03-25-09, More on Teahan's Candidacy for City Council by Herbert Molano

 

What's a disagreement among friends?

I can understand Lila's opinion in believing that Michael's contributions in the past with regard to the issues of homeowners would translate into positive contributions as a councilman.

For a while I thought the same. The opinions he expressed, carried the elements of popular concern and a demeanor for proper dialogue. Those are qualities that are conducive to good governance, but do not necessarily make a good councilman.

I stand squarely against his stance for greater taxation and his equivalent disregard for government waste of taxpayer's funds.  Both positions are two sides of the same coin.  The idea that we should first seek ways to expand city revenues before challenging the significant waste of taxpayer's money demonstrates a significant lack of knowledge of the city's financial history.

That alone makes him unqualified in my book.  That makes many other candidates unqualified as well.  That level of naiveté is similar to that of three freshmen councilmen in 2001 who approved the city's change in the pension system that now allows Fire and Police personnel to retire at 90% of their last salary.  I know how that policy change was sold to the councilmen by city management and understand the detrimental financial impact on future budgets and the deterioration of the quality of life of
Glendale's residents.

The impact of budget policies show up eventually in higher taxes, higher utility rates or both.  Those increases hit hard those residents least able to pay.  Those excesses prevent the city from funding essential programs that can help sustain essential programs for youth and families at risk, crime prevention, employment and other initiatives.

That Michael Teahan has qualities that would make him an effective association president or a good father or good friend, I don't doubt.  But it takes more than a friendly and concerned disposition to make a good councilman.  A sound understanding of governmental finances is essential and the willingness to hold management staff accountable even more so.  Those two qualities he has not demonstrated.  His name is absent from the minutes of many commissions that deal with government accountability or council meetings that dealt with the budget.

Anyone can talk the talk.  Anyone can express opinions.  But few have been willing to take on a government that has been unaccountable for too long on their waste and abuse of the taxpayer's money and the loss of opportunities to improve
Glendale.

That is the reason why I've wanted to present to the GHOCC an evaluation of
Glendale's budget without the impediments to sound debate that normally occur when staff is controlling the agenda or the discussion.

Good government begins with transparency and a sound evaluation on the true state of the city.  Let's begin there and see if we can break through the cloud of misinformation that often obscures our attempts to make Glendale a city that can trail-blaze a path to good government everywhere.

Herbert Molano