A Balanced Approach to City Government
As your City Council representative, I will weigh all issues evenhandedly, without bias. I will evaluate all decisions that come before council on the following criteria.
1. The impact it would have on our city budget and our taxes
2. The impact it would have on our neighborhoods and people.
3. The impact it would have on our business/working community.
4. The impact it would have on our environment.
5. Is it a local issue that City Council can do something about?
By applying the above criteria to all decisions, I feel a more balanced and objective problem solving approach to often complicated issues can be attained.
Think Globally. Act Locally.
I will discourage spending unnecessarily on idealistic and unrealistic boondoggles that cost us millions and waste an inordinate amount of staff time. While each of these “socially responsible statements” may be admirable in concept and perhaps alone each doesn’t cost much, but added together they do cost the city a great deal—in real dollars and in reputation. Some examples of this waste are: the referendum to boycott the country of Myanmar, suing the Bush Administration over greenhouse gasses, and the ill-advised, expensive and unsuccessful attempt to move a few rodents.
I am all for studying the issues carefully, and using the considerable knowledge resources available in Boulder to make the best possible decisions. Though, at some point studies must end and decisions must be made. Considerable city funds are spent each year on such studies, we can cut back a little here. While it doesn’t impact the budget much—increasing the glacial speed at which the council seems to work would help too. At least the lights could be shut off earlier!
Accountability of Council to the Community
The most troubling aspect of this issue is the capricious way City Council handles it. The Planning Department and the majority of the present City Council have arbitrarily forced zoning and other changes against the wishes of overwhelming majorities of neighborhood residents.
In 2000 the council voted against the wishes of over 800 homeowners in north Boulder by rezoning a neighborhood of single family homes to a high denisty neighborhood.
This applies also to the recent decision to make 900 University Hill homes an historic district. This was done against the wishes of many residents and without public hearing, and in a special closed “emergency session,” depriving the homeowners of significant rights. I will never support zoning changes without a clear majority of neighborhood approval.
For a number of years the majority on council have been swayed by special interests. While this body often listens to public comment they have not usually heeded the public's concerns when it came time to vote. Many times the council has participated in, and even directed studies and analyses of problems for which they already had a preconceived, perhaps planned outcome. To citizens these exercises look like the smoke screen they are. It comes as little surprise then when council has acted in ways that defy logic or common sense.
It's time for this to stop. We need to get back to some common sense on this council. We need to do what's right for the majority of people, not just those special few.