Dictated Predetermined Decisions: Hail to the King

From the Email InBox:

To hold a Public Meeting with “Intent to Approve” shows a bias, or a predetermined decision. The Planning Commission and the City Council have clearly been told how to decide and it is a uphill un equal burden for any opposing facts or input to impact their decision.

This is not equal representation or fair governance. This is governance by special interest, and a dictatorship. Until the Citizens of Grand Terrace recognize that we have slipped into a Kingdom with King Schwab running the House of Lords and that there is no House of Commons to off set the decision making processes in GT, we will continue on the path we are on.

There are some amongst the Peasant Class who don’t appreciate the Dictatorship being supported by the House of Lords… oh they are called the City Council. We hope that more than a small fraction would at least participate in the next election.


From the Email InBox:
Response to last Post: Please Post in the interest of balance and fairness

I am painfully aware that many of you who participate in this forum despise Tom Schwab for whatever reason, but the fact remains that he has been hired to run the day-to-day operation of this city. Why would you not want him to have any input? My understanding of his job is that he runs the city and makes recommendations to the city council on how he feels certain issues should be decided. This is how it's done virtually everywhere in this country. The "Intent to Approve" simply means that this is the action that he feels would be best for the city based on his experience. The council is not bound by this intent.

I feel however, that it would be negligent of the city council to pay a guy $150,000 per year and then ignore everything that he suggests. His recommendations should...no, must...carry some weight. And yes..they should carry more weight than the recommendations of the average citizen. WE PAY HIM to make these decisions so that we have the time to live our lives and raise our children. WE DON"T have the training or expertise to make some of these decisions. WE ELECT the council to oversee his decisions and those of his staff. These people are continually re-elected; the system is working. It's working, in large part, because Tom Schwab is a brilliant individual, and a very sound manager with an impeccable record. We're lucky to have him.

That having been said; if one feels that all of his decisions are bad ones, or that the council is simply "rubber stamping" every decision without consideration, then a different issue has been raised and should be addressed at the ballot box. But don't criticize the fact that he or his staff recommends approval prior to the meeting. Surely you wouldn't expect them to set forth proposals that they want disapproved. When a congressman introduces a bill onto the house floor, he is "recommending approval." He knows good and well what he wants the outcome to be long before the congress or the public even knows what the bill is.

Schwab is not trying to be a dictator. He is doing his job...very well, I might add. If you have a problem, its with the council. Unfortunately for you though, the majority of Grand Terrace residents do not share your concerns, as indicated by election results and lack of interest in recent recall attempts.

Remember the words of the only council member the opposition could tolerate, former Councilman Herman Hilkey, "There is no conspiracy in Grand Terrace...there is no conspiracy in Grand Terrace." When Hilkey retired, the first person he thanked was City Manager TOM SCHWAB. I've started to learn more about Hilkey recently, and if there was untoward behavior going on, he would have blown it wide open:, of this I have no doubt.

I agree with your final point that you, "hope that more than a small fraction would at least participate in the next election." Are you sure that's what you really want though? Be careful what you wish for. Yours is a minority view. Campaigns such as a hatred towards a certain individual or civic body typically are more successful when the vote count is low as a percentage of the population. The majority of Grand Terrace residents are aware of how government works and understand, as the Kingfisher residents did, that if you have a reasonable beef, you can speak up and get it resolved. Our city leaders are intelligent, reasonable people. If you have your way and we have a huge voter turnout in '08, your views will become even more diluted and pushed to the margins. Think about it.

Brian


Dear Gramps,

I’m so sorry that Brian is pained, because some people in Grand Terrace question the decisions that are made by our city council/city manager. I guess his theory is to believe everything you hear – so naïve.

Brian is correct Tom was hired as city manager, but we didn’t hire him. He wasn’t voted into office. His job performance has been poor to mediocre, and yet after all these years – he still has a job. WHY is that? Brian would have us believe it’s because Tom is “brilliant”. Thanks for that explanation, it makes perfect sense now. (Note to Brian - brilliant is a little strong)

Why does the city of Grand Terrace have to use the words “Intent to Approve”? Because, as Brian explained “that’s how it’s done virtually everywhere in the country”. “The council is not bound by this intent”, yeah but when did council not go along with Tom’s intent?

Brian you are right it is negligent of the city to pay the city manager $150,000 a year (plus benefits – i.e. house, car….).

Dear Citizens of GT:

When in the course of events a group of humans organize themselves into a city it is common for the citizens to form an organizational structure and a general plan. Plans are plans, and are abided by as a guide to the development and life in the community. IF the Plans contain “Rules” or “Codes” or “Requirements” they apply to all and enforced equally upon all.

What is being reviewed by the Public Meeting is contrary to this ideal. The prior owners of the property were constrained from developing by a pre existing plan. Yet a New Developer is now making a Proposal for a Development which also requires a Change in the Plan. When the City Manager, and City Council and City Planning Commission, take the Pre Public Meeting Position that they are Intending to Approve the Changes to the Plan in order in part to be able to accept the EIR and the Developers Plan we see reactive planning rather than proactive planning. This is where the stench of favoritism begins to waft out of the halls of the City Manager’s Office.

There should have been a Public Meeting to Change the Plan and Land Use at the proposed site for the Blue Mt. Senior Villas, long before the Developer was selected and the first plan pushed through the City Council, and was then was Held up by a Court Order requiring an EIR. Clearly the EIR process revealed that the City Plan and the Development were at odds and the current changes are to Force Fit the Development into the area and zoning or plan.\

This is reverse engineering. Build a House and then draw the blue prints.

Who else is given this opportunity……Home Owners, Joe and Jane Smith, or is it only large developers or Developments that the City Manager thinks up? Remember: Outdoor Adventure Center, Town Center… Blue Mt. Senior Villas, Parks, Islands in the Road, Power Plants, and…. What next?

Is it strange how when these folks want to change a plan, or get an approval they contribute to the Historical Committee or Grand Terrace Days Fund? If they wanted to be good citizens why not just donate to the base ball team directly. Oh that my not influence the City Council or City Manager. Again the odiferous air is wafting out of the doors of city hall and the trail leads back to the City Manager's Office.