A Brilliant Question. Two Fine Answers. And Then There is Tom

During the public comments on non-agenda items, a resident of R.P.V. made comments about Measure C, the charter city ballot measure and then asked a simple question to the three 'veteran' City Council members.

She was trying to find some measure of whether having R.P.V. becoming a Charter City or not would be a good thing or a not-so-good thing. I felt her question was brilliant, but I will comment about the results after I post her question to Councilmen Wolowicz, Stern, and Mayor Long. (Mayor Long was communicating during the meeting via telephone because he is in New York.)

Her question was basically, what if any, impediments did you find during your terms because R.P.V. is not a Charter City?

First, I feel that her question should not have been answered by anyone during that portion of the meeting. The comments on non-agenda items strictly should be that, comments.

I have seen many people stand up and ask questions during that portion of the meeting that answers were not allowed to be uttered by Council members because the portion was not designed to be a question and answer period.

However, since no objection was raised, I believe Councilman Stern provided her the first, and to the question, answer.

He mentioned how he was impeded because he could not deal with cost issues revolving around city projects without the constraints of prevailing wage laws. He and Councilman Wolowicz both were very impassioned, I feel, about their not being able to lower the taxpayers' costs for contracts.

I think Councilman Stern answered her question well even though I believe Mayor Pro Tem Misetich should have stopped any answering because that is not technically part of the public comment period.

I found Councilman Wolowicz, taking two periods to respond to the question, also did a fine job at dealing with the question asked and not varying off too far from the question.

Between Councilman Wolowicz' comments we heard from Councilman Campbell.

Councilman Campbell probably should have stayed silent because he was not one of the Council members who the question was posed to, because the woman was asking only the more veteran members of the Council.

Mayor Pro Tem did what I feel was correct for him by not providing any comments or answers to the question.

Then there comes onto the speakers the voice of Mayor Long.

He spent almost the entire time of his overly long lobbying, campaigning for Yes votes on Measure C and did not offer any real answer to the woman's question about his past impediments to not governing in a charter city.

I think what Tom Long did during the time of the public City Council meeting was completely campaigning, lobbying, and supporting Measure C during a meeting in which that type of stuff should not be allowed and should have been stopped.

Mayor Long represents ALL the residents of R.P.V. even those who oppose Measure C, during the scheduled meetings of the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council.

It sounded far too much like he was campaigning on behalf of the city and the City Council and while he is perfectly within his rights to speak about such matters as a resident of the city, while he is attending City Council meetings he should not lobby as he did to the public who were present at the meeting and those listening to him via the television or Internet.

What makes this problem worse is that now opponents of Measure C can (rightfully) claim that Tom was using City Council time and the costs to the city for those representing the city at the meeting to call for support of Measure C with overt campaigning language and what can only been thought of as a lobbying effort by an official on City business, for a measure.

By the way, at the meeting I heard from Council members and former Mayor Ken Dyda that now make me even more supportive of Measure C, no thanks to Tom.

Attending the meeting and listening to Tom's words was one of the most outspoken opponent of Measure C. This person, I feel, now has more talking points against Tom and against passage of Measure C, if the person plays their cards right.

I don't like it when 'our' side basically hands the other side reasons to oppose what 'we' support.

I think Long should do his business in New York, come home, and support passage of Measure C as a resident and not as Mayor of R.P.V.

I feel Tom did a disservice during the meeting, to all those who support Measure C and gave opponents something to use.

That's just my opinion.