Citizens should elect their representatives. Sounds simple enough, right? Not so in Thousand Oaks.
Tuesday, the Thousand Oaks City Council decided it will appoint someone rather than call a special election to fill the unexpired term of Councilman Dennis Gillette, who is resigning March 1 for health reasons.
The council botched the decision, in The Star's view. Council members should be publicly elected, not appointed, except in rare circumstances. And nothing about this situation justifies an appointment.
First, the timing is convenient for a special election on Nov. 6, coinciding with the scheduled election of two Thousand Oaks City Council members and the national election.
Second, the cost is minimal, about $8,000, and easily absorbed in the city's general-fund budget, according to city officials.
Third, the length of time remaining until Mr. Gillette's term expires in December 2014 is too great to be filled by a political appointee picked by a majority of the sharply divided council.
We could have accepted an interim appointee to serve only until a Nov. 6 special election. Instead, the council unfortunately set an April 30 deadline for naming an appointee to fill the remaining 33 months, which amounts to more than half of the four-year council term.
Given the stark divide separating political factions in the Conejo Valley, the council's regrettable 3-1 vote reeks of control issues and power politics. That's the plain truth even if some claim the appointment will provide stability in municipal government, cooperative interaction among civic leaders and public confidence in the city's future.
We believe the people of Thousand Oaks deserve better than what they got this week from the council.
City councils are elected to make tough decisions, but this is not one of them. The council members owe it to their constituents to put the selection of the newest council member squarely in the hands of the voters, where it belongs.
Sharing a love for music
720,000 ladybugs released
Sheriff trainees put to the ...
Boy Scouts treat mothers to ...
Musician takes iTunes by storm
Sculptures come to life
Ventura County's Most Wanted May 17th
Solar spectacle
TEA Party rallies voters for elections
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 8
anyonecansee writes:
This is for the city council: http://dictionary.reference.com/brows...
Joe_Public writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
LooneyTunes writes:
Joe_Fonti, very classy comment about Councilmember Glancy. I hope that you are in good health yourself and that you sleep well at night.
nickeq writes:
Dear TO Concerned Citz:
We should ALL be incensed!! I did not choose to live in sunny Thousand Oaks because the Great Leader would choose for me. We have been kind to not say that we ave been WITHOUT a 5th Council member since the 2010 election, or if Denny knew then to hang up the gloves; as Mr. Glancy KNOWS but refuses to.
It is an abomination that foxy says the he and Denny are poster children for clean politics! This after his campaign manager the disgraced Pizza Queen tried unsuccessfully along with the same suspects, a few who still came out on Tues tried to Recall Cm. Zeanah. Their MAIN supporter is the disgraced diner @ the public trough who shamelessly takes our tax dollars for his so called failed Lakes who get prefentriatial treatment over every one on every thing!! foxy they do NOT pay $35 K a month rent by ANY logic; even if they did it would be a GREAT bargain as just the lease fro the former Hungry Hunter was $30K pm. In leau of the city spending $17 mill to help them set up shop they spend 1% or $170K per yr in goodwill like the bunny hunt, useless movies. Why is their report a YEAR Late and REDACTED!! Yea I have respect for these clowns!!
It turned her into a hero as has happened with Al Adam who is a shoe in in Nov. Jacqui also was a shoe in but NOT any more. She has a good gig but NO accomplishments to show after so many years NOT doing here job but for being a cute rubber stamp for the over paid under worked staff.
Scott called the breakup of his corrupt RDA the greatest tax grab; well the legislature createth and the legislature taketh away. Well this royalty will appoint a CRONY for almost the entire term of a CM. who in reality LOST the last election. We will NOT vote for ANY ONE who will NOT immediately in Jan. 2013 RESCIND the unethical appointment.
Former candidate Billy Martin put his name as an interim but Glancy refused to even address the issue.
Q: What should we call the stooge in the interim? Certainly NOT honorable CM?? Temporary CM?? I promise to say that God willing for the next 3 years IF I have to.
I hope Al Adam will apply and put MORE pressure on the goons!! How about a PROTEST OUTSIDE City hall @ the next appointment meeting @ 430 pm Tues March 6th!!
NO MORE CLONES!! We need a Thousand Oaks SPRING NOW!!
http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/feb/2...
http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/feb/1... Looks like they did NOT read this!!
bionox writes:
@ Nickeq, I live in Oxnard and so we have our own set of troubles but I ponder the question of why have our elected officials become so unresponsive to the concerns of the public? Is public service just an excuse to enrich their cronies? I like to think change is possible but, jeez Louise! Enough is enough!
wowza writes:
I don't think Joe Public was out of line. People are genuinely concerned about Mr. Glancy's ability to continue to serve, that's all.
kkayla writes:
Are any legal remedies available to "right this wrong"? The council members responsible for this decision need to be fired NOW! How can we achieve this?
Joe_Public writes:
Yes, Power Politics. Here is what is really going on. Glancy will probably not run in November for health reasons. That creates one open seat. If Fox and gang allowed a special election in November for Gillette's seat then that would have meant two open seats plus incumbent Irwin's seat. There would be a good possibility that those two open seats would instead go toward those who believe in honest open government, one that is fiscally prudent, noncorrupt and responsive to the residents. Fox couldn't take that chance and lose power so he had to appoint now even if it meant weathering some bad press. Even if Fox loses "Glancy's" open seat in November he still has a 3-2 majority. Simple as that. Power Politics!!!
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.