SCV Talk · Archive
Nine years of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
April 13, 2012· scvtalk.com · WordPress (SCVTalk 3.0) · Wayback capture

How to Replace the Mayor?

By Timothy Myers SR. — Tim Myers

So from SIGNAL reporting today we know a few things:

  1. There are 787 votes left to count in the City Council election, which thankfully will be finalized before the April 24th swearing in of Bob Kellar and TimBen Boydston.  Luckily Laurie Ender or people close to her understand statistics (which the befuddled City communications officerGail Ortiz obviously does not since she told folks in council chambers on election night that these things needed to be “sorted out”) and realized that the remaining ballots will most likely result in an additional 100 vote margin for TimBen Boydston (who will ironically come close to matching Ender’s vote count in 2008), thus not prolonging the pain of her historic loss.
  2. Unnamed “officials” are “working on” who will be the “Mayor” when the Council convenes on April 24, with seeming similar befuddlement.

Well we at SCVTalk don’t know the answer to untangle  this unprecedented Gordian’s Knot but we have some opinions, so here goes.

First,  the “Mayor” is not an executive office but solely a parliamentary office.  The only actual duty of the “Mayor” is to chair the City Council meetings.  Therefore, under parliamentary procedure, the election of a “chair” is solely in the purview of the folks participating in the meeting, in this case the City Council.

The Board of Equalization also has a Chair who possesses no executive power but exercises parliamentary power by chairing the meetings of the BOE.  In accordance with the BOE’s procedure, if the Chairman is unavailable to run the meeting, the Vice Chair will assume the role.   If both are unavailable, the remaining members of the Board will select a chair to serve for that meeting only.

So it appears that the City Council has three choices, since they need a chair to run the meeting on April 24:

1.  Let the Mayor Pro Tem (Frank Ferry) chair the meeting for the remainder of the year since the “Mayor” is absent.   This is problematic since the Mayor Pro Tem is not actually the “Vice Mayor.”

2.  Have the council members select someone temporarily to chair the meeting, for each and every meeting for the rest of the year; or

3.  The most obvious solution?  Council members nominate and select a Mayor for the remainder of 2012.  If I were advising the three other council members I would recommend “surprising” Bob Kellar with the title in recognition of his historical top five performance in vote production.  That would deflate the “haters.”

 

 

Comments (30)

  1. ToddApril 13, 2012 at 12:27 pm
    As I understand it, the current city council (Ender) must certify the election first. So until such time, Ender is on the council. What would make sense is that the agenda reads as follows: Resignation of Ender Council deliberates on an appointment to an unexpired term Swear in new mayor certify election results swear in TimBen Continue on with business I agree. Why is this so difficult? (It would be less difficult if, perhaps, we had a Charter that explicitly spelled out that the new term takes effect the first business day in May, and that the Mayor and pro tem are elected at that time…. but I digress.)
  2. David GaunyApril 13, 2012 at 12:34 pm
    I’m sorry, Todd. I’m sure your points are really good but I got so excited when I read “Resignation of Ender” that I couldn’t read anymore! Woot woot! Whatever they decide, I’m just so stinkin’ happy! Yes, it may be time to talk about a charter for the city. It would force a lot more accountability on council members and staff as a result. But there are definitely pros and cons with this, particularly with elected mayor.
  3. Timothy Myers SRApril 13, 2012 at 12:46 pm
    “Haters gonna hate!”
  4. David GaunyApril 13, 2012 at 1:23 pm
    I don’t get it… how’s that hating? I just like my democracy with a little less catty arrogance and a lot more representation. Apparently lots of others felt the same way. Of course, that doesn’t include the 70,000 or so who supported Ender but couldn’t make it to the mailbox or voting booth. I thought for sure they’d show up, especially since she represented them so often! Maybe “representers ain’t representin’?!”
  5. NateApril 13, 2012 at 1:53 pm
    Gauny you thinking about a rematch?
  6. Jennifer KilpatrickApril 13, 2012 at 8:54 pm
    David I wanted to reply to your comment by saying that the voters of Simi Valley generally rue the day they voted to have a separately elected mayor. At the time, Simi Valley’s Mayor, as chosen by the Council, was a highly intelligent engineer and MBA who everyone in town liked. His name was Greg Stratton. So the “ballot measure” to establish an elected Mayor easily passed, and Greg was elected Mayor, serving several terms without any muss or fuss. Ultimately Greg Stratton didn’t run for Mayor again because he was too busy with his day job. While Greg was Mayor, a vacancy occurred on Simi Valley’s City Council, and a man named Bill Davis was appointed to the Council. Mr. Davis’ sole qualification for the Council was that he was next-door-neighbor of Vicky Howard, a very popular Councilwoman. When Greg Stratton ceased to be Mayor, Bill Davis was elected. That led to many years of terrible conflict between residents of Simi Valley and Mayor Davis, because he was not “Mr. Congeniality”. Former Police Chief Paul Miller was then elected Mayor, and there were some “noses out of joint” because some people felt that Mayor Miller was pushing for heavy funding of the Simi Valley Police Department to the detriment of other city departments and services to the public. Later, a dark horse candidate was elected Mayor, “former” Councilman Bob Huber. Mr. Huber had been “off the Council” for a long time, because he was busy with his law practice. Mayor Huber is pleasant enough, but as they say in Simi Valley “He’s no Greg Stratton”. The problem in having a separately elected Mayor is illustrated by the Simi Valley experience. A “great guy” as Council-elected Mayor was used as a tool to get the “elected Mayor” concept approved by the voters. However, greatness didn’t last and Simi Valley went from a great Mayor, to a bad Mayor, to a controversial Mayor to an inconsequential Mayor, each of who was re-elected due to the natural power of incumbency. Santa Clarita is blessed with its “revolving” mayoralty, because when the Mayor has been disliked by the public, for whatever reason, the public has only been stuck with a “bad mayor” for one year. Despite the legal reality that Santa Clarita’s Mayors only serve as presiding officers over Council meetings, in private every Mayor Santa Clarita has had in the past 15 years has used the clout of the “Mayor” title in private dealings, sometimes for good and sometimes for bad. When my spinal cord was crushed in a Metrolink crash, I was laid on a stretcher with a whole field of casualties. My cel phone was ringing, and a fireman/paramedic answered it, and “my friend the Mayor” demanded that the firemen put me in an ambulance forthwith. Moments later, a T.V. cameraman showed up and put a camera in my face, asking “Are you the one Santa Clarita’s Mayor is calling everyone about, trying to get you to the hospital?” My relatives in New York saw my bloodied face on FoxNews even before my kids in SCV knew that I was injured. I think I was put on Ambulance #2 leaving the crash scene. That’s the power of the title “Mayor” in the general public’s mind, and based on the Simi Valley experience it’s simply too risky to let an incumbent hold the title, one election after the next, until the incumbent decides to retire.
  7. David GaunyApril 13, 2012 at 10:02 pm
    Thanks for your post, Jennifer. That is precisely my concern with it. It’s a great idea if you have a good Mayor but once a bad one gets in place, what then? Given the abuses of power we’ve witnessed for so long in Santa Clarita, I would hope that we’d be very cautious about jumping into that scenario. Although we haven’t met, I appreciate your insights and thank you for sharing your story here also. While your writing helps me to visualize the tragedy of that event, I could never fully imagine what that day was like or what you’ve been through since. I appreciate the wisdom and the commentary.
  8. SCV Republican SupporterApril 14, 2012 at 8:08 am
    Jennifer is right. Once your elect the “wrong” person as mayor the power of incumbency makes it very difficult to change it. The rotating system is better at keepting mistakes from happening. In Thousand Oaks Madge Schaeffer was passed over for years to the benefit of the City.
  9. AlpinerApril 15, 2012 at 4:00 pm
    Very good points!
  10. Phil EllisApril 13, 2012 at 12:48 pm
    It is not rocket science. School Boards and other similar boards go through without any difficulty where the board “chair” term coincides with member terms.
  11. Alan FerdmanApril 13, 2012 at 12:50 pm
    Todd After we finish this latest bit of history making, maybe the simplest solution is to set up the rotation so council members who are up for election are never appointed as the Mayor during the election year.
  12. Timothy Myers SRApril 13, 2012 at 1:04 pm
    Here is another thought. Eliminate the titles and replace them with “Chair” and “Vice-Chair.” That way even the uninformed would understand that the post is one among equals and NO ONE would in the future be tempted to use it for political advantage either by awarding it or depriving someone of it.
  13. ToddApril 13, 2012 at 1:30 pm
    We already have the prestigious “mayor” of Los Angeles County. So why do we need mayors of municipalities anyway, right? :lame:
  14. spineflower2April 13, 2012 at 8:35 pm
    So then they can attend the “Chairs Breakfast”?
  15. ToddApril 13, 2012 at 1:29 pm
    Thats never going to work, and we both know it. I have no problem with the Council selecting their mayor as they see fit, but I think that we just need to setup finite term dates for both our council members, and have their appointments and ceremonial titles coincide with those dates.
  16. Phil EllisApril 13, 2012 at 2:18 pm
    Now is the time to align the two dates.
  17. Alan FerdmanApril 13, 2012 at 2:28 pm
    Sure it would work. That is, if there are a majority of council members who want to play fair.
  18. SCV Republican SupporterApril 13, 2012 at 2:51 pm
    No reason for Ender to resign. She was defeated. Tim Ben will be sworn in once the votes are certified by the Council. I would think Frank as Mayor Pro Tem would initially preside, but the first agenda item after the swearing in should be selection of Mayor and if necessary Mayor Pro Tem. For those TmBen supporters, also expect April 24 some strong support for Ender as she leaves the City Council.
  19. ToddApril 13, 2012 at 2:56 pm
    Resign as mayor, I should clarify.
  20. AnnetteApril 13, 2012 at 4:42 pm
    I am sure Laurie’s supporters will be there to support her, they should be. Maybe at that time I will be able to publicly comment that I did think she was gracious in her concession without being blocked, like she did on her Facebook page.
  21. ToddApril 13, 2012 at 5:40 pm
    I understand that she is rather well liked by not necessarily the management of the city staff, but of the rank and file, they really like her. One staffer told me “she’s the only one on the council that treats any of us with any respect.” Staff fears TimBen, as he previously did some “not so nice” things. I know his reputation was that he’d grill in council, but again, I’m talking about rank and file… not the usual suspects.
  22. NateApril 14, 2012 at 2:20 am
    Quit being butt hurt over being blocked… you were/are a hater.
  23. MikeApril 14, 2012 at 5:42 am
    Now that you’ve won, the tinfoil hat is no longer necessary. She didn’t block you. The page no longer exists.
  24. Timothy C Myers SRApril 14, 2012 at 8:39 am
    I would actually guess it would be fairly low key. I don’t have the final numbers yet but some partials indicate that turnout in Laurie’s home “district” decreased by about 50% from 2008. This was enough to do her in.
  25. Coastal SageApril 16, 2012 at 9:09 am
    Government Code 36801 controls because Santa Clarita is a “general law” city. It really doesn’t matter what the SC City Council has traditionally done. SCV Republican Supporter’s logistical summary is the one which matches 36801. However, the identity of the “New Mayor” and the “New Mayor Pro Tem” will probably be a done deal before anyone walks into the Council Chamber, due to daisy chaining perhaps facilitated by those whom the Brown Act permits to do so.
  26. ToddApril 13, 2012 at 2:55 pm
    No, acutally it wouldn’t. What happens if a sitting councilmember is recalled, dies, or is otherwise unable to complete their term. Who rotates in then? How do you determine how the rotation starts and who goes first? Besides, I think its pretty evident after this week that the incumbent advantage of having “mayor” on your name isn’t what it used to be. Fact is, in a four year term, with five sitting members, elected in 2 seats one year, three seats two years later, it is impossible to equitably rotate the seat, while ensuring that nobody overlaps the chair while in their election year. We just need to align the start of the terms. Why is that so disagreeable???
  27. Coastal SageApril 16, 2012 at 9:13 am
    You’re right. Past practices of the SC City Council have probably not matched Government Code Section 36801 which requires a new election of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem after each election on the two year cycle. Theoretically if both the Mayor and the Mayor Pro Tem were not on the recent ballot, and they insisted on keeping their titles after mid-February, without a new vote, they would be violating state law.
  28. BrianBApril 13, 2012 at 8:55 pm
    I hope it’s Kellar. David Gauny are you going to run again?
  29. NateApril 14, 2012 at 2:17 am
    We all know you hope it is Juking Jon…
  30. RNDDUDEApril 16, 2012 at 6:57 am
    They should change the title from ‘mayor’ to ‘Grand Poobah’….

Preserved as part of the SCV Talk Archive. Text is presented as originally published; presentation has been standardised for readability. The original capture is available at the Internet Archive.

Support