03-25-09, Michael Teahan’s Response to Herbert Molano’s Comments on the Teahan Candidacy

 

Herbert Molano has gone to great lengths to discredit my capacity to comprehend the complexities of city government.  More accurately, however, is that his efforts are more about furthering the candidacy of someone for whom he cannot even vote—Mr. Molano doesn’t live here—than about honest discourse.

 

To be clear about my qualifications; I have built a very successful business in Van Nuys with help of a very capable associate where I am responsible for all aspects of business operations including accounting and monitoring international monetary markets.  I have degrees in both Economics and Political Science with a focus on development economics and public choice theory.  My positions on city government policy are firmly grounded in macro economic theory and are not some casual association with the facts. 

 

I have clearly indicated my goals in moving the city’s compensation and pension plans toward a more private sector model, but Herbert only wishes to hear my contention that change will take time.  I have accomplished a great deal in a very short time with the support of countless members of our community, a privilege I have been happy to reciprocate whenever possible.

 

My advocacy for change to the Hillside Ordinance calculations for floor area ratios in Adams Hill included a complex statistical model to demonstrate what constitutes a typical home in our neighborhood and how it can be effectively compared.  If Mr. Molano wants to invert some matrixes and run some regression models over coffee, I would be happy to indulge him.

 

It is egotistical to assert that just because someone doesn’t agree with you, that they must not understand.

 

Much has been made of the $300 million in expenditures exceeding revenue since 2002 on page 129 of the CAFR, but unless my calculator is broken it’s actually $236 million.  It also includes capital expenditures in the mix and if you look to page 124 of the CAFR you will see that the net assets of the city INCREASED by $286 million over the same period.  The city has not been funding operational expenses with restricted bond debt—that would be illegal and Herbert is not shy about bringing lawsuits costing us hundreds of thousands of dollars.  It’s not his money, after all, because he doesn’t live here anymore.

 

Accounting, especially government accounting, is complicated and not the realm of amateur, self anointed budgetary analysts. 

 

My position on a business license for Glendale is rooted in the fact that the city keeps no data on the composition nor health of the business sector.  When the News Press called to find out what businesses were closing their doors, they had no answer.  You cannot attract business if you don’t know your strengths and this data is critical to economic development.  Montrose does it and it works.

 

The lack of a licensing process also forces the city to use CUP’s to regulate business behavior, adding months to the time it takes to open a business here.

 

My advocacy of a business tax is rooted in macro economic theory.  The city has a vested interest in approving a Home Depot over a solar panel manufacturing plant because its revenue model relies too heavily on sales tax and development fees.  We end up with shopping malls and diminishing green space instead of a healthy mix that would foster healthy economic growth.

 

When it comes to deeds over words, our quaint little homeowners associations have done our fair share of hauling water.  Much more than the combined efforts of Barry Allen or Herbert Molano.  The city council does a lot more than negotiate employee compensation packages and balance the budget.  It addresses quality of life issues and a direction for the city that Mr. Molano refers to but never effectively describes.

 

As far as the demeanor of a councilman, the characteristics of confrontation that Mr. Molano seems to advocate have been the root of the Council’s inability to work together to find solutions that serve the public interest.  If a desire for openness and transparency are desirable qualities, as he has claimed, it was my consent that Mr. Molano was given an opportunity to present his views on the budget before the next GHCC meeting on Monday before the election.  There will be no impediments to sound debate.

 

I am, quite frankly, a little tired of Herbert’s use of our city as a political playground for his ideological advocacy.  When he converts even one slab of concrete to a blade of grass, as our association has done in Adams Hill, perhaps I will start to pay attention.  In the interim, I will continue to run a campaign of substance over billboards and ideas over ideology.

 

Respectfully,

 

Michael Teahan

Still a candidate for City Council