If you have followed any of my posts on the subject of
politics here in Costa Mesa, you should have come away with two general themes.
First, I have a reasonably conservative view of how public funds should be
raised and spent. Second, I am really not in favor of ideological dogma driving
decisions in local government.
What I have come to accept over the years is that the major
political parties are using local office as a farm team for their nominees for
partisan office. Now, I don’t know if this is a result of term limits or not.
Term limits reduce the political “shelf life” of a politician. That means the
parties have to have new talent on the bench ready to go. Regardless of the
driving factors, it is a reality. Because of this, voters, like me are
presented with ever more stark choices for local candidates. Even though the
local offices are “non-partisan” we frequently see a battle between Republicans
and Democrats. Sure the occasional altruistic candidate comes along, but they
are rarely prepared for political battle and are generally underfunded to the
point of being almost irrelevant.
In this environment, I really feel as if I have little
choice but to start aligning with candidates from the party that most closely
reflects my views of government. In local offices, that alignment is clearly
with Republican candidates. Now, I may not agree completely with their national
platform or even their state and local initiatives. Non-the-less, if I am to
see the types of decision made that I can endorse, I find no other alternative.
This brings me to the current Costa Mesa city council race.
The lines of division in this race are clearly Democrats vs. Republicans. On
the one hand we have the public employee association backed slate, the
Democrats, running against the slate not endorsed by the public employee
associations, the Republicans. Sure, there are other money players in this
fight, but from my position as a taxpayer, this is the bottom line. Do I want a
council majority that will continue with the status quo when it comes to how
services are delivered and paid for or do I want change? I want change. It is
past time to make service delivery paramount and employment driven by that
priority. If we need employees to provide services as efficiently as possible,
great, hire them. If we can do a job more efficiently contracting it out, then
contract away.
On top of that, I believe our community needs to change the
long term cost of employment. When we pay an employee for their labors, they
should be paid. Final. Period. The system we have now pays an employee for
their labor and then the taxpayer is on the hook for the rest of that employee’s
life if their retirement plan investments don’t pan out. That is a great perk
if you can get it, but one I am no longer willing to fund.
So there are my high level priorities for my community.
These sit on top of safety and infrastructure. Within the above priorities, I
want reasonable services provided for my tax dollars.
This leads me to my choices for this election. As the title
of this post states, I am “All In” for reform. I have been pretty vocal that
some of the decisions made by the current council majority could have been
handled with more tact and finesse. Still, I am not willing to see a council
majority that is inclined to roll back their reform plans, including
outsourcing and pension reform.
To that end, I am endorsing Gary Monahan, Steve Mensinger
and Colin McCarthy for city council. I am also supporting Measure “V”, the city
charter and Allan Mansoor for Assembly.
I plan to post more
about these candidates and Measure V in the future.
2 comments:
I thought you said you wanted change?
City council races are supposed to be non-partisan. When you bring in the Rep v. Dem, it ceases. What we have now is an overload of extremist Republicans, that don't represent Republicans. They represent their own political agendas. Don't be fooled by this.
The other 3 candidates bring a better balance and mo personal agendas to the council, except one thread in common: the betterment of this city, as they feel the residents of Costa Mesa deserve better.
City council races are non-partisan to the extent that qualified parties do not nominate candidates that then face each other in a run-off election. That is as far as the non-partisan nature of local races goes.
As for "extremist" Republicans, I don't see that at all. What I see are Republicans that are not willing to continue the policies of previous councils with respect to labor costs and negotiations.
I don't consider that "extremist" at all. I consider that working for sustainable labor costs. Defined benefits pension systems have proven to be unsustainable and contribute to run-away city overhead. It is time to revamp that system. That is the "change" I am looking for.
Thanks for sharing you view!
Post a Comment