Campaign Issue: Process, Process, Process

The upcoming Davis City Council race is shaping up to be an interesting one. Lamar Heystek has elected not to run again, as has current Mayor Ruth Asmundson. Don Saylor may give up his seat and position as Mayor Pro-Tem on the City Council if he becomes a County Supervisor. Even Sue Greenwald was toying with the idea of running against Don Saylor for County Supervisor. It is almost as if the incumbents are deserting a sinking ship!

There has been much talk about the crushing workload of City Council members, for virtually no pay; and the partisan bickering with colleagues that makes sitting on the City Council particularly unpleasant. Essentially it has been posited that being on the City Council is a thankless job, with little in the way of rewards. That is unless a Council member has higher political aspirations, and is using his/her seat on the City Council as a launching pad to bigger and better things.

Here are some thoughts I will impart to any candidates, should they be fortunate enough to win a City Council seat. First and foremost, something needs to be done about process, or a lack thereof. We have about twenty different commissions, which are pretty diligent about their particular cause. Most commissioners are absolutely frustrated at being virtually left out of the political process. I have heard of commissioners quitting because they felt their opinions have not even been considered by the City Council.

Three cases in point are illustrative here:

At one time, the Senior Citizens Commission was slated for elimination altogether by the Subcommittee on Commissions. The matter was put on the Consent Calendar, in an attempt to fly the issue under the radar screen. When that didn’t work, the Subcommittee on Commissions attempted to poison the well in various ways: trying to convince seniors they would be better served by “merging” with the Social Services Commission; browbeating Senior Citizens Commissioners into acquiescing in the elimination of their own commission; refusing to elect new members to the Senior Citizens Commission to artificially create quorum problems; and the list goes on. Dirty politics at its worst.

Seniors fought back hard to save their commission, garnering 138 signatures on a petition in one weekend. Ironically, many who signed the petition were friends of the two City Council members of the Subcommittee on Commissions. Over time, the Senior Citizens Commission has become a much more powerful force to be reckoned with, having learned how to better work around an entrenched City Staff/City Council majority. In short, seniors found their voice. In consequence, the Senior Citizens Commission has achieved a great deal in the last three years since the City Council voted 5 to 0 in favor of retaining the Commission:

• Established off site meetings at senior complexes;
• Transportation Safety Expo was held at the Davis Senior Center;
• Commissioners participated in filming of two CHP videos on older driver safety;
• Collaborative Transportation Provider Forum was held.
• Public Transit Mobility Training was provided to seniors;
• Senior seminar was held, discussing when to give up the keys to the car;
• AAA Roadwise Review/CarFit programs were integrated into Davis Senior Center programming;
• Commissioners developed Senior Housing Guidelines for City Council consideration;
• Commissioners collaborated with City Staff on development of Senior Housing Strategy;
• Commissioners closely monitored increase in sewer rates;
• Commissioners provided advice to Atria Covell Gardens on protesting steep rent increases;
• Commission facilitated approval of Carlton Plaza Davis assisted living facility.

City Staff developed a preliminary Senior Housing Strategy, after the Covell Village developers clamored for a discussion on senior housing. City Staff then made a presentation to the Davis Senior Citizens Commission, asking for public and commissioner input. The developers and the group CA Healthy Aging (CHA) gave their views during public comment, and then commissioners weighed in. Ultimately City Staff was more persuaded by the knowledgeable suggestions of commissioners, and incorporated most of their ideas into the Senior Housing Strategy. Such ideas included retrofitting existing homes, encouraging smaller infill projects, requiring a developer to show an existing need for the proposed housing. CHA complained it was ignored by the Senior Citizens Commission, rather than admit its views were not persuasive.

Unfortunately, there has been intense push-back by the Covell Village developers and their supporters behind the scenes. In consequence, the Senior Housing Strategy has been tabled. One City Staffer suggested the process has become overly politicized, which indicates to me there is a wait and see attitude in terms of who will make up the newly seated City Council. I’m sure the Covell Village developers are hoping for a more sympathetic ear. However, there is also Measure J to consider. It is not likely any large peripheral development would pass a Measure J vote by the Davis citizenry at the moment. So why waste City Staff time on something that is not likely to be approved?

But the fly in the ointment is the possibility the Covell Village developers will purchase the Cannery property. There has always been a thought floating around by City Manager Bill Emlen that the two properties should be planned as one. But the Covell Village property is subject to a Measure J vote, whereas the Cannery is not. If the Covell Village developers were to purchase the Cannery property, and the city determined both parcels should be planned as a unit, would that somehow circumvent a Measure J vote for the Covell Village property? In other words, is the purchase of the Cannery property a way of circumventing the Measure J process? I sincerely hope not.

The approval of the Carlton Plaza Davis assisted living facility is a brilliant example of how process is supposed to work in Davis. Once the Senior Citizens Commission and Carlton developers were able to get the project out of City Staff’s “bureaucratic vortex”, City Staff came out with an initial recommendation against approval. This was understandable, since both the Davis Police Dept. and Davis Waste Removal were in opposition. The problem was, once each of these agencies had to explain their objections in the light of day, before the Davis Senior Citizens Commission and the Planning Commission, those protestations did not stand up under scrutiny. In consequence, City Staff reversed its opinion, and recommended approval. The City Council voted 5 to 0 in favor.

So in light of the above examples as context, I would like to see some drastic changes in how the City Council does its business. Call them the new Roberts Musser’ Rules of Order!

1. City staff reports can be shortened without compromising the accuracy or completeness of content. Too often these reports contain unnecessary verbiage, which can be used to camouflage the facts. Excess verbiage also means a diligent City Council member must wade through hundreds of pages of documents each week.
2. The Subcommittee on Commissions should be abolished – as a political tool to quell dissent created by the City Council majority.
3. The City Council itself should give specific direction to City Staff – on how matters will eventually come before the City Council through appropriate Commission review. We have commissions for a reason, and they need to be given a chance to weigh in on issues appropriate to their particular mission. At commission meetings, there is also ample opportunity for public comment. It is high time for the City Council to cease ignoring commissions instead of just using them as a rubber stamp. It is insulting to disregard commissions, wastes the time of commissioners with a good deal of useful expertise, and probably results in less than optimum City Council decision-making.
4. The City Council needs to stop wasting time weighing in on matters not within its purview, such as what is going on in the Middle East. Just taking care of local matters represents a full plate for the City Council to deal with, exclusive of unnecessarily taking on additional matters of national or international concern.
5. Each City Council member needs to be limited to no more than five minutes of pontificating at any one time. If the public has to do it in three minutes, I see no reason why a City Council member cannot do it in five. If one round of questions is insufficient, then allow for as many rounds as is necessary to get the job done. But a five minute limit keeps things from dragging on endlessly, forces Council members to come prepared with collected thoughts, and should cut down on any opportunity to cut off viewpoints the Mayor doesn’t agree with.
6. Civil and professional discourse should be the norm at all times by every City Council member. This includes a respectful demeanor towards each Councilmember and towards the public. Side looks, rolling of the eyes, smirks, criticism that is not constructive (such as criticism for merely expressing an opposing view than that of the CC majority) have no place in a democratic forum.
7. City Council meetings should occur weekly with reasonable length agendas. No City Council meeting should go past 11 p.m. People are tired, cranky, and don’t think very well after 11 p.m.
8. There is no good reason why City Council discussion cannot be had prior to motions being made. It would result in better thought out motions, and take some of the gamesmanship out of the political process.
9. Public comment should not be limited to any less than three minutes per person; if an issue not on the agenda should arise in which many speakers want to voice an opinion on a particular subject (for example unrest in the Middle East), and lengthy public comment would interfere with conducting city business, then slate a separate public forum for just that topic. In general, public comment is not the reason why City Council meetings run too long.

Lesson to be learned: Democratic process is important. Without it, there is only tyranny.

Elaine Roberts Musser is an attorney who concentrates her efforts on elder law and aging issues, especially in regard to consumer affairs. If you have a comment or particular question or topic you would like to see addressed in this column, please make your observations at the end of this article in the comment section.