A Response to Councilman Gardiner's Concers

By Tom Long

A Reply to Councilman Gardiner's Criticisms of his Colleagues

I was saddened to read of Councilman Gardiner's concerns about the city council and his criticisms of all of his colleagues including Mayor Pro Tem Stern, Councilmen Wolowicz and Clark and myself, but I feel they are misplaced and do not justify his apparent conclusion that at least some of his colleagues are not worthy of re-election. Councilman Gardiner's concerns relate to relatively small disagreements between himself and the rest of the council where in the end there is not much disagreement of substance. I must admit I am surprised by his reaction to these disagreements. But let me respond.

Councilman Gardiner expresses concern about a council decision to add 4 staff positions at a payroll cost of about $500,000. Councilman Gardiner does not describe all of the votes. Each position was voted on separately and only Councilman Gardiner opposed all of the staff additions. One addition in particular, an additional public works person to help with the city's infrastructure projects, was felt worthy of immediate action by all of us except for Councilman Gardiner. Nonetheless, the City Council unanimously agreed to defer any new hirings until the management study currently underway brings us its recommendations.

Hiring additional staff will likely save the city money by lessening the use of expensive consultants and overtime costs. Surely we will all look closely at the recommendations of the management study to help make the city more efficient. In the end there is no substantive disagreement.

Councilman Gardiner is also concerned about increased information technology (IT) expenses which now make up about 4% of the city's budget. The council has moved proactively to expand the city's use of technology to increase employee productivity and improve our communication with our residents. Much of the increased cost comes from automating document management and implementing a geographic information system (GIS) used by many other cities. Dr. Gardiner was the councilmember who brought the motion to implement the GIS technology using the PV on the Net intern program. The city has also expanded employee access to computer hardware and software to allow city staff to provide our residents better, more efficient and timely service. My review of a study by an organization cited by Councilman Gardiner on IT shows that government agencies are typically "laggards" in the use of technology that increases employee productivity. As some technology costs have come down most businesses are using more technology and spending more on IT to increase productivity.

Councilman Gardiner did not mention that each new step authorized in IT has been supported by him and this council by unanimous votes. The current management study is looking closely at IT along with all city departments. We asked the consultants whether they recommended that we "go out to bid" immediately or first hear the results of their phase 1 study as to whether now was a good time to go out to bid. The consultant recommended that we receive their phase 1 report first. We voted 4-1 to do so. If the consultant then recommends we go out to bid for any of the different aspects of IT, I suspect we will.

Residents may recall the city spending roughly $100,000 to go out to bid on waste hauling at Councilman Gardiner's insistence only to find out that only one company would bid and only at a 50% increase! We rejected the bid and extended the existing contract. We don't want to waste precious tax dollars going out to bid again without first asking whether now is the right time. I am confident we will all look closely at the phase 1 study results and devise a cost effective decision as to how to handle the city's IT needs in the future just as we did in the past.

Councilman Gardiner also is concerned about crime and suggests that "we missed it." We are all concerned about crime, but no one has "missed" the issue. My colleagues Mayor Pro Tem Stern and Councilman Wolowicz, as our representatives on the regional law enforcement committee, have acted diligently. We increased the sheriff's patrols for traffic enforcement when the sheriff recommended we do so. We have monitored the crime statistics which show no trend of increase in serious (Part 1) crimes and actually show a decrease in less serious (Part 2) crimes. We have asked the sheriff to bring forward a proposal for improved technology, such as the use of cameras to identify license plates at major entrances and exits to the city, to help solve and therefore deter crimes. (Ironically these improvements may lead to somewhat higher IT expenses.) We also took steps to control unwanted solicitors from "casing" residents' homes. My colleagues and I remain vigilant to keep the crime in our city where it is, among the lowest in California. Councilman Gardiner has supported almost all of these efforts, except the ordinance to control unwanted solicitation which he opposed even though such solicitation can be a prelude to burglaries. Again there is largely a consensus on how to address the issue.

The current city council is not treating residents poorly. All of our meetings are broadcast live and are available on the city website so residents can view the meetings and make their own judgments. Like any councilmember, Gardiner is free to agendize anything he wants. Under the Brown Act the council must agendize proposed action in order to act. Sometimes the council cannot do more than the staff has already done. For example, the council cannot add conditions to a building permit after the permit is issued without risking significant liability. Yet members of the public expect the council to act on items placed on its agenda and are understandably disappointed to find that their time addressing an agenda item does not lead to a productive result. It is inconsiderate to the public for a councilmember to agendize items on which we can take no action. It is important for the council to act in a business-like manner. I am committed to implementing the management study's recommendations to address this issue once the study is complete. I am confident that a consensus will emerge on the council as to how to handle this issue as well.

Whatever may be said in the election campaign, I urge you to judge the candidates' positions on what they say, not on how others characterize their positions. Please vote Tuesday November 6th.

Tom Long Mayor, Rancho Palos Verdes