Campaign Promises

Unfortunately, we have all become accustomed to our politicians promising to do one thing to get elected and once elected doing another. I am sure that is one reason why polls consistently put politicians near the bottom of the ‘trust’ scale.

Now before everyone jumps up and down I need to acknowledge a couple of things. One is that things do change, economies falter, circumstances were not as they were when a promise was made, so a change is needed. Or perhaps the politician was not aware of all the facts during an election but once informed they need to modify their stance. This is where honesty is needed to explain the reason behind a change.

All of that said, a principled promise is a completely different thing. One stands for election declaring an increase in transparency but then conducts the real business behind closed doors. Or they vow to fix the budget yet undermine half of the budget equation. These are the issues that people have a hard time with but time and time again it seems our elected officials seem to get away with.

In Marina we have a case in point. Mayor Delgado promised the people of Marina more transparency across the board but specifically as it has to do with Measures M and N during our last election. He specifically endorsed the establishment of a citizen’s oversight committee to help the City track the funds generated by the tax measures and make sure they help to maintain the level of core services promised with the Measures. He has now voted against the idea and stated that such a committee is not needed. So his vote along with that of Councilmen O’Connell and Brown, have killed the oversight committee that was promised to the voters of Marina.

When Marina voters passed the Measures they wanted accountability and a level of oversight that made sure the funds would go where they were promised. They will not get what they were promised. The Council’s majorities vote now makes any future Measure, bond issuance or other vote of our citizens nearly impossible to pass. Perhaps we someday want a new fire station, or civic center or even another branch for our Library and certain promises are made.  Will the citizens believe them to be true ever again?

If you continue to close the revenue options for the City the only other option is deeper and deeper cuts to our services until there is no need to be an incorporated entity any more.  Perhaps that is the goal.

More later

Curiouser and curiouser

“Curiouser and curiouser!” Cried Alice in Alice in Wonderland. The same exclamation seems to apply to our own Marina City Council when it comes to round three (or is it four) with a new Cypress Knolls request for qualifications (RFQ).

A brief look at the recent history and things simply do not seem to add up. After a two year process of extensive review and financial vetting the majority on our City Council decided to scrap the entire process and start over with a new RFQ. Then they decided to reconsider that decision and a very qualified developer was chosen (Coastal Rim Properties, CRP), then another reconsideration and they voted to scrap the entire process once again.

Throughout this process the Mayor has been for a second developer (Peninsula Housing Partners, PHP), Councilman O’Connell claimed that neither developer was qualified, Councilman Ford and Councilwoman Amadeo supported  (CRP) and Councilman Brown has wavered between starting over and supporting CRP.

So now we find our City Council wrestling with the creation of a new RFQ. The Mayor and the Mayor Pro Tem now want an accelerated process to choose a developer as soon as possible (they had one). And in the process, they want less information about the potential developers. Rather than require a certain amount of qualification, history and financial backing he prefers that they meet a base level of these qualifications.

So here is my question. If after a two year process of extensive review requiring multiple submittals of massive information, two developers were deemed unqualified, how can you ask for less information over a substantially shorter timeline and come up with a different outcome that’s credible?

Here are a few more questions that would make sense to ask as well. At what point in an accelerated process do you get this information? How far down the road do you go before you discover a potential developer is not qualified? How much staff time and money do you spend before you have the critical answers necessary to make a qualified decision? Isn’t it better to spend the time and effort up front and determine who is in fact qualified before proceeding with a project worth tens of millions of dollars?

As Alice said… curiouser and curiouser!

More later