> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# LETTERS TO THE EDITOR City manager should think leaner, tighter
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/letters-to-the-editor-city-manager-should-think-leaner-tighter-2/
- Published: 2006-12-18T16:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-25T01:30:58.000Z
- Author: Bill Bauer
- Tags: Opinion, Santa Monica, #archive-import, Homeless

*MY WRITE*

Kudos to City Manager P. Lamont Ewell for going out into the community and hearing the people’s opinion about next year’s city budget and how we think our tax money should be spent.

Five community meetings were scheduled. The last three will be held this week. Tonight’s meeting is at the Thelma Terry Center in Virginia Park, Tuesday’s at Marine Park Auditorium and the final meeting on Wednesday is set for the Roosevelt School auditorium.All meetings begin at 7 p.m.sharp.

The City Council will discuss the upcoming 2007-08 budget in January. They’ll consider comments from these meetings and hear remarks from the public during their own meetings. They’ll determine their priorities for staff to incorporate into next year’s fiscal plan. The budget will be tweaked, finalized and approved before June 30.

I think the city should reset priorities and focus on serving the citizens of Santa Monica. It seems a lot of our money goes for extras and frills. We’re just not getting much bang for our buck.

By taxing us for basic services, money is freed up for nonessential “pie-in-the-sky” schemes promoted by City Hall social reformers and idealists out to change the world at our expense. The city buys up tens of millions of dollars worth of private property for future development, ranging from low-income housing projects to light rail transit terminals, and annually spends millions for pet City Council pork while we pony up more for garbage, sewage and wastewater runoff.

Here, the goal is to save the world, one Styrofoam cup at a time -- but at what cost? There also seems to be a lot of staff, political appointees and politicians building resumes. The problem is that much of this self-aggrandizement wastes money and doesn’t make for a more livable or practical community.

Oh sure, all of this crap gets a lot of attention. The social reformers say, “We’re making the world a better place.” Those of us with common sense react, “It’s not the job of my city government to be the envy of social reformers.”

City staff has grown dramatically over the last few years. Presently, there are well over 2,000 employees for a city with approximately 86,000 residents — one city employee for every 43 people!

For example, the number of people employed in City Hall’s Homeless Services Division has dramatically increased over the last few years. There are a half-dozen staff working with “homeless” programs -- not counting a consultant, a $200,000-per-year Homeless Czar and six police officers assigned specifically to the Department’s Homeless Liaison Program. Plus, millions of dollars are handed out for service programs for transients.

Yet, the lost souls who are supposed to be in housing and receiving attention are still on the streets and eating out of trash cans. How long are we going to pay for ineffective programs that aren’t helping who they’re supposed to help and that do nothing for the residents except expose us to more dirt, disease, filth and danger?

With a budget nearing a half a billion dollars, the city has a 10-percent users tax on telephone, water, electricity, cable television and natural gas, and collects a portion of the state sales tax and property taxes.The city also receives numerous grants that pay for things like low-income housing, street improvements and equipment for the police and fire departments. So, maybe a tax reduction?

We know city politicians are against improving traffic flow, but can’t we hire someone competent enough to adjust signals so we’re not waiting at lengthy red lights on major boulevards for side streets with no little or traffic?

Here, the city supports public schools, and I’m all for it, but not as long as the district continues its long history of financial mismanagement. I don’t think it’s a lot to ask the city to require that the school district and others receiving city largesse to be accountable, manage their money properly and deliver positive results if they’re going to continue riding the gravy train.

My advice to Mr. Ewell and to the City Council: Budget for a smaller, tighter, more efficient city. Stop ego-driven programs and trophy projects. Set priorities that service the most residents, cut the waste and keep your hands out of my pockets.

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on December 18, 2006.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/121806.pdf?ref=smdp.com)