I wouldn’t call it a
“mandate”, but Pacifica voters certainly expect the next City Council to do something about our perilous financial
position and long-term structural problems. And that Council will have, for the
first time in many years, a decisive majority with an energetic, pragmatic outlook
and a clearly expressed desire to tackle those problems. This will be a Council
majority that truly understands and encourages sensible economic development.
And, perhaps more importantly, a majority unburdened with the ideological
baggage of the past.
Newly-elected
councilmember Karen Ervin is a veteran of the Financing City Services Task
Force (among many other civic responsibilities) and is well acquainted with our
fiscal predicament. This experience, on top of her other impressive
credentials, may account for her position as the election’s leading
vote-getter.
Mike
O’Neill, the other first-time councilmember, has worked for years to help
balance the books and support the development of our public schools. He’s a
dynamic, hard-working, and creative problem-solver.
The
new councilmembers share a firm commitment to the improvement of our community,
evidenced by years of civic involvement. Both are ready, and deserving, to take
a seat on the dais, and they bring with them a fresh perspective, energy and
expertise. Pacifica has chosen wisely.
Mary
Ann Nihart, who was returned for another well-earned four-year term, requires
no introduction to the readers of this paper. The almost intimidating level of
her intelligence is gracefully balanced by the depth of her understanding.
Throw in the work ethic of a farm-girl and you’ve got one of the finest and most
effective local representatives I’ve ever encountered.
These
three will join Len Stone, the upcoming Mayor, and Sue Digre, the
longest-serving councilmember, when the new Council is sworn-in at their first
meeting of the New Year.
Nihart
and Ervin out-polled Sue Vellone for the two available full-term, four-year
council seats. O’Neill bested Vic Spano, Rich Campbell and quasi-candidate Gary
Mondfrans for the single two-year seat. (I’ve been reliably informed that,
despite appearances, council positions are not gender-specific; there are no
designated “girls” seats and “boys” seats. It just happened to work out that
way this time.)
Sue Vellone and Vic Spano, both worthy
candidates, were also committed to a business-friendly, developmental agenda,
which seems to be the wave of the future around here, and both had respectable showings
in the polls. Rich Campbell, an EPA attorney presently serving on the Planning
Commission, came in third, behind both O’Neill and Spano, in the race for the
two-year seat. Campbell had received the blessing of the Sierra Club, which
would not seem to be as consequential as it has been in the past.
The new Council will
take office saddled with high expectations. They have serious, long-standing
problems to deal with, and the solutions cannot infringe on those environmental
qualities that have made Pacifica the unique coastal community it is today. A way must be found to pay for the
breathtaking beauty we enjoy every day, a workable, equable and sustainable balance between the economy and the
environment. Given that prerequisite, all options should be on the table.
Whatever the new
Council does, they must do it with more transparency than formerly. Closed-door
discussions, while sometimes required by law, always promote suspicion and
distrust. I can understand the sensitivity of, for instance, union
negotiations, but Council should also understand the public’s vested, and
intense, interest in these matters. We’re the ones who are eventually paying
the bills. Keep us informed. And there should be no more foolishness like “attorney-client
privilege” covering up a publically funded report.
All of the candidates,
successful or not, deserve our gratitude and respect for undertaking a long,
grueling, disruptive and expensive ordeal. For those whose tallies fell a few
votes short of the mark, take heart; we still need your civic contributions,
your energy and ideas and experience. And the next election is only two short
years away.
Thanks are also due to
Ginny Jaquith, who volunteered to serve out a vacated seat, and did so in her
eminently classy and competent fashion.
My heartiest
congratulations to those candidates who won a seat on the Council, and my commiseration
for the difficulties you are sure to face. Remember you have the support of a
substantial portion of the community; we want you to succeed. Now it’s time to
get to work. There’s a lot to be done.
Submitted by Paul Slavin
14 comments:
Bravo Paul very well said!
"Whatever the new Council does, they must do it with more transparency than formerly. Closed-door discussions, while sometimes required by law, always promote suspicion and distrust. I can understand the sensitivity of, for instance, union negotiations, but Council should also understand the public’s vested, and intense, interest in these matters. We’re the ones who are eventually paying the bills. Keep us informed. And there should be no more foolishness like “attorney-client privilege” covering up a publically funded report."
Without pressure from the public, the newspaper, or the DA's office, look for more of the same from this crew.
"look for more of the same from this crew"
yup
back door deals are alive and well.
voters expect them to do something. they also want their free gifts from Obama. neither will happen. bank on it
saying Ervin is a veteran of the Financing City Services Task Force is not much on an endorsement. What did they accomplish?
council needs to vote 4-1 on the following in the first 6 months, or they are not serious about making a sustainable economy in Pacifica: repeal the poison pill and bring in a developer for the Quarry; bring in a developer for council chambers; review garbage and sewer rates; repeal the free ride for sanchez art center for the fire inspection fee.
the last one is more symbolic. hippies are done.
I liked Paul Slavin's opinion piece because it didn't rely upon rampant speculation and conspiracy theories, unlike Hutch's bizarre LTE.
@435 "bring in a developer", twice?
As if. Skip the ridiculous ultimatums. Nothing on your list will happen. This council will distinguish itself as purely symbolic.
ok anonymous @435, they're not serious.
^ Pete how many times do I have to tell you
agreed. they're not serious. none of that stuff will happen.
get real. the easiest path for this council, and the one they are hardwired for, will be to pass a new tax. they delayed any action because they didn't want it on the ballot during council elections where it could be leveraged by any candidate (and they look out for each others interests first), they've already laid the groundwork by intentionally mucking up the outsourcing of the p.d., hired communication consultants to perfect their salespitch, they'll threaten to cut some sentimental favs, pander to the voters and shazaam! we've passed a tax to get us a few years down the road--kick the can to somebody else. revenue from development is farther away than ever but a tax is as near as placing the resource center on the chopping block.
Great letter. I would call it a mandate though.
Post a Comment