Supervisor Terra Lawson-Remer’s State of the County Address was last night. Kelly Davis does an excellent job recapping it in the SDUT: In defiant speech, Lawson-Remer calls for bigger county spending, unity against federal cuts
The SDUT reporting notwithstanding, we feel obliged to add some fun nuances to bits of the news, as well as to a few key Lawson-Remer comments. Italicized comments are our additions.
“In her State of the County speech, the acting Board of Supervisors chair called for a ballot measure to boost funding and urged her colleagues — two of whom weren’t present to hear they were being urged, as they weren’t invited — to free up reserves for vital programs.”
“And she called on her fellow supervisors to support an immediate change to the policy on how much cash the county holds in reserve — currently $100 million more than what fiscal experts recommend. Neither acting vice-chair of the Board Joel Anderson nor his colleague Jim Desmond were on hand to hear they were being called on to change the reserve policy, as they weren’t invited to the speech.”
“‘We believe in a society that’s not every person for themself, but all of us standing together — well, not really ALL of us — to defend and fight for our highest ideals,’ she said. ‘The work will not be easy. Leon Williams knew that, and we know it too.’ When the late Leon Williams, also a Democrat, was chair of the Board in 1985 and 1990, his Republican colleagues were included in the State of the County address.”
On an additional side note, when Democrats Nathan Fletcher and Nora Vargas chaired the Board of Supervisors in recent years, all their colleagues were invited to the State of the County. Prior to that, with decades of Republican chairs, all Supervisors were included, regardless of partisanship.
Is this Lawson-Remer’s vision of inclusiveness and statesmanship? (Ok, statespersonship.) Republicans need not apply?
Ending question: Was last night’s Lawson-Remer by-limited-invite-only State of the County Address paid for by the public?
_____
Added note:
Some are saying the Brown Act stood in the way of having a majority in attendance.
Majorities have attended for decades. Years and decades of prior examples, yet now suddenly County Counsel is citing a problem?
One means to achieving this, as done by thousands of jurisdictions over the years, is to post it as a public meeting. But that would mean allowing the public to attend.
We were able to confirm with both Anderson’s and Desmond’s offices they were not invited.
Comments 9
Majority of board meeting outside of agendized setting could be a Brown Act violation. Nice try, though.
Author
Yes, some are saying the Brown Act stood in the way of having a majority in attendance.
Majorities have attended for decades. Years and decades of prior examples, yet now suddenly County Counsel is citing a problem?
Please.
Pretty bad, when the minority party is treated as though they don’t exist. We as taxpayers, of several parties should be appalled and remember this when it’s time to vote again! The County Board of Supervisors of San Diego should be for all the peoples living in San Diego County, regardless of party affiliation!
The County Board of Supervisors of San Diego IS for all people living in San Diego County. That is the exact reason for not inviting those two Republicans …. because they ARE NOT for ALL people living in San Diego County. Show me one Republican today that cares about DOING the right thing, the moral thing, for ALL people, (besides Liz Chaney and Adam Kinzinger).
Politics drove them not to attend, pure and simple. They did not want to seem to endorse what SLR had to say.
Author
@Kathryn, thanks for proving our point.
@Barry, you’re simply wrong.
@ Kathryn Pogue. “All people of San Diego County” includes those people that VOTED INTO OFFICE THE TWO REPUBLICANS ON THE BOARD. Your comment is so reflective of the EXCLUSIONARY nature of the Democrat party nowadays. You are open to all opinions, as long as they agree with yours. We live in a representative government system in this country. If you don’t want those with whom you disagree to have a voice, move to another country, like Russia, where any dissent from the government line is punished.
What Lawson-Remer did is just like the Dems at the state level! They own the state! Republicans were voted to the County Board of Supervisors! Those 2 gentlemen deserved to be there. ” We the people ” voted for them and Lawson-Remer chose to exclude them. You don’t deserve to be President of the Board. That’s not how we do things here in San Diego!
So, may I assume, in that I live in Joel’s district, that none of the tax revenue collected in the districts represented by Joel and Jim will be used for anything having to do with the other districts? (See how absurd that sounds?) Anyone in the Democratic Party ever hear of “taxation without representation”?
P.S. Why is Jim working to stop TJ sewage when it is in another BOS’s district? Maybe just let it continue.