Positions can change after elections
Since moving to Yorba Linda 32 years ago, I’ve watched 17 of the community’s 21 past City Council elections, researched the previous four and written in these pages about the six most recent contests.
Density always has been the top issue, with listening to the public becoming important in later years.
This year’s candidates—ballot newcomer Victoria Gulickson and past council members Hank Wedaa and Keri Wilson—claim to support the city’s low-density heritage and say they’ll listen to the people when making decisions.
However, they toss around the term “low density” generically, without stating specific numbers and, importantly, what those numbers should be in Old Town, while “listening” is subject to several interpretations.
Like many voters in past elections, I’ve read candidate statements, reviewed campaign mailers and listened to presentations at forums hosted by various groups before casting my ballot based on what I thought was an informed decision.
But, again like many voters, I was surprised when the campaign rhetoric from several candidates I voted for didn’t match their post-election voting records, and I wondered why some of their previous concerns vanished from their agendas.
That’s why I think Councilman John Anderson is a refreshing change: he still focuses on his original platform during conversations with constituents, comments from the dais and on his straight-talk www.anderson4yl.com Web site.
During Anderson’s five months in office, he’s backed opening council committee meetings to the public, revamping an “out-of-touch” planning commission and allowing Traffic Commission input into decisions about development projects.
And Anderson wants the city to examine “the pros and cons of using state redevelopment law” because “debate on this issue has been very one-sided.”
“Informed decision-making requires exploring all possibilities, including abolishing the Yorba Linda Redevelopment Agency,” Anderson notes. He adds he’s not advocating such a move, “just suggesting that there should be no sacred cows in city governance.”
I’m not sure how a voter can determine if a council candidate will be the same person with the same concerns after the election as he or she was before the ballots were cast.
But that’s one reason voters should ask candidates for more details. If one says the city needs five new planning commissioners, for example, voters should be told how that goal would be achieved.
A FINAL NOTE
In the old days in Yorba Linda’s council elections, some candidates and their supporters left unsigned flyers on doorsteps, made anonymous phone calls and launched last-minute attacks on opponents with misleading mailers.
But they’ve become much more malevolent in a technological age, as they register versions of a candidate’s name to put up a phony Web site, unleash anonymous attacks on blogs and post mean-spirited comments from unidentified people.
While the backroom bloggers bare supposed skeletons in the closets of others, residents may wonder if the furtive figures have too many bones in their own backyards to reveal their names in public.
Density always has been the top issue, with listening to the public becoming important in later years.
This year’s candidates—ballot newcomer Victoria Gulickson and past council members Hank Wedaa and Keri Wilson—claim to support the city’s low-density heritage and say they’ll listen to the people when making decisions.
However, they toss around the term “low density” generically, without stating specific numbers and, importantly, what those numbers should be in Old Town, while “listening” is subject to several interpretations.
Like many voters in past elections, I’ve read candidate statements, reviewed campaign mailers and listened to presentations at forums hosted by various groups before casting my ballot based on what I thought was an informed decision.
But, again like many voters, I was surprised when the campaign rhetoric from several candidates I voted for didn’t match their post-election voting records, and I wondered why some of their previous concerns vanished from their agendas.
That’s why I think Councilman John Anderson is a refreshing change: he still focuses on his original platform during conversations with constituents, comments from the dais and on his straight-talk www.anderson4yl.com Web site.
During Anderson’s five months in office, he’s backed opening council committee meetings to the public, revamping an “out-of-touch” planning commission and allowing Traffic Commission input into decisions about development projects.
And Anderson wants the city to examine “the pros and cons of using state redevelopment law” because “debate on this issue has been very one-sided.”
“Informed decision-making requires exploring all possibilities, including abolishing the Yorba Linda Redevelopment Agency,” Anderson notes. He adds he’s not advocating such a move, “just suggesting that there should be no sacred cows in city governance.”
I’m not sure how a voter can determine if a council candidate will be the same person with the same concerns after the election as he or she was before the ballots were cast.
But that’s one reason voters should ask candidates for more details. If one says the city needs five new planning commissioners, for example, voters should be told how that goal would be achieved.
A FINAL NOTE
In the old days in Yorba Linda’s council elections, some candidates and their supporters left unsigned flyers on doorsteps, made anonymous phone calls and launched last-minute attacks on opponents with misleading mailers.
But they’ve become much more malevolent in a technological age, as they register versions of a candidate’s name to put up a phony Web site, unleash anonymous attacks on blogs and post mean-spirited comments from unidentified people.
While the backroom bloggers bare supposed skeletons in the closets of others, residents may wonder if the furtive figures have too many bones in their own backyards to reveal their names in public.
posted by Jim Drummond at 12:00 PM
<< Home