What "we" thought about last night...

There really was no protest last night.  Someone did work the phones to get the media there so they thought there was a story here.  I am sure that transgender peppered every other sentence in their delivery.  I had a talk with one of the protesters who thought that Ms. Stanton should have had a review and been written up if there were things that the Commission didn't like.  I pointed out that would have been to fire her "for cause" and that the Commission's action was just to change course - and according to her contract, she could be let go for no reason.  This protester thought it was good how Ms. Stanton kept the developers at bay to which I responded there were no developers during her tenure.  Then we got in to the beach and this protester thought that the beach was the greatest thing.  I pointed out the Greater Bay lawsuit that the city has spent, at least, $600,000 in an attempt to defend its position and still could be required to pay millions in the form of a judgement.  I also pointed out the the City Manager did her best to hide the real cost of the beach project.  She thought that this was all spawned from Maxwell's aversion to the City Manager and that somehow this represented a bigoted act.  At this point in the conversation, I said that I was gay and am offended by the insinuation that this was somehow about the former City Manager's gender.  It had nothing to do with it.

The "protesters" didn't make it to the actual meeting, that I could see.  Once the meeting got started, we were treated to the grim history of the Park of Commerce.  We were told about all the potential there (see my blog from the meeting) and how the whole notion has been plagued by fits and starts over the past 15 or so years.  The CDM group, who prepared the latest study on infrastructure needs for the Park of Commerce, was there for free last night.  The study was paid for by an Economic Development Administration matching grant of $250,000, with $250,000 from the City.  This grant was issued with great fanfare two years ago but our most recent and former City Manager did all that she could to not put up the matching money, until she finally caved.  It appeared that it wasn't exactly the current City Commission's priority and that she had other things that could be done with $250,000.  She eventually saw the light, but the city was in jeopardy of losing the grant.  Now the study "sits on the shelf" and the property owners in the Park of Commerce are getting tired of empty promises from the city.  It is clear that whatever happens next has to mean something tangible or the whole notion could be abandoned.

What I found striking about the budget discussion is this point was danced around, but missed.  That is the former City Manager and the previous City Commission had made their mind up that they would have an assessment for fire pension BEFORE any examination of the budget realities.  That is what Commissioner Maxwell was getting at.  And it points to the weakness of the former City Manager's it-is-my-way-or-else attitude.  That, in the end, was the source of her demise - nothing else.

I will have a video later of some of the feistier discussion during the budget cut portion of the agenda.  It became clear that the former City Manager had not integrated information requested by the new members of the City Commission in these budget cut recommendations and I am sure that contributed to the last week's outcome as well.  The Mayor made a point about looking at Commission and senior staff salaries to see what money would be generated by a 10% cut in each area.  McVoy ridiculed the notion saying that a 10% cut in Commission salaries would amount to $7,000 and that we had $1.4 million to go.  Commissioner McVoy -  have you heard of the concept of a symbolic gesture?  You are asking the public to make a sacrifice so you, in turn, make a sacrifice.  While not materially important, it is symbolically important.  And many times when the Mayor would mention items that she had asked the City Manager to prepare - for informational purposes - both McVoy and Mulvehill made it seem like her mind was made up to go through with those suggestions when she maintained she needed to see that information BEFORE she made any decision.

One of the most telling parts of the meeting last night was when Mr. Bressner with the ICMA mentioned that being fired on a 3-2 vote, something that he experienced, is a difficult thing.  But he said that it is also difficult for the community and for staff.  He implored this Commission that "it was time to come together."  I didn't see much evidence of that last night.  I thought that lip service might be paid to the notion, but I didn't hear that either.