires coordinated regional service planning and better timed connections across BART, Caltrain, VTA, AC Transit, Muni and other systems - conditions new regional operating money on clear performance standards, independent audits and public reporting - strengthens the region's ability to align transit funding, land use and transit-oriented housing production - reduces duplicative governance where practical and gives the region a stronger framework for accountability when agencies do not meet agreed-upon goals
Explain your position on California's High-Speed Rail project.
Cohen:
For a litany of reasons, Californians need high-speed rail to succeed. It is sad that the United States is so far behind the rest of the developed world in providing fast, clean, electrified transit options for our residents. California can set a national model for how to modernize our transportation infrastructure. Our urban centers have run out of capacity for significantly expanding our airports and freeways. We need this transportation option to keep our people and our economy moving far into the future.
Kepner:
Like many, I supported the 2008 measure creating high-speed rail and hoped it would materialize. To date, it has not. In today's challenging climate, I am interested in our resources being spent on regional public transit systems. We must get people out of their cars on a daily basis and onto public transportation for their day-to-day traveling.
Sakakihara:
The project has taken too long, costs too much and suffers from too many management and credibility problems. I understand why taxpayers are frustrated. I do not think the responsible answer is to walk away after major infrastructure has already been built. My position is that California should continue the project, but under a much stricter framework, which includes realistic phasing, stronger independent oversight, honest public timelines and no blank-check mentality. If we are going to finish this, it has to be in a way that delivers real transportation value and restores some public trust.
Joint Venture Silicon Valley estimates 400,000 Bay Area jobs are at risk of being replaced by AI. What role should the state play, if at all, in regulating AI to protect Bay Area workers and/or consumers?
Cohen:
California must facilitate the job transition by establishing regional training partnerships and worker retraining. If done right, workers will benefit from the transition. Our community colleges will play a lead role in offering programs that prepare workers for the tech jobs of the future. As the adoption of AI technology increases, we must be ready to act quickly and put in place reasonable regulations to protect workers from abuse and preserve privacy. We were not ready for the social media explosion. We must be ready to react nimbly to AI, without overreacting and stifling innovation.
Kepner:
There need to be guardrails in place for the use of AI to better ensure they help, not replace, working people. I am supportive of bills that focus on transparency related to the use of AI and also to ensure humans, particularly in the health care delivery system, have the final authority over AI-generated recommendations. As for job displacement because of AI, the state has a role to play in partnering with private industry, stakeholders and our public education system to ensure people are retrained and prepared to fill the roles required by AI and the new industry.
Sakakihara:
We should harness AI's potential in areas like medical research and making complex, previously expensive systems available to individuals, small businesses, nonprofits and government. We should also insist on transparency, accountability and worker protection where AI can cause real harm. That means rules for high-risk uses of AI in employment, housing, lending, health care, education and public services, strong consumer privacy protections, safeguards against deepfakes and fraud and special protections for children. It also means investing in workforce adaptation so workers are not simply told to fend for themselves while the economy shifts underneath them.
Would you support legislation to curb children's use of social media?
Cohen:
Research is making it more clear that social media can have a detrimental effect on children's developing minds. I believe California must join other countries around the world and implement policies to protect them from the negative effects of social media use.
Kepner:
Yes. As a mother of three, I have grown concerned over the destructive, addictive nature of social media. In Los Angeles County, a jury found Meta and Google liable for negligently designing addictive features that harmed the mental health of a young user. The jury found the algorithms are intentionally engineered to exploit the developing brains of children. This was a bellwether case and there have been similar verdicts in other states. It is important we protect our children and this has become a public health issue and regulation needs to be considered.
Sakakihara:
Yes, if it is carefully written, evidence-based and legally durable. I support stronger protections for children online, including limits on addictive design features, better default privacy protections, clearer parental tools and stronger enforcement against platforms that knowingly harm kids' mental health. I also think we need more digital literacy and media literacy in schools. The goal should not be performative legislation - it should be laws that actually make children safer.
What actions would you support to help California balance its chronic deficit? If that's by raising revenues, explain how. If that's by cutting spending, explain how.
Cohen:
During my time on the school board through the 2008-09 recession, I faced difficult budget decisions and learned how to protect core priorities even in tough times. That experience shapes my belief that we can navigate this moment responsibly while still planning for the future. We rely too heavily on volatile sources like income tax, making it harder to plan and invest consistently. We should move toward a more stable system that supports essential services without increasing the overall tax burden on most Californians, while also prioritizing core services and strengthening reserves to better prepare for future downturns.
Kepner:
As mentioned with the federal cuts from H.R. 1, we must raise revenue by requiring that large corporations and the mega-wealthy, who disproportionately benefit from government investment, pay more. The wealth disparity has grown significantly and even The Wall Street Journal has recently lamented that it is a problem. We must correct the imbalance that persists.
Sakakihara:
I would start with performance-based budgeting, tougher oversight of large programs and a willingness to stop funding initiatives that do not produce measurable results. We should find redundancies and streamline programs, reform procurement where it wastes money and stop relying on gimmicks, delays and one-time maneuvers to paper over recurring problems. On the revenue side, I am open to fairer and more targeted changes, especially closing loopholes and asking the largest corporate interests to pay more, but I do not think voters will support more revenue unless the government demonstrates much more discipline and accountability on spending.
In what ways, if at all, would you support modifying Proposition 13?
Cohen:
Prop. 13 provides important protections for homeowners and those protections should be preserved. However, over time, the property tax burden in the state has shifted more onto homeowners whose properties change hands more frequently and less on businesses who hold properties for many decades. I believe we should discuss small reforms that might improve our revenue streams in the state.
Kepner:
Prop. 13 was passed to protect homeowners and now it is in effect protecting commercial property owners. I am supportive of correcting that imbalance.
Sakakihara:
I support revisiting the way Prop. 13 treats large commercial and industrial property, because the current system too often rewards long-held corporate property in a way that shifts the burden elsewhere and deprives schools and local services of revenue. I am open to a split-roll style reform that protects homeowners while asking for a fair share from the biggest commercial interests. I would also be open to improvements that better protect seniors and longtime homeowners on fixed incomes, and I think any Prop. 13 conversation should be grounded in fairness rather than ideology.
What are the biggest challenges facing your district's public schools? What actions would you take to improve them?
Cohen:
During my 14 years on the school board, I saw firsthand how flaws in funding formulas and mechanisms create real disparities for students, from access to counselors to classroom resources. I believe it is time to shift from attendance-based funding to enrollment-based funding. Schools staff based on enrollment and should be funded that way. Also, there should be a state reserve built up over time that can supplement low-funded Local Control Funding Formula districts so that every student in the state has an equal opportunity to succeed.
Kepner:
Declining enrollment and insufficient funding are the two biggest challenges facing public schools in District 10. For insufficient funding, I advocate that schools be funded on enrollment, rather than attendance. For declining enrollment, we need to have more affordable housing in our neighborhoods so more young families can live in Senate District 10. In the community college and California State University system there is a greater possibility of increasing enrollment by expanding and adapting our offerings to meet the needs of our surrounding communities, with which I have direct experience.
Sakakihara:
I would fight for stronger and more stable school funding, universal preschool, better mental health support, more robust career and technical pathways and policies that help educators actually stay in the Bay Area. I also believe California needs to do a better job of aligning housing, childcare and education policy, because families do not experience those as separate silos.
What do the biggest contributors to your campaign expect from you?
Cohen:
I believe my biggest contributors expect me to be a thoughtful legislator who listens to input from all stakeholders to make thoughtful policy decisions. I have built a coalition of supporters who appreciate my independence and willingness to compromise and craft better policy.
Kepner:
They expect me to fight for working people, support our public schools and advocate for the elderly.
Sakakihara:
I am fortunate enough to have been able to make an initial personal investment in the campaign. Beyond that, my support has come almost entirely from a mix of family and friends, local community members and people who know me from public service and my professional life. My contributors expect me to be thoughtful, accessible, honest and effective. And they expect me to bring the same values I have brought to local office: pro-housing, pro-working and middle class families, serious about public safety and willing to stand up for vulnerable communities when it matters.
What more should we know about you that might inform our board's judgment of your capacity to serve this district's constituents?
Cohen:
I've run twice for city council. The first time, organized labor supported me. After making several policy decisions based on my principles, not their politics, they opposed my reelection. I truly believe cooperation and collaboration yield results, not cronyism and fealty. I'll be an independent voice for California focused on results. From the East Side Alliance to the League of California Cities, people I work with recognize my ability to solve problems collectively. That's why all of my colleagues on the city council support my campaign for Senate, regardless of their political persuasion.
Kepner:
I am a mother of three. Our daughter is now 30 and our twin sons are 19. In January 2026, our daughter moved out of California as she no longer saw a future here. She and her boyfriend, who are both well-educated, were struggling to find well-paying jobs and could not imagine being able to afford their first home here. I am running for State Senate because I want California to be a place where our next generations can envision their future. I am also very concerned about the growing influence of big corporations in our politics.
Sakakihara:
First, I think voters deserve transparency. I spent a significant part of my professional career in Silicon Valley at the software company Palantir. I was in the finance department, not making product or policy decisions, but I understand why people ask about it given the company's work with ICE under Trump. My own values are clear: I oppose Trump's immigration agenda, I oppose collaboration with ICE and I do not want families in this district living in fear. That is a large part of why I quit my job last year.
Copyright 2026 Tribune Content Agency. All Rights Reserved.