This election has been dull and uninspiring, feeling more like a maintenance election than anything else. I credit that to the fact that the local economy is struggling to rebound from the Great Recession meaning that there is somewhat of a detente between the no-growth and pro-growth forces that define politics in this valley.
But this is an even-numbered year and thus, we must hold an April election. Which means it is time for the 15% of us who actually vote to pass judgment on the City Council’s management and operation of the City of Santa Clarita over the last two years.
On the plus side of the column, there are reasons to be pleased with the City. Biggest among them, I think, is the city’s fiscal health after nearly four straight years of an anemic and contracting local economy. Think about it: our town has double-digit vacancy rates in many offices, industrial and retail properties, and scores if not hundreds of foreclosures, short-sales and other ‘distressed’ residential properties on the market. The Creekside dealers are a shadow of what they were five or six years ago, and despite some recovery in the last year, there are still several empty showrooms. People aren’t moving to the SCV like they once were; in fact we’re starting to see signs that school districts may have overestimated growth.
And yet through all this mess, the City of Santa Clarita has remained in the black. Staff at the City anticipated this years ago, ordered department heads to cut budgets and implemented a hiring freeze. Other cities limping from one financial disaster to the next, but here in the SCV? We’re building new libraries, new bike paths, and more. That’s not a small achievement. At the same time, it’s not an achievement I’m willing to credit entirely to Laurie Ender and Bob Kellar.
On the other hand, no one can deny that in the last two years, the City Council has become less receptive to the public’s voice and even antagonistic when big, controversial items appear on its agenda. The ink was barely dry on the exciting 2010 election when the Council voted to, in effect, make committee appointments permanent rather than term-limited. They followed up that unpopular move with something even more controversial: increasing to $1,000 the amount individuals could donate to City Council candidate campaigns, a move that blatantly favors incumbents and their powerful patrons.
Finally, of course, the library take over. Conceived of in early 2010, announced in June and passed by late August, the City’s library takeover against overwhelming opposition has to be one of the most controversial decisions in the City’s 25 year history. The City may have made the correct decision to seize the libraries and outsource their operation to a private, for-profit corporation, but they bulldozed through public opposition and ignored local protests and calls to slow down on their way to that decision.
They took an ends justifies the means approach, and in democracy, the means are as important as the ends.
So, on balance, while I appreciate the remarkable way the City has weathered the recession, I believe the City Council and senior staff deserve a rebuke for the way in which they handled these high-impact, controversial items over the last two years.
And the best guy to deliver that rebuke is TimBen Boydston, alone. Loathed by some, loved by others, I believe Boydston will, if nothing else, at least bring some rigor, transparency & legitimacy to the management and decision-making process of the City. He’ll be the same guy he was in 2006 & 2007, when he became notorious for pestering staff with questions and digging deep into budgets and documents and meeting minutes. This is a man who will spend many hours each week working on behalf of us; TimBen will not be a part-time pushover as some on the City Council are.
A City Councilmember Boydston might even lend more legitimacy to the City Council when it makes big, important and controversial decisions. After all, if a new controversial ordinance passed muster with the nerdish, devils-in-the-details Boydston, for instance, what could City critics say in response?
And if Boydston throws a grenade in the middle of a vote on a what was an easy consent calendar item, so much the better. We the people benefit when there’s a bit of friction in our elected bodies to match the friction in our body politic. A City council isn’t supposed to be a smooth, friction-less rubber stamp for whatever the staff wishes; it’s supposed to be a place where the community hashes out disagreements, solves problems, and compromises.
I think TimBen is that guy and what’s more, I recommend you bullet vote for him. As we cover every time there’s an election, bullet voting is the best choice you can make if you want to help a challenger defeat an incumbent in an at-large race. Voting for Bob Kellar & Boydston only ensures that Bob Kellar finishes second and TimBen finishes third. So tomorrow, bullet vote Boydston and let’s bring back some rigor and accountability to City Hall.
Comments (19)