By CAROLE ORLIN
I recently read a moving article about an impoverished farm worker who accomplished amazing things in his and others’ lives by adhering to his simple philosophy: Sigue adelante, move forward.
I interpret this to mean keep focusing forward towards your goal, no matter what. I have found myself using that phrase over and over again in my thinking — for everything from little frustrations to big decisions, and I can’t help but apply it to my adopted home, Santa Monica. Santa Monica is moving, and doing so at an extremely rapid pace. But are we really moving forward? Are we focused on where we are going? Are we focused on our goals, the end results? What are our goals? How are we, as the residents of Santa Monica, able to participate in ensuring that the majority of our community is heard and our desires followed? What system of local, representative government is best suited to the Santa Monica of 2004 and beyond? Santa Monica, like other cities has undergone many transformations. We have not been simply a beach community for decades. The congestion, noise and endless construction attest to that. Also, let’s face it — the homeless have the beaches in the morning, evening and night. (The taxpayers have it afternoons, but unfortunately that is when we are working). My neighbor, who has lived here for 50 years, remembers when this was a town of cowboys and movie stars. My doctor remembers growing up here when it was the wrong side of the tracks. We were once a quaint beach community … a port … the home of aviation, etc. Did you know that the first pilots to fly around the world took off from Clover Field Airport in 1921? Since 1960, when our population reached 83,000, we became a metropolis. We need to acknowledge that. We need to be governed as such.
When I arrived in Santa Monica in 2000 and began looking at the moving forces that were “shaping” Santa Monica, I was quite surprised. I found our local government was created through its city charter, adopted in the mid 1940s, as a “Council-Manager” form of government. We have been governed under our charter for nearly 60 years by a City Council of seven residents who are elected citywide to a part-time position that has evolved over time to wield very powerful and unique control over a city that now has nearly 100,000 people.
By virtue of the city charter, the City Council selects a city manager to be the city’s full-time chief executive officer and head of the administrative branch (and the council selects the city attorney). The City Council also appoints a “ceremonial” mayor for the city from its own body. By the charter of nearly 60 years ago, the salaries of the council members were set at $750 per month and the mayor at $900 per month. With adjustments, these amounts have increased now to approximately $863 per month (City Council) and $1,035 per month (mayor).
Keep in mind that a majority of the City Council prioritizes a rather impressive annual budget of approximately $377 million. The council is able to dictate how tens of millions of dollars of revenues are spent each year (public safety, community and cultural services, planning and community development, etc.). Furthermore, the City Council is able to control the current and future direction of the city through its ability to pass ordinances and resolutions, and to be the final arbiter of appeals from the Planning Commission and zoning administrator. While wielding all of this control, the part-time City Council, whose members received slightly more than $10,000 per year, has its policies implemented on a day-to-day basis by a full-time city manager (currently earning more than $219,500 per year) and a full-time city attorney (earning more than $187,000 per year).
Has the time come to make a structural change to our city government that would permit our City Council members to devote their full time and attention to the problems and issues that confront their city? I would suggest that our city has, over the last six decades, outgrown the type of governing authority that its charter created. Our local government appears to be structured in a way that isolates and bifurcates decision-making and power. Perhaps it is time to look at something more responsive to the demands of a city of Santa Monica’s size (both population and budget). Perhaps it is time to have a full-time City Council that is elected by wards, or districts by individuals that live in those areas and earn salaries commensurate with their responsibilities. The position of city manager could be replaced by a chief financial officer, responsible for handling the significant demands and complexities of daily oversight of our budget. Perhaps it is time that each of us can approach our represented councilperson to discuss problems that might be unique to our particular residential or business areas, as well as citywide problems and issues. Perhaps it is time to sigue adelante. (To reach Carole, ).
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on May 24, 2004. Read the original PDF.