Andy Holcombe’s Letter – Council Race

Peggy sent us this letter by Andy Holcombe, expressing why he didn’t want to appoint the runner up from the last election. I submit it for your consideration:

“Greetings….

I for one have not made up my mind on who I favor for appointment. I have acknowledged that Bob Evans is qualified,and would be a good appoinment. That criteria alone of course could and does apply to many.

I am not sure what “persuasion” you think I may be, or others on council for that matter, but I can speak for myself and all on council of all persuasions, that we seek what is best for the entire community.

What is persuasive to me regarding this appointment thus is what is best for our community. In that regard, I think the open appoinment process, and the public consideration of all interested, and the pros and cons of what they may bring to the council, the public discourse over what they offer to our community, is the way to get the best for the comunity appointment.

In and of itself the fourth place vote getter analysis simply is not dispositive of who may be the best selection. As our paper pointed out at my election when I was the highest vote getter, within the total number of people voting in that election, almost three times as many voted against me as in my favor. I don’t concur with the inference of that “analysis”, but vote count can be interptreted many ways. For example, in the most recent election for the three spots, a significant majority of two thirds voted for candidates labelled as liberal or progressives. (note, this is a non-partisan race or election). In deference to the winning majoriy of voters should a liberal or progressive be appointed? I don’t think so, at least not for that reason. And as pointed out by others, this was an election for only three positions. There is no waying of knowing who the fourth vote getter may have been if there were four choices to be made at that time. (Although, if one chose to extrapolate from the two thirds liberal or progressive vote getters that were winners amongst the top three, the likely result would seem to be that a liberal or progressive would rise to that fourth spot.)

As indicated above, I favor the a process that I hope will identify and build consensus for what is best for our entire community. Could be Bob Evans. Could be a liberal or progressive. The vote outcome is to some extent a factor in that process. For the reasons I outline above, it is far from dispositive for me.

All council members were elected to serve the entire community. The charter was amended not too long ago to specifically create the appointment option within thirty days, and to call for a special election after that if no appointment made.

If you were at the last meeting, you would have heard me state that at the informal meeting I had with Bob a few days earlier, I stated to him that I thought polarity and devisiveness were the biggest problem facing our community. (ensuring structurally balance budget and containing employee costs was my #2).

One of the reasons I favor the appointment process now underway as it is a way to very publically listen to our entire community on a very important topic. It is an opportunity for community building. For me, there was no political motive in this, though I admit many on both or all sides are trying to make it political, with the all too predictable polarity and devisiveness that weakens our community. That is what is disappointing to me.

Anyway, I hope you ultimately find some reasonableness within my approach, even if you disagree with it. Certainly appoinment of Bob at the last meeting would have been reasonable. I just don’t think it would have been in the best interests of our community to do so then, and thereby miss out on what I still hope will be a community building dialogue. And a reasonable best for the community appointment.

Andy Holcombe”

My thoughts: Mr. Holcombe says he wants an open appointment process so that all candidates can be given a fair review and citizens can have their input. Funny, I thought that is what the election was all about?

There were 3 council seats open during the election as Holcmbe points out and then a 4th seat became open 2 seconds after the election of Councilman Wahl to the Board of Supervisors, That makes the 4th seat open. The first three got their seats through the vote and you may wonder why not the 4th? I think it should be obvious by now. Because contrary to what Councilman Andy Holcome says this IS all about politics…leftists, liberal politics and what serves THEIR interests, not the city as a whole.

The liberals on the council couldn’t just bypass 4th place winner Bob Evans to reach the next liberal in 5th place, that would be an outrage and caused a scandal. But, they can create the [appearance] of trying to do the right thing for the community and seek someone through this so-called open process selection and then appoint a liberal. This gives them cover (plausible deniability of wrong doing) and then they can keep the council firmly in the hands of the far left – which so far as been a financial disaster for the city.

In closing, Mr. Hocombe says he wants to build consensus on the council, is that what you call 6 liberals and 1 conservative?

I hope you will join us at the City Council meeting tonight and express your support for Bob Evans. He deserves the next seat.

Jack Lee