Aside from a haircut and a few new highlights, Donna Frye has gone unchanged since she started as a write-in candidate for San Diego mayor last year. Frye’s commitment to tear down the veil of secrecy that shrouds City Hall and invite the citizens to participate in city government earned her the top spot in July’s special election, which followed the resignation of Mayor Dick Murphy. And now, with just days before Tuesday’s runoff, San Diegans prepare to cast their third and (hopefully) final vote to elect our new strong mayor. The only candidate who can restore the city’s faith in its elected officials and is willing to set politics aside and have an honest discussion about the reality facing San Diego is Donna Frye.

From local surf shop owner and clean-water activist to mayoral candidate on the front page of the international addition of USA Today – love her or hate her, you can’t help but admire Donna Frye. Besides being known as an outspoken supporter of equal rights, Frye has earned unparalleled respect for her extensive work on environmental issues, as well as pushing for open government at a time when backdoor deals and dirty-water politics plague our city.

As for Donna’s integrity, no one in their right mind would propose a $1.1 billion tax increase months before an election – unless you’re Donna Frye. Why? Because Frye knows San Diego will never recover through cuts alone. Place the two candidates’ reform packages side by side: Frye’s cuts run just as deep, but San Diego cannot avoid bankruptcy without increasing revenue in addition to pairing down excess spending. That’s the honest truth. That’s Donna Frye.

While we have endorsed Frye for mayor, we don’t agree with everything she proposes. Taxpayers cannot be expected to bail out those politicians who erroneously increased pension benefits for city employees – and themselves – and under-funded the pension fund at the same time. It’s just too hard to swallow, even for many in the traditional Democratic safety zones of the inner city. Compare the average private worker’s retirement package to a city employee’s pension and it’s no wonder San Diegans feel like they’ve been robbed by their elected officials. Instead of placing roughly 80 percent of the under-funding liability on the backs of the taxpayers, Frye needs to strike a balance between cuts and increased taxes, and ask taxpayers to pitch in half of what she’s proposed while collecting the other half through cuts to the existing city budget.

Already touting one of the leanest city governments in California, just where will these cuts come from? That’s hard for anyone to figure out without a current city audit and reliable financials, but this race isn’t entirely about who has the answers now; it’s about who we can trust once we’ve elected them.

Rosa Parks’ death last week spurred many of us to reflect on the parallels between the civil rights movement and our quest for full GLBT equality. Between the two candidates for mayor, only Donna Frye sees gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people as equal to everyone else: She supports full marriage equality for same-sex couples; believes the Boy Scouts should not be rewarded with a preferential land lease as long as they continue to discriminate against our families; and agrees that anyone doing business with the city of San Diego should be required to offer employees full domestic partnership benefits.

Sanders does not support full marriage equality for “religious reasons,” opting for civil unions and domestic partnership arrangements instead. He believes the services the Boy Scouts provide its membership outweigh its discriminating policies, and does not share in Frye’s belief that the city should dictate how contracted businesses treat employees.

Campaigning for separate-but-equal treatment is like asking Rosa Parks for her vote and then telling her to go sit in the back of the bus. One candidate believes our community should have all the same rights and privileges as she enjoys, while the other has given our community’s rights the back seat in the name of politics. The choice is clear.

Sanders is a decent man, and we don’t believe he is anti-gay. However, he lacks the courage of his convictions and is unwilling to stand up for what he believes. As close as he and his family are to the GLBT community, it’s disappointing that he has chosen not to lead on our issues. How can our community support a candidate who will stand up and tell the GLBT community that they are second-class citizens when we have a qualified and viable alternative choice?