From Poway Councilmember Dave Grosch…
Dear Poway voters,
One of the first things I did when I was elected last year was to propose term limits for Poway City Council Members. I proposed them because I strongly believe they would encourage more residents with fresh ideas to run for office. Too often, potential candidates are discouraged at the prospect of facing the “incumbent advantage”. Not surprisingly, my proposal was quickly rejected by other council members unwilling to put restrictions on their own positions.
Because the Council dismissed my proposal, and because I believe strongly in term limits I am working to put an initiative on the ballot so YOU can decide if the mild limits I have proposed should become law in Poway. But your signature is needed NOW to qualify the initiative for the November 2012 ballot.
Your signature on the petition is not a vote for or against term limits – your signature simply means you believe Poway voters, not elected officials, should decide the issue.
To sign the petition, visit the Farmer’s Market (at Old Poway Park) on Saturday mornings, email me, or call me and we will get a petition to you.
To read the full text and find out more about the initiative, go to: http://powayfortermlimits.org/
Your Councilmember,
Dave Grosch
dgrosch@cox.net
14436 Maplewood Street
Poway, Ca. 92064
(858)486-3252
Comments 21
Term limits and getting rid of their fringe benefits. Elected officials should not be getting medical or retirement.
Well I have to say this is a bad idea. And I think they would be a particularly poor idea in a small city like Poway – with all its peculiar politics.
A) They empower staff. Councilmembers, even with 8 years, have a hard time going nose to nose with City managers who have made a lifetime of studying/managing cities. It is often understanding what second, third, and fourth questions to ask. If you want a CLEAR example of why expertise on councils is important just watch the tape of the San Diego city council meeting where they missed the implications of MP II because they were ill prepared to push past Staff’s BS. It happens ALL the time. In the case of Poway – you would be removing from Council expertise, built up over decades, in the ins and outs of redevelopment law, a critical part of the City’s budget and yet so arcane that a “bad” staff can take things in the direction they prefer rather than that of the legislative majority. Far too easy for staff to tell the body “You can’t do that” when they don’t want to rather than “You can’t do taht but if you ask the question a different way I can tell you Yes”
B) They encourage careerist approaches. People run for political office for a whole host of reasons. We hope most do it for the “right” reasons. But some (many?) gain satisfaction from holding elected office. Term limits mean that you often get all the disfunctionality of legislative bodies where the holders are thinking about their next “job”. In the case of Poway figure a LOT more pressure to put county issues and PUSD issues on the term-limited council’s agenda. Seen in every legislative body that has them in place.
C) They are undemocratic. Yes, they bring new ideas but memo. Powegians LOVED (and for good reason) Mickey K., god rest his soul. Is it “fair” that they would have been denied reelecting him just so someone else had a chance? One of the biggest downsides is that Mikey wouldn’t have been there on SANDAG – which provided the City a ton of investment on I-15 and on Scripps Poway Parkway.
Now where I would agree with you is the VERY pernicious Powegian practice of strategic resignations. What has been done as a matter of course to ensure the North Poway Association remains a powerful force is about as close to Machine Politics as you can in San Diego. It also borders on plantation style politics as this has largely come at the expense of South Poway. I would be VERY supportive of a measure that said that the council needed to call a special in the case of a vacancy or operate with just 4 until the next regularly scheduled election. That would stop the practice. But term limits? A failed experiment that needs to be sent to the dustbin of history.
Erik:
It is unlikely Carl DeMaio would be on the SD City Council
today without the term limits voters approved in 1992. It’s
also unlikely he would be running for Mayor today without
those same term limits.
Ditto for the admirable Councilwoman Lorie Zapf.
Ditto for Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher, State Senator
Mark Wyland, State Senator Joel Anderson, and former
Assemblywoman Shirley Horton … all thanks to state
term limits approved by voters as Prop. 140 in 1990.
Term limits will likely lead to the election of fellow
Rostrafarian Marie WALDRON to the State Assembly
next year.
Term limits allow NEW talent to emerge, with new
ideas, new energy and optimism. And yes, all of
those qualities matter a great deal.
[Hat tips to then-SD Mayor Maureen O’Connor for
her role in the 1992 SD ballot measure, and to
the late Peter Schbarum who shepherded Prop.
140 onto the state ballot].
Oh come now. By that logic….without terms limits we would have KEPT Judy McCarty, Harry Mathis and avoided Peters/Lightner and Emerald and we wouldn’t have had a VERY green and inexperienced council approve Managers Proposal II. We would have also kept wing nuts like Saldana and Wayne out of office – and even more importantly such paragons of governance as Karen Bass, Antonio V, and impressive Fabian Nunez. On the whole I will absolutely take experience over the AMAZING efforts of these legislators and their “new ideas”
A key problem is that for every Carl you probably have 4 Emeralds – careerist who don’t care enough to actually put in the time to understand and push back on the bureaucrats.
But don’t take my word for it. California has led the nation in this movement. The past 2 decades of near criminal misgovernance have been a direct result.
And BTW – I don’t want to hear for a week any comparisions about Texas and California’s economic performance since Austin does not have to suffer under the impact of all those “great new ideas” generated by a term limited legislature or executive (thats right, no term limits for Texas)
Jim,
This is just a guess, so please correct me if I am wrong: you were opposed to the term limit measure for County Supervisors. I say that because that measure was being supported by the Labor Council, while this one is being proposed by someone who is neither a union leader nor a prominent Democrat.
Please tell me I am wrong and that you have consistently favored term limits. I will gladly admit my mistake.
Alger:
You are Incorrect.
I predicted Supervisor term limits would pass, but would
have little effect on the current Board since term limits
apply prospectively, and the “Fab 5” would have left the
board by 2018.. http://sdrostra.com/?p=1169
I also pointed out that, according to public records,
exactly TWO entities donated the $250,000 to get
the measure on the ballot.
http://sdrostra.com/?p=1391
Finally, I noted that major players who fought term limits
at the State and Federal level SUDDENLY backed them
when they applied to an all-GOP Board of Supervisors.
I also saluted prominent Democrat Maureen O’Connor
in the above comment for her pro-term limits action.
Nice Try, though!
Jim,
I didn’t read anywhere in your cited posts that you were actually in support of term limits for the County Supervisors (kudos for the spot-on analysis of the measure). However, if you say you were, I will take your word for it, admit my mistake and give you credit for being philosophically consistent.
For the record, I agree with Erik on this one; term limits are a bad idea and make it much more difficult to run an effective government. And yes, I was strongly opposed to term limits for the County Supervisors.
I’ve always supported term limits. It’s a bad idea, and CERTAINLY no panacea, but it’s better than NOT having term limits.
The REAL problem we face is that, in local elections, the labor unions (private and especially public) rule, with their hugely disproportionate spending and “volunteer” army. Term limits or not, most of the time, the labor unions are going to win these elections. Under either scenario, they own most local governing bodies.
I definitely publicly supported SD County term limits, though I was disappointed that they started the clock over, thereby ensuring our current group 8-10 more years of guaranteed tenure. These incumbents would all have retired anyway by the time term limits take effect.
BTW, I tried to work with SEIU in their county sup term limit campaign. We had one trial run at a small TV station, but they didn’t want me back after that (go figure).
Truth is, they didn’t need me. Love term limits or hate ’em, the public wants ’em. The measure passed overwhelming.
I don’t know what the unions spent on the campaign, but I doubt it was much — surely far less than the cost of putting the measure on the ballot via the petition process.
Here’s another fun part. The SEIU faced LABOR UNION opposition to their county term limit effort — it was a unique instance where a union pushed term limits. Most of the time unions oppose term limits. The SEIU made an exception only because they faced five (admittedly wussy) long time GOP incumbents running the county government. Of course, then they blew it by not including past time in office, defeating their purpose of ousting the seated Republicans. Sheer genius!
HINT: If labor unions usually oppose term limits, it’s for good reason. Thus which side should their opponents be on?
The facts of Poway are that Green Valley is where the money and power lies. The majority of the council lives there and have no problems getting the money to run. Dave, bless his soul, walked Poway and that is why he won. Merilee has a massive database based upon all the work she has done for the area, so she can win without Green Valley. Bob Emery was one of the original members of the Council and really looked at what was best for the city instead of the best interests of Green Valley, so people respected him and he won reelection.
Green Valley has too much influence. For example, their influence got rid of the excellent water conservation plan the city had developed. Green Valley didn’t want to pay higher prices to keep their large acreage green, so they got the lower users and the ones conserving, to pay more so GV could pay less. One way to get rid of this power is to have District only elections. The problem there is that special interest groups can then really control elections. Instead of putting up with the influence of one area, you then have to deal with these groups, so what do you do?
This might be shocking to some, but some politicians get addicted to their position and benefits. They might say that the benefits don’t matter, but if that is the case, why don’t they get rid of them?
The longer a politician stays in office, the more convinced they are that they can make the right decisions for us — in essence, to rule us. Friedrich Hayek called it the “fatal conceit.” When secure in one’s office, one gets the sense that they are ANOINTED rather than elected.
Most important, the longer in office, the chummier the politicians get with their staff — and especially with their city managers.
City managers profit the MOST from runaway compensation, yet too veteran politicians too often mindlessly turn to these very profiteers for advice on what to offer in the way of pay, pensions, healthcare and other benefits (BY FAR the biggest problem area of any CA government).
Bottom line: Career politicians usually become part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
You don’t have to have years of officeholding experience to know that one should be skeptical of people who profit from your decisions. Sadly, the longer in office, the less skeptical a politician becomes.
Not surprising when a person criticizes a comment
without really reading it, but it IS unusual when the
critic does not read THEIR OWN posting!
Thus… quoting Alger to Alger: “so please correct me if I
am wrong: you were opposed to the term limit measure
for County Supervisors. ”
I did NOT oppose the measure in my posts here, but
instead analyzed its origins and the double-standards
involved. “Opposed” was Alger’s word.
Jim,
If you are going quote me, please use the entire quote. What I said was “THIS IS JUST A GUESS, so please correct me if I am wrong, you were opposed to the term limit measure for County Supervisors.”
I was clearly making a supposition. If you read further you would have noted that I made that assumption based on the fact that the Labor Council supported the measure and you usually have a knee-jerk response to anything they are in favor of.
Your response to my comment was that I was wrong and even though the post you cited did not state that you were opposed to the measure as it related to the County Supervisors, I accepted your word that you were in fact consistent in your opinion of term limits.
I not only read my post but I also read yours and the ones you cited. I even admitted that my original assumption was wrong and gave you credit for consistency. Perhaps it is you who should read more carefully before posting a reply.
Again, the problem in a small city like Poway – that absolutely is going to continue to have “part time” city councilmembers is that there is a huge learning curve to be able to push back on “staff”. If you like how city managers think you love term limits. Not at all clear they will be helpful for Poway.
And I completely agree about Green Valley – one of the reason (see above) that I absolutely would support (and walk) for a measure that prohibited interim appointments to fill vacencies – something the GV crew has been doing for decades.
Why we are on the subject…..when the HECK are we getting a PUSD school board member who lives on the West side? Or even in RB? The Poway cabal really needs to end.
Erik,
The Poway Unified School District is arguably the best school district in the county, maybe the best in the state. Would you really force obviously excellent school board members off of the board because of an arbritary time limit (term limits) or because too many of them live in the same city?
ACTUALLY……
1) PUSD is a great district – EXCEPT when it comes to college going at both Poway and RB High – which underperform given demographics. At the risk of pissing off Bronco Football supporters I will keep my speculation as to why to a minimum. Not suprising, at the schools that deempasize Athletics, West View and now Del Norte, College going EXCEEDS demographics. Mt. Carmel about average.
Also the fact that the board didn’t can baseball after the scandle will continue to be a black eye for the district. Indeed, the coach remained employed and they named the diamond after him ;-(
2) PUSD also has EXTREMELY unequal funding distributions with us on the West side, with outrageously expensive mellos supporting capital projects on the East Side. See complaint about Poway dominance above.
A voice from the Westside would bring these things up and to the attention of the district.
I thought that the capital projects on the east side were funded by two school bonds that the residents voted for while it is the schools on the west side that are supported by Mello Roos taxes. It is also my understanding that Mello Roos taxes can only be spent on schools that serve the residents that pay that tax.
Attendance boundaries do NOT have to follow Mello lines.
In addition, Poway has a pretty aggressive “sibling” policy – and since they wanted to fill the new schools from day 1 (when housing was not built out to day 1+X) you have families grandfathered for several years. One of the funnier ironies was that in the community I live, families paying mellos were compelled to go through a lottery to go to their neighborhood school while grandfathered families skipped the lottery for siblings.
Unclear at best that there has be a rigorous separation of funds – with much of the overhead that sucks up 10-30% of capital budgets not allocated in anyway approaching a fair distribution.
I didn’t know that attendance boundaries didn’t follow the Mello Roos lines; thanks for that bit of education. You also make a good point about overhead costs and how they are divided.
All in all, and in spite of the inequities you rightly point out, I still think that Poway does a much better job than most, if not all, of the other public school districts and I would hate to mess with that in the name of term limits.
Alger – I actually would oppose term limits. What I would like to see is a) Prohibitions on strategic resignation/appointments which enable these appointed people to run as “incumbents and b) Some political strength west of the 15. Good district. Family lives in it and work for it but I think that it NEEDS a west sider rather than the closed clique of GV so as to be more representative. We have NEVER been visited once by a candidate living 15 years+ in the district and I can’t remember the last time they showed up to a community event.
Erik,
I, too live west of 15 and have children in the District. The last two elections had open seats, but frankly there wasn’t a candidate who lived outside of Poway worth supporting. Perhaps you might be interested in 2012 or 2014?
The “Poway city staff” already run the city. The council has, especially the current sitting members abdicate running the city to the “the staff.” Some examples: 1. nearly half a million dollars have been spent abusing two Poway residents because “the staff” tore down some trees; 2. it took nearly three years and “staff study” to install badly needed stop signs on Valle Verde; 3. over neighborhood objections, the council hid behind “staff recommendations” and endless “staff studies” costing thousands of dollars to approve WalMart expansion, Toyota and Lowes movement and putting lights over a flood control basin; 4. instead of making a decision, giving leadership guidance, the council sent the issue of marijuana dispensary to “staff study.”
The people of Poway elected 80% of the council in the past to represent them, but continually fund “the staff” to make recommendations which the council always approves. The other twenty percent were appointed council members. The council is already “dysfunctional” and not representative of the all the people of Poway, accent on all.