Lompoc needs help going forward, and one would think the City Council would be leading the charge of positive change, hearing the needs of the citizens, deciding what is best to move the city forward, and so on.
If you have people seated as political leaders of a city who are intent on encouraging appeals of staff decisions concerning long-established city policies based on federal and state regulations, they become the leaders of tyranny.
A tyrant is defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary as “an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution.” Tyranny is defined as cruel and oppressive government or rule. In the thesaurus, related words to define a tyrant are “browbeater,” “bully,” “bulldozer,” and “authoritarian.”
During the Aug. 6 Lompoc City Council meeting, the subject of how fees were assessed for accessory dwelling units (ADUs, aka “granny flats”) was discussed. The problem arose when Sacramento hurriedly passed Senate Bill 1069, amending sections of the government code to reduce the barriers California homeowners face when seeking to build ADUs. This only added confusion concerning what fees would be assessed based on the impact of each new unit.
Because fees being charged for new units were varying, the city manager in conjunction with several city officials developed interim policy guidance for assessment of fees pending completion of a fee study. Basically, the fees would be based on the relationship of the ADU size to the square footage of the primary residence. No fees would be charged for solid waste, water, or sewer if the ADU shared the service to the primary unit.
The staff is in the process of preparing a new fee schedule; the management services director said it should be ready for the council in “a couple of months.” But people are in the process of trying to build ADUs to accommodate not only their “granny” but other family members as well. They can’t wait for the cumbersome process of public hearings to play out.
During the council discussion, Councilman Jim Mosby was visibly upset and very vocal about how this new interim policy was created “behind locked doors” rather than in a public meeting. He argued that the meeting wasn’t “transparent,” and even though it may have been legal to do it the way it was being done, it should have been brought to the council in a public hearing.
The staffer tried to explain that there were two permits pending at the time and some guidance was needed concerning the assessment of fees. The primary purpose of the interim action was to provide some consistency in the application of fees.
Councilman Mosby further alleged that the process was “an arbitrary, cruel, and unreasonable use of control, and that’s called tyranny, and that’s what we have going on here.” The city attorney then said that since this was a logical extension of an existing fee that this policy was created legally and advised Mosby to direct his obvious discontent with the process toward the city attorney, not the staffer making the report. Mosby has been warned before concerning the way he treats city staff.
Councilwoman Gilda Cordova, in a move to calm down the rhetoric, then read from the staff report that the fees were derived from the applicable sections of the government code. So, they weren’t just something the staff made up out of thin air.
Mosby then made a motion to return this issue to the council so that they could make a fee determination; the motion passed 5-0. This was a reasonable request, but why was all the emotion and bullying of the staff necessary?
If anyone in that chamber was acting in a tyrannical way it was Mosby; he has consistently acted like this in numerous discussions. When discussing matters of government policies or considering citizen-generated appeals of staff decisions he seems to be “unrestrained by law or constitution.” When discussing matters of the budget or interacting with staff during council meetings he frequently acts as a “browbeater,” “bully,” “bulldozer,” and “authoritarian.”
Mosby and his associates give the impression that they think that government services should be free; they’re not. Just like it costs when you call for a plumber, electrician, roofer, or landscaper to provide services to your home, it also costs money to pick up the trash and to provide electrical, water, wastewater, police, and fire services.
His behavior exposes a serious concern. How can a decision maker who has had several run-ins with city and county code enforcement officials over the years in his business life, who clearly dislikes established regulatory requirements, and has a negative bias toward the validity of the professional staffs’ decisions make sound judgments of fact?
Councilman Mosby doesn’t appear to be someone who can help Lompoc going forward. Using words like “tyranny” when referring to the city staff is another of many reasons why his approach to leadership will not provide a path to success.
Ron Fink is a resident of Lompoc. Send your thoughts to letters@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in Aug 29 – Sep 5, 2019.