Term Limits Obscured Fresh Ideas, Real Concerns Remain
Unfortunately sweeping angst and anger morphed into Measure C for term limits, obscuring fresh ideas and the very real concerns about exorbitant campaign contributions from within and beyond the city. Term limits and the relief provided is still many years in the distance with campaign financing still unaddressed.
Steve Martin, an otherwise intelligent and able individual, has apparently lost perspective and appears lacking in judgement by allowing himself to be the champion of their discontent.
Had he prevailed, he most probably would have been rendered ineffective resulting from his perpetual alienation of the current council, their deputies, the staff and again a broad swath of the community. Where would he have found consensus?
Mr. Martin had every opportunity to shift his own focus, that of his followers and embark on a fresh, respectful approach to problem solving in delivering his message. The message, the means and the messenger need to reveal integrity, credibility and good judgment.
Tagged election 2013, let's discuss, lynn russell, measure c, steven martin, term limits
Sal Gomez - Save the Pickford Fairbanks StudiosWed, Mar 06 at 6:20 pm
A very nicely crafted anger ridden op-ed but lacking in any real substance. Is there any clear offer of any vision that will be hampered by Measure C.
Lynn RussellWed, Mar 06 at 8:37 pm
Hi Sal, it is disappointing to hear your reaction. Realizing that you have become acquainted with local issues initially through the future development at Pickfair Fairbanks Studio aka The Lot , I think it might be fair to say that perhaps you are do not have the benefit of context for some of the observations. Many folks in the community followed that particular issue from its beginning several years ago in an effort to be informed and offer alternative ideas. It all seemed rather respectful although not everyone was thrilled with the outcome. What was surprising was that many of the folks working at PFS , presumably invested in the history, simply never appeared. Last year an outcry erupted at HPC prior to demolition of a building, with protesters voicing dismay without the benefit of many of the facts and specific consternation at the city staff for how they seemingly disrespected you and the buildings history. You and I actually had a conversation or two about it although you seemed undone and not inspired to hear a rational explanation. In a nutshell that is how things often evolve or quite frankly, don’t evolve.
Skipping the “is there any way to resolve this step” folks go into overkill rather than getting the facts and finding a reasonable approach. Situations like this happen all too often and result in highly emotional personal attacks on the council, city staff and others which collectively is disturbing to witness and progressively degrading to the speaker. Personally I have had much the opposite experience dealing with folks at all levels in the city on different issues.
There were clear alternatives to Measure C, focusing on how to limit seemingly runaway campaign contributions that would eventually benefit everyone across the board. No one needs to spend preposterous amounts and no one likes to see it spent distorting the playing field. However, the drumbeat of the angry and discontented for many years has been “get the folks off the city council that are wronging me/us and/or won’t speak with me/us”. The speculations have been wild. It finally culminated in a movement getting term limits on the ballot with the possible additional benefit of sweeping someone into office as a result. Measure C’s success or failure simply postpones the inevitable changes needed. No matter what case one is attempting to make, an approach to those in power benefits from learning the facts and forging a respectful dialogue if any cooperation or a solution is anticipated.
Sal Gomes - Save the Pickford Fairbanks StudiosWed, Mar 06 at 11:11 pm
Hi Lynn,
For starters, I do resent the notion that I was unwilling to listen to reason or the facts as they pertain to The Lot. I do respect your experience in dealing with all levels of your local government however, with the number of years I have logged in dealing with a number of corporate hierarchy, city officials both in WeHo and other cities, negotiating contracts through local unions and taking up the fight to save Pickford Fairbanks, one thing I have learned is that there is always a better way. There is always an alternative solution. And even if the conditions that have been set forth regarding the future demolition of the lot were, as we were told a “done deal” it has been my experience that nothing is over until those structures are completely leveled.
That is what historic preservation is all about. Sure there are legal avenues to peruse and you can stand in line all you want but is that all there is to it? Not on your life. This was the basis for our decision to bring WeHo residents together and assist them in creating a non-profit such as what is now called WHPA.
Regarding term limits, Measure C was a long overdue law that will help curtail the increasingly destructive poisoning by outside interests. The rest of that curtailment can be accomplished by campaign finance reform which WeHo sorely needs. A John Duran type will have NO vested interest in helping anyone other than those that feed his coffers.
Now I cannot speak for anyone that was initially involved with the decisions and agreements concerning the lot. However, the small core of us that started this campaign nearly a year ago have not gone away. And yes, the facts have been studied and discussed and meetings have taken place between our group and the city and we believe there are still alternatives and possibilities. Everything is being explored and investigated.
So in closing, things that occur in a small town like Weho will not always sit well with everyone. Our democracy has been set up so everyone is capable of casting a vote(opinion). And by last count an enormous amount of your neighbors feel a combined service of 70 years by the incumbent city council is quite enough indeed.
I of course am not disappointed in my position and I am not disappointed in yours, but sometimes change is good. Often times it is completely necessary.
Virginia GillickThu, Mar 07 at 10:05 am
Hi Lynn,
Just wondering what you think of John D’Amico backing Measure C. Thanks, Virginia
Lynn RussellThu, Mar 07 at 11:01 am
Hi again Sal. Seems we both appreciate seeking solutions without leaving a stone unturned. My feelings are that with many similar type issues repeatedly recurring, the community has an opportunity to speak and meet with council and city staff to help craft provisions that would in some cases change an ordinance or policy hopefully for a more favorable outcome. The path to development and its possible incursion into historic and potential historic sites could use critical adjustment and also bring more knowledge to the table.
Much has to do with the tone of the approach. Folks bringing short attention spans, personal animus, volatility and lack of credible information never help move the ball forward.
Although John Duran has not always agreed with issues I was advocating, he and his deputies have always been available and taken the time to hear me out, Sometimes I have been lucky but everyone is on some type of learning curve and no one has all the answers. The answer can come from anywhere if they aren’t shut out. My political contributions in Weho have been nil but I have put in considerable time on several complicated issues and that seems to work for me.
Thanks for taking the time.
Lynn RussellThu, Mar 07 at 11:15 am
Good Morning Virginia. I actually don’t feel one way or another about it. John d’Amico has a right to his opinion. Beyond that sometimes it clearly helps if someone provides the true facts regarding how a change of mind takes place. Folks in public positions owe that to the people they serve. Every individual’s decision finally accumulates in the credibility and reasonability column which often is more important than the decision itself.
Sheila LightfootThu, Mar 07 at 1:29 pm
Dear Lynn,
I look forward in the coming months to seeing you at the forefront, using your formidable diplomatic skills, bringing forward fresh ideas and working with “current council members, their deputies, city staff and independent residents” to bring about change in what you describe as your ”very real concerns about exorbitant campaign contributions from within and beyond the city.”
Perhaps you can set the example to show us all how to go about achieving change with your “fresh, respectful approach to problem solving.” I will happily wait and observe your more successful methods “to limit seemingly runaway campaign contributions that would eventually benefit everyone across the board.” That, we seem to agree, would be a good starting point for you to demonstrate how to resolve issues with your more respectful approach.
Lynn RussellThu, Mar 07 at 10:28 pm
Hi Shiela, thanks for your comment. While I have no need or interest in being in the forefront of anything but my own business and projects, I am happy to function as a collaborator where I can be useful. Steve Martin expressed a spontaneous opinion to me when I made a statement regarding regarding runaway campaign contributions and unless they were reformed, they would most probably continue within an inch of the law.
Even if term limits are in place the same entities will attach themselves to new council members as it is unfortunately, the nature of the beast. Steve stated that “term limits are no cure all by any means but beats the status quo”. “I feel we may need to consider having public financing if incumbent (s) spend more than 60k or if there are active Independent expenditure campaigns”. He mentioned that in a response to my observations and characterized his thoughts as being “an unformulated idea so far”.
Don’t you think there is value to this idea? We have a small community and if WeHo could create a level playing field isn’t that a good objective? Term Limits may or may not be a credible first step depending on differing points of view and historical context, but isn’t the second step campaign financing? You and I have only met in passing, have never really had an in person conversation but I feel you are a motivated and articulate person. Would you be interested in this objective?
MeWed, Mar 13 at 10:20 pm
I’ll start listening to lynn when she actually makes something good happen in weho….until then, the word blowhard comes to mind
Lynn RussellSun, Mar 24 at 2:40 pm
One of the best things that could happen in WEHO is an interest in positive comments and positive solutions, independently and collectively. I am personally not one that needs or wants to be in the forefront. There are several reasonably important things that have been accomplished without fanfare even in your immediate neighborhood that you may not be aware of. They relate to larger issues in the big picture.
You may call me if you like.