In perhaps a preview of things to come, Mayor Pro Tem Joe Krovoza led a civil and respectful discussion about how the Council will go about seeking to replace Mayor Don Saylor who on January 3, 2011 will take his seat on the Yolo County Board of Supervisors.
On Tuesday night, the method of replacement was chosen, but not the process itself. The Council agreed to come back on January 4, 2011, the day after Mr. Saylor becomes Supervisor Don Saylor, and discuss both the replacement of the Mayor and the process by which Mr. Saylor’s vacant seat would be filled.
Debate in the community had raged last spring and summer as some attempted to pressure Don Saylor to announce his retirement early.
But Don Saylor held fast, despite being criticized in both the Enterprise and Sacramento Bee. He said he planned to serve for mayor for six months, and to focus on issues such as the budget, water and improving communications among council members.
The Davis Enterprise had recommended a somewhat odd plan, where he announced his resignation, the council would call for a special election in November and then re-appoint him to finish up until the November Election.
None of that controversy remained on Tuesday night, as the Council looked at their options very clearly.
The problem with elections is twofold. First, the cost is somewhere between $65,000 and $220,000 to hold an election, during a time when the city is having to cut back on staff.
Perhaps as big a problem was the fact that the seat would have had to lie vacant from January 3 until an election result could be certified. Interim City Manager Paul Navazio and City Attorney Harriet Steiner thought that June 7 was the earliest such an election could reasonably be held.
The school district is looking towards a May timeline for their parcel tax election. The city had apparently discussed a partnership with the school district, but it did not seem like a great option.
Interim City Manager Paul Navazio was skeptical that there would be enough time for the city to get a measure on the ballot, and believed it was far from clear that the school district could get an all-mail ballot for a parcel tax election anyway.
While a revised city ordinance would not have precluded it, neither Councilmember Sue Greenwald nor Rochelle Swanson were inclined to support any sort of interim appointment to bridge the time between a vacancy and the election.
That pretty much settled the issue of whether the council would utilize an appointment process, and the question now is how that process will look.
Councilmember Stephen Souza suggested the idea of an appointment process that is like an election in everything but name. That would somehow rely on a public process, whereby the public participates in the selection.
Councilmember Sue Greenwald thought that was not the best approach and suggested that it might be good to find someone who might not traditionally be a candidate, in order to reflect a different set of values.
Council did not make any final decisions, though they are weighing some sort of lengthy application akin to applying for a commission.
There apparently are some legal requirements that will make this process interesting.
According to Harriet Steiner, the City Attorney, the Council cannot meet in closed section to deliberate on this matter. Instead it has to take place in open session. Individual councilmembers can meet with the individuals who seek a spot on the council, but they are bound by normal Brown Act requirements, which provide for meetings to be available to the public and for limits to meetings outside of council meetings.
That may be the most interesting public spectacle that we have seen.
While I understand Mr. Souza’s intentions, I think, as a practical matter, that this has to be a very formal and solemn process. It might be better if there were only discussion in public, rather than an actual process of public speaking and advocacy.
Can you imagine what the public comment period would look like with each person coming up to speak on behalf of his/her own favored candidate? This would not resemble democracy which occurs in secret, behind a curtain, uninfluenced by the spectre of public pressure. This would be closer to a spectacle of mob rule.
The council needs to think long and hard about a process that will preclude such a sideshow.
There is a further caveat, and that is the question as to whether the public could, by petition, force the matter to a vote anyway.
It appears, from Ms. Steiner’s view, that Council would actively have to “Amend the Municipal Code to authorize appointment of a replacement but to require a special election if enough petitions are signed requesting an election. The City would need to set this numerical threshold, as well.”
But one wonders if that is actually true.
Commentary
The previous council had two individuals of color. One was Ruth Asmundson who is Filipino, and Lamar Heystek who is part Asian. There is a sizable portion of the population of Davis that is non-white, but right now we have only white councilmembers. We need greater diversity on the council, not just in terms of age, but in terms of life experience and background.
I am pleased to see two new members who are currently working with their own careers, and I think that is healthy for the city. But I think we can find more diversity in terms of age, background, ethnicity, experience, etc.
Again, I have no one specifically in mind. As they say, I will not seek and if offered I will not accept…
—David M. Greenwald reporting
The interesting question to me is how does the council get down to a short list of candidates they can scrutinize carefully?
In an election candidates put themselves forward, often with a push from others.
In a job selection process candidates can apply but it is also typical to seek out qualified people, typically through a head-hunter (as Davis will be doing in the case of the new City manager).
But its unclear to me, and probably to the Council itself, how the process will winnow out weaker candidates and focus on a few good ones. I have my own secret preference (known to only a few people including this person) but I think the probability that he/she would be selected is very small.
Lets face it, this is a job and we are hiring someone (at crappy pay) to do it.
I’ve participated in a number of hiring processes. The good ones all have several things in common– a good pool of candidates, well established criteria, a charismatic but fair and open leader, and a well established process to winnow out the good from the less good. I hope that is what happens here but its going to be hard and I don’t envy our Council having to do all of this in a fishbowl
One final comment: Diversity and youth are desirable but at this point I’d go for experience/expertise in budget matters as well as ability to work with others on the Council.
It’s always dangerous and a little foolhardy to quibble with the words used by a professional writer. Nevertheless, the phrase, “mob rule” does not seem to apply in the context shown. Mob rule, for all its onerous imaging, does have a unity of purpose. That’s why it is a mob and why it is so dangerous a grouping.
I would offer, “chaos,” as a more accurate depiction of possible future events in our fair city. The other words, “public spectacle,” and “sideshow.” fit perfectly.
[i]”Perhaps as big a problem was the fact that the seat would have had to lie vacant from January 3 until an election result could be certified. Interim City Manager Paul Navazio and City Attorney Harriet Steiner thought that June 7 was the earliest such an election could reasonably be held.”[/i]
This is false.
State law would have allowed the City Council of Davis (by ordinance) to appoint an interim member of the council, who would have held office for the period (about 4 months) until a replacement was elected. I realize it would be strange to be an interim member, but I thought someone who had previously served on the council and thus was already up to speed would have fit that role.
Rich:
Although technically I am sure you are correct, its seems foolish to me to have an interim seat followed by an election for a second interim council member. From a practical standpoint I think an appointment makes sense.
DAVE: [i]”As I stated last week … I would like the council to actively seek people of color to run.”[/i]
Last week, you literally wrote, “I would be interested in seeing a person of color considered for the role. We now have an all-white council.”
You have not said the person who takes Saylor’s seat should or must be of a darker hue. However, your statements presume that color is an important qualification for this job and that and, but for your heroic role as a martyr–“I have never shied away from controversial statement”–the members of the current council would shy away from anyone who uses an SPF lower than 45.
In my opinion, the notion that color (or gender, for that matter) should be any type of qualifier or non-qualifier is ridiculous. Ruth Asmundson, who was our last full-term mayor, did not win election to the council, finishing first as it happens, because of her racial or ethnic heritage or for being a female. She won for the same reasons Saylor finished first in his last election and Krovoza in his–because the people of Davis liked her best for her qualifications as a human being.
I think your viewpoint effectively harms those non-whites who might seek this position. If one is chosen, it might be seen as a nod to the idea that a person’s race or gender or perhaps ethnicity matters when it comes to deciding whether a 6-foot or a 7-foot fence is appropriate at Willowbank 10; or whether we should eliminate 4 FTEs from the Police Department instead of reducing the health benefit package; or whether the City should adopt labor contract reforms or just seek municipal bankruptcy protection. In none of those most important decisions the council makes does race or gender or heritage play any part.
You might counter, but what about if there are conflicts between the police department and non-whites? Wouldn’t a person with coloring have more insight? No. Those are questions of fairness and judgment and the ability to listen to the specifics of each case and decide who, if anyone, was in the wrong and what policies need to be pursued.
A person’s race does not give him the qualities of fairness or judgment. I don’t think, as you have implied, there is any reason to think that Ruth or say Jerry Kaneko would have more insight on such questions than you would or I would. When anti-Semitic incidents happen in Davis, I don’t claim that I should have any more say than anyone else in our community should when it comes to public actions, because my heritage happens to be Jewish.
I have faith that the people of Davis are overwhelmingly fair and our elected representatives, whatever SPF they require, will reflect that. Your calls for “a person of color” presume you have no faith that “people without color” can be fair, decent or impartial judges.
DOC: [i]” From a practical standpoint I think an appointment makes sense.”[/i]
I don’t necessarily disagree. I was simply pointing out that what Dave wrote, that the seat would be empty until June, is false.
I think Cecelia Escamilla Greenwald would be perfect!
Rich Rifkin: ” In none of those most important decisions the council makes does race or gender or heritage play any part.”
Dr. Wu: “One final comment: Diversity and youth are desirable but at this point I’d go for experience/expertise in budget matters as well as ability to work with others on the Council.”
I’m with both of you. Experience/expertise on fiscal issues is what is truly needed at the moment, above all else.
As to process, why doesn’t the City Council publicly ask for applications from those who would like to serve to fill Don Saylor’s vacant seat; winnow down the list to the most qualified 5 using some sort of point system; then select from that list of 5? Seems simple enough to me…
dmg: “But Don Saylor held fast, despite being criticized in both the Enterprise and Sacramento Bee. He said he planned to serve for mayor for six months, and to focus on issues such as the budget, water and improving communications among council members.”
To the extent Don Saylor only had a short time to push through his agenda, he gave short shrift to budgetary matters, conceded water issues to the JPA, and shut down comments from the public and Council members on important topics by rushing through just about every issue for the sake of making City Council meetings end early. I think he discovered being mayor is harder than it looks, and takes a good deal of time and effort to hone administrative skills – far more than the 6 brief months he was to serve. My hope is he learned something from this brief stumbling experience, will take it to heart, and be more careful when he takes his seat as County Supervisor. But I have absolute faith he will not be able to run rough shod over the current sitting County Supervisors…
I suspect Jo and Ro on the Davis City Council are recognizing their responsibilities as they fumble their way through their first months in office. It takes time to learn the ropes, and citizens will forgive initial mistakes, so long as time goes on, it becomes clear that the best interests of the city and not special interests are the focus of any/all decisions. I favor Joe Krovoza as the logical choice for Mayor. I would also urge all City Council members to listen carefully to Council member Sue Greenwald’s advice on fiscal issues, as her experience and expertise in this area have been invaluable in the past, and right on target…
[i]why doesn’t the City Council publicly ask for applications from those who would like to serve to fill Don Saylor’s vacant seat; winnow down the list to the most qualified 5 using some sort of point system; then select from that list of 5? [/i]
That’s pretty much what they are going to do. They are currently “requesting those who would want the position to apply now.”
Stephen Souza suggested he favors using an Australian ballot ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting#Australia[/url]), where a consensus can be achieved by eliminating in rounds those who are not preferred by a majority until a consensus candidate is found*. I think that’s a pretty good idea. I hope there are at least 5 people in Davis who are willing to put themselves up for this job. And I hope the person selected already understands how serious our budget problems are going to be in the next 5-10 years. (Unfortunately, Ro and Jo don’t appear to understand that themselves. Sue obviously does. I think Stephen does, too, but thus far he has not been willing to do anything about it.)
*When you have four people doing the voting, I don’t know how that system breaks the 2-2 tie, once you get down to a final two.
[quote]why doesn’t the City Council publicly ask for applications from those who would like to serve to fill Don Saylor’s vacant seat[/quote]
I think Rich is right. The downside of this approach (and what I was getting at in my post above) is that some very good people may not step forward.
I guess its up to all of us to make sure that does not happen.
Dr. Wu: “The downside of this approach (and what I was getting at in my post above) is that some very good people may not step forward.”
You cannot force people to step forward if they do not wish to. I assume if you or anyone else knows of someone they think would be a good candidate, you/they will urge the person to step forward. But you just cannot make someone throw their hat in the ring if they don’t want the job. And frankly, having seen what Lamar Heystek had to go through in his four year tenure in office, I can’t blame anyone for not wanting the job! It is virtually for no pay, requires hours of work if done diligently, city staff can be difficult to deal with at times, the politics can be downright vicious from both the public and other Council members, and can literally be a detriment to one’s health. Not to put too fine a point on it, the pay, the hours of work, the unpleasant atmosphere make it a thankless job…
My hope is that with Jo and Ro on the Council and a new City Manager, things will improve somewhat (I’m ever the optimist), but only time will tell…
It will be interesting to see HOW many step up. May be less than we think. Any bets?
[quote]Councilmember Sue Greenwald thought that was not the best approach and suggested that it might be good to find someone who might not traditionally be a candidate, in order to reflect a different set of values.[/quote]What I said was that we might be able to appoint a person with strength in substantive areas who might not be the kind of person who would want to endure a campaign. I would expect their values to be in line with the values of the community.
Sue Greenwald – could you elaborate on the “strength in substantive areas” that you’re looking for? If one doesn’t want to endure a campaign, what would you and the other council members be looking for in that person?
Rifkin wrote:
“She won for the same reasons Saylor finished first in his last election and Krovoza in his–because the people of Davis liked her best for her qualifications as a human being”
Rifkin- how do you know this? I know someone that voted for her because of her gender.
J. Berg: I was thinking of expertise in economics or planning, for example.
“State law would have allowed the City Council of Davis (by ordinance) to appoint an interim member of the council, who would have held office for the period (about 4 months) until a replacement was elected. I realize it would be strange to be an interim member, but I thought someone who had previously served on the council and thus was already up to speed would have fit that role.”
Rich: two members of council dismissed that possibility.
DAVE: [i]”the fact (is) that the seat would have had to lie vacant from January 3 until an election result could be certified.”[/i]
RICH: [i]”State law would have allowed the City Council of Davis (by ordinance) to appoint an interim member of the council.”[/i]
DAVE: [i]”two members of council dismissed that possibility.”[/i]
So what? You argued against an election saying that would create a vacancy, but the truth is it would not have to. Your assertion that “the seat would have had to lie vacant” if we had a June election was wrong.
Obviously, it’s a moot point, because the council has decided to appoint a member and not have an election. But an election does not ipso facto imposed a vacancy on the council as you falsely said it would.