The big battle Tuesday night in the opening session of the new council was over the appointments to the various bodies. Don Saylor announced these appointments during the meeting and the council discussed them and made some alterations. In yesterday’s publication, we had the original list of appointments but not the final list.
She wrote, “Commissions: Senior and Social Services (The council is always trying to combine them into one given the budget crunch), the Bicycle Commission (which is scheduled to be rolled into Mobility, with Krovoso as liaison), and Historical Resources, which I am conflicted out of (which Don knew).”
“Inter-jurisdictional: Yolo Transportation Board, the Downtown Business Association, the Yolo Visitor Attraction Bureau, and Unitrans (which meets once a year, so I not counting it). The last two have done little in the way of policy in recent memory,” she continued.
She said that she received no subcommittee assignments, “Zero,” she said.
“There were 56 regular positions assigned, and Saylor had appointed me to 5 regular positions, assuming social services and senior remain remain separate. This includes one or two commission laison commissions, depending on whether Senior and Social services are conflated, and 3 interjuridsictional entities which meet more than once a year, for a total of 5 out of 57 positions, assuming senior and social services remain separate,” she wrote.
“None of my initial appointments dealt with the major growth, land use, fiscal, water or council policy issues. Yolo Transportation was the only major policy-making position,” she continued.
In the end, there were some changes made with Sue Greenwald being given a few additional appointments.
Here is the initial list:
Here is the revised list:
My final sense on all of this is that the final product produced more parity than the original. From talking to some of the other members off the record, I would say that they were put into an awkward position by the initial process. There were things that each of them wanted to be appointed and that they received.
It was the first council meeting for both Councilmember Rochelle Swanson and Mayor Pro Tem Joe Krovoza and so for them there was not the history that the others had in this process. It seems to have made it difficult for them to rectify the situation after the fact and no one wanted to vote a colleague off a committee that they were willing to do and were nominated for.
The bottom line here is I think we should not read too much into the initial response from the council to these appointments. Hopefully communication and process will improve as everyone settles into their new roles.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
I can’t wait for Saylor to leave.
Sue is getting up into old age , I think Don made the right decision keeping her work load small .
Sue , why do you vent on this blog , instead of working out your concerns with your fellow council members ?
The initial appointment numbers speak for themselves: 4 or 5 out of 55 regular appointments, none dealng with the major growth, land use, fiscal, water or council policy issues. Yolo Transportation was the only major policy-making position.
I was included in none – not one — of the 14 council subcommittees which bring policy fully formed to our now truncated meetings for a mostly up or down vote. (I forgot to remove Unitrans from the total number of appointments in my first calculation).
As I pointed out earlier, this would have tended to cut me off from my council colleagues in terms of collaboration and discussion because of the Brown Act.
Hopefully, as our new group dynamic matures, there will be a majority of at least three who will take personal responsibility to take the action needed to assure that each councilmember is treated equally. This can involve making motions to change procedure that the chair has outlined, and motions to override the chairs rulings.
Correction:
Make that: I was included in none – not one — of the 14 council subcommittee appointments to the subcommittees which bring policy fully formed to our now truncated meetings for a mostly up or down vote.
There is a surprising consensus here that Sue was screwed and Saylor is responsible.
Then people say Sue is unreasonable.
I really hope this ends. Its poisoning our council.
You missed the tell in the graphic. I don’t know what the A or R stand for but what is easy to see is that Don appointed Sue to nothing that he is on. I think that speaks volumes about what Don thinks of Sue.
Sorry explained it yesterday, R is regular member, A is alternate. Interesting point I didn’t pick up on.
Sue, Don is now the man in charge , if you can’t stand the heat of the kitchen , then it’s time to move on !
What is to prevent council members from attending any commission meeting, like any other member of the public.
I guess I miss the point about whining about this on a blog. Apparently it merits some whining, but not enough to *really* cry wolf and take action. My point is: save it for the big battles. Attend the meetings you want, gather information along the way, plot your grand designs fruitfully and strike strategically. Or just keep whining about having to be a regular member of the public (and not always in a position of power) if that is working out.