From jflofland at ucdavis.edu  Mon Jun  6 15:59:42 2005
From: jflofland at ucdavis.edu (John Lofland)
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 15:59:42 -0700
Subject: [OldNorth] Fwd: A "power play" to prevent Sue Greenwald from
	becoming Mayor
Message-ID: <p06100505beca85cf7a94@[10.0.1.4]>

FYI, if you not otherwise received this. John Lofland

>
>Subject: A "power play" to prevent Sue Greenwald from becoming Mayor
>From: Ken Wagstaff <kjwag at dcn.davis.ca.us>
>Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2005 23:58:22 -0700
>X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.49 on 169.237.104.195
>Status:  
>
>Dear friends,
>The Davis City Council has launched an outrageous assault on 
>democracy and the spirit of fair play in our City.  Angry that they 
>did not win the position of Mayor in the last election, the Council 
>majority has indicated that they intend to override that election's 
>results by retroactively changing the rules.  We must not allow this 
>to happen!
>
>On May 24 the Council acted on a 4-1 vote to direct staff to prepare 
>amendments to the City law that sets forth the process for selecting 
>the Mayor. The current ordinance directs the Council to promote 
>Mayor Pro Tem Sue Greenwald to Mayor after the March 2006 election. 
>But the Council has directed that the ordinance be changed to select 
>the Mayor by a straight vote of the Council.  Further, all four 
>members pushing for this amendment also refused to second a motion 
>by Sue Greenwald to delay the change until after her term as Mayor. 
>
>This action is obviously intended, therefore, to prevent Sue 
>Greenwald, the Davis Mayor Pro Tem, from becoming the next Mayor, as 
>current ordinance directs.
>
>Background:
>The present mayoral succession ordinance has been in effect since 
>1990. It provides that the person who received the highest number of 
>votes in a Council election shall become Mayor Pro Tem.  It further 
>directs the Council to promote the Mayor Pro tem to Mayor after the 
>next election two years later. Sue Greenwald got the most votes in 
>2004 and is Mayor Pro tem. According to the ordinance in effect when 
>Sue was elected, she is to be the new Mayor after the 2006 election.
>
>This 1990 ordinance was put into place because, in a "General Law" 
>city like Davis, absent a legal directive otherwise, all five 
>councilmembers decide among themselves who is to become Mayor.  The 
>"vote by Council" mechanism, which was used prior to 1990, had 
>resulted in nasty, divisive political wrangling.  Hence, the 1990 
>City Council enacted an ordinance directing the Council to select 
>the highest vote-getter as Mayor Pro Tem, and then to promote the 
>Mayor Pro Tem to Mayor after the next election. 
>
>The "highest vote-getter" ordinance has been honored by every 
>Council since it was enacted.  When I was Mayor, Susie Boyd was a 
>"minority" Mayor Pro Tem - exactly the same situation that Sue 
>Greenwald is now in. Neither I nor anyone in the majority even 
>dreamed of abusing our power by trying to change the ordinance under 
>which Susie was elected.  In fact, I appointed her to all of the 
>important interjurisdictional committees in order to prepare her for 
>the role as Mayor (a courtesy that Sue Greenwald has not been 
>afforded as Mayor Pro Tem). 
>
>Two separate issues:
>We are dealing with two separate issues here.  The first is the best 
>method for selecting the Mayor.  The second is the fairness that 
>lies at the heart of the democratic process, i.e. if a change is to 
>be made, that change should not be used to override the results of 
>an election held under a different set of rules.     
>
>1. Method of Selection of Mayor
>I strongly believe we must retain the current system of selecting 
>our Mayor.  It gives the people some say in the selection of the 
>City's major spokesperson.  It avoids the bitter, divisive politics 
>that accompany Council selection of Mayor.  But most importantly, if 
>less obviously, it allows progressives a chance to be elected Mayor. 
>With the cost of elections now surpassing $40,000, it is becoming 
>increasingly hard to find citizens willing to run if they don't have 
>financial backing from development and other big-money interests. 
>Hence, it is becoming increasingly unlikely, absent a voter 
>initiative that cuts down on campaign costs (like public financing 
>of campaigns or district elections) that there will be three 
>progressive votes on the council.   Under the current ordinance, 
>citizens who want independent leaders can rally behind the few 
>candidates that are running grass roots campaigns, and, even if they 
>cannot get a majority on the Council, they at least have a chance to 
>elect a grass-roots Mayor.
>
>2. Changing the rules retroactively
>Regardless of what you think about the best method of selecting our 
>Mayor, the idea that the Council would consider overturning the 
>results of the last election-- by retroactively changing the rules 
>under which the election was held-- is an outrage.  This is a crude 
>power play; it smacks of the kind of dirty politics that we have 
>witnessed on the national level.   We cannot tolerate this method of 
>governance in the City of Davis. 
>
>Act now!
>I urge all progressive people to immediately write a letter to the 
>editor of the Davis Enterprise expressing our collective outrage at 
>this action. 
>
>Letters to the editor can be e-mailed to newsroom at davisenterprise.net    
>It is important to include your address and phone number, and to 
>write "letter to the editor" in the subject line. 
>
>You can also talk with or e-mail  Ted Puntillo, Ruth Asmundson, 
>Steve Souza, and Don Saylor. Their email addressess are listed 
>below. Tell them what you think of this outrageous move.  
>
>You could also send an email to all your friends. Tell them, whether 
>they voted for Sue or not, that in the interest of fairness this 
>change should not become effective until after Sue's term.
>
>If we do our part, Sue Greenwald will be our next Mayor.  She won 
>the election fair and square.  She ran a clean, positive campaign, 
>was outspent by 50%, yet was highest vote-getter by a very large 
>margin.   This Council must not retroactively change the rules under 
>which the Mayor is selected.  The citizens of Davis have always 
>demanded fair play.  
>
>Thank you,
>
>Ken Wagstaff
>Davis City Council Member, 1998-2002
>Davis Mayor, 2000-2002
>
>rasmundson at ci.davis.ca.us
>tedpuntillo at prodigy.net
>dnsaylor at dcn.davis.ca.us
>ssouza at ci.davis.ca.us
>suegreen at dcn.davis.ca.us
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/oldnorth/attachments/20050606/43d5dc4d/attachment.html>

From valerie at vanngroup.com  Mon Jun  6 17:46:12 2005
From: valerie at vanngroup.com (Valerie Vann)
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:46:12 -0700
Subject: [OldNorth] Peter Gunther Op-Ed in Enterprise
References: <868fd7ad893883de004ddf13e1df9342@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <42A4EE54.38779EFB@vanngroup.com>

Very nice job, Peter!

I also found the op-ed to the left of Peter's 
rather interesting. I couldn't figure out where
the uprooted houses that are to be temporarily stored
until being set down somewhere else are supposed 
to come from; from B Street? from Old North adjacent
to 5th? from the Core Area? 

Valerie Vann
valerie at vanngroup.com
====

sheryl lynn gerety wrote:
> 
> Peter, & Old North Neighbors:
>         I recommend to everyone Peter Gunther's fine op-ed article in todays
> Davis Enterprise (see p. A9, "Let's invest in our historic
> neighborhoods")