This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Politics & Government

Thoughts From Measure C Supporters, Opponents

RPV Patch asked six leading players on both sides of the issue for their insights and opinions on what happened ... and what might happen next.

Tuesday, Rancho Palos Verdes residents will have the opportunity to cast their ballots on Measure C, the charter initiative, which could significantly change the form of their city government.

Should RPV remain a general law city, like most California cities are? Or should it adopt its own charter, or constitution, written by the city government that could potentially claim powers from the state government?  

It's been a bumpy road to the election throughout the last few months. Here's what six leading lights of this election—three supporters and three opponents—have to say in the final hours of the campaign.

Find out what's happening in Palos Verdeswith free, real-time updates from Patch.

What are the main reasons for your position on the charter initiative?

Sharon Yarber, longtime RPV resident and No on C spokesperson -- Opponent:

Find out what's happening in Palos Verdeswith free, real-time updates from Patch.

“This charter is just so bad,” she said. “The principle concern is that it leaves the election laws wide open. Those are our most fundamental rights, and they shouldn’t be tinkered with without voter approval. We’ve seen people express concerns against the actions the council wants to take, but the council goes ahead and does what it wants to do. We’re also very concerned over election rules regarding initiative, referendum and recall. The initiative process is an issue with certain people in the community and the council, and I think they want to tinker with it.”

Tom Long, current Mayor and longtime city councilman -- Supporter:

“It really boils down to essentially one reason—financial savings—in three different forms,” Long said. First, the city brings in nearly $5 million a year of its $20 million annual budget from taxes and fees approved by the voters. Today, Sacramento is looking to raid local government budgets, he said, and charter cities have stronger legal grounds to protect their revenues. Charter cities can also potentially save money on public works projects through design-build contracts and prevailing wage exemptions. “To me, it’s all coming down to having more local control over our revenue and spending,” Long said.

Jeff Lewis, RPV Planning Commissioner -- Supporter:

“The two big reasons that I support Measure C are the opportunity to save money and protect taxpayer funds,” he said. “It will also enhance our ability to prevent Sacramento from raiding our Terranea occupancy tax revenue. Plus, there are the potential savings we could have on public works projects from (more use of) the design-build process and opting out of paying prevailing wage rates.”

Barbara Ferraro, former RPV mayor and councilwoman -- Opponent:

“The council is rushing into this without really thinking it through,” Ferraro said.  “This is a very short charter, very vague, and there’s too much left out." Her biggest concern is that there hasn’t been enough time or opportunity for public review and input, she said. "It seems to me that they (the council) are trying to railroad it through.”

Ken Dyda, former RPV Mayor and Councilman -- Supporter:

“I want to protect our local taxes (and other revenues) from the money grab by the state,” he said. The charter would help the city protect its beleaguered budget against “back-door” taxing by Sacramento, added Dyda, which intends to put the burden of paying for its unfunded, mandated state programs on local governments.

Arline Glotz, former RPV commissioner, leader in local charities -- Opponent:

“I don’t think it was vetted enough in the community,” she said. “It’s come as such a surprise to so many people. Second, it seems to me this charter has no restrictions.  It’s only two pages; looks more like a page and a half to me. I just don’t think it was well thought out enough. Third, there’s so much spinning (of the issues) going on. It doesn’t seem like we’re getting clear facts. It would be helpful if we had more time to vet it and look at the facts.”

What do you think of how the campaigns have been conducted?

Tom Long, current Mayor and longtime city councilman -- Supporter:

“Some people on the 'no' side have tended to focus a little too much on hypothetical things,” Long said, “putting a lot of emphasis on fear of government rather than on a good logical analysis.” Long also criticized anti-charter mailers prepared by construction unions and sent to residents, saying they “completely misdescribed” the charter. “Everybody in the community, yes and no alike, feels those (mailers) were not very helpful,” he said.

Sharon Yarber, longtime RPV resident and No on C spokesperson -- Opponent

“We’ve done a herculean job of reaching out to a good number of residents in a very short time,” she said. “But we don’t have the city’s resources behind us, so it’s been very challenging. We’ve found that when we’ve talked to people about the charter, the overwhelming response is to vote no. Since the beginning, the city kept this issue under the radar. There was no community outreach, and people are still unaware.”  

Jeff Lewis, RPV Planning Commissioner -- Supporter:

Lewis and other C supporters criticized inaccuracies and misleading statements in construction union mailers sent to homes across the city. Just a few days ago, Lewis said he received a mailer with false statements and “fear-mongering” content including photos of Bell city officials being arrested. “Suggesting that Measure C would turn RPV into Bell is just not a valid argument,” he said.

Barbara Ferraro, former RPV mayor and councilwoman -- Opponent:

Ferraro objected to pro-charter speakers characterizing charter opponents as really campaigning on other issues, such as Marymount development. A letter to a newspaper that called the No on C organization a “cabal” particularly irritated her.  “There’s no cabal, “ she said. “We’re just a group of people who want to proceed in an orderly manner and take time to give the public a chance to vet this issue.”

Ken Dyda, former RPV Mayor and Councilman -- Supporter:

“The opposition is spreading fear and doubt, without any substance,” he said.  “They’ve never said what they’d like to do; they’re just saying what we’re doing is wrong.

Arline Glotz, former RPV commissioner, leader in local charities -- Opponent:

Glotz expressed disappointment in how she feels residents have been treated by the city council regarding this issue. “These people just don’t seem civil to the citizens,” she said. “I don’t remember meetings like that years ago. There’s a lot of acrimony going on. Remember that President Obama said we should be more civil to each other? I don’t think that’s happening. ”

What’s your prediction for the outcome of Tuesday’s vote?

Sharon Yarber, longtime RPV resident and No on C spokesperson -- Opponent:

“We’re actually cautiously optimistic that we’re going to win,” said Yarber. “We’ve heard from disparate people who have held straw polls that they think the charter will be defeated. But it’s anybody’s guess.”

Tom Long, current Mayor and longtime city councilman -- Supporter:

“I’m not going to predict because I wouldn’t want to make people complacent, or they might think I’m trying to manipulate the election,” Long said. “Besides, I don’t have a basis to predict, because I’m not aware of any polling.”

Barbara Ferraro, former RPV mayor and councilwoman -- Opponent:

“My prediction is that the measure is going to fail,” she said. “When I talk to people at our schools or at the store, I haven’t herd a single person say they plan to vote yes.”

Jeff Lewis, RPV Planning Commissioner -- Supporter:

“Nobody does polls, so it’s hard to say,” he said. “The only prediction I’m going to make is that the election will be very close, not a blowout like we had with Measure P.  And I don’t think we’ll have high voter turnout that we had for Measure P.”

Arline Glotz, former RPV commissioner, leader in local charities -- Opponent:

“I’d say we’re on the winning side,” she said. “Not because everybody thinks it’s bad to have a charter – but not this one. People are interested, and they want their say.”

Ken Dyda, former RPV Mayor and Councilman -- Supporter:

“Heck, I don’t know,” he said. “This one is much too close to call.” Dyda expressed concern that RPV voters who don’t really understand the issues or the government process might automatically vote no. “If they’re not sure,” he said, “most people will vote no, just to keep the status quo.”

What’s your prediction for what will happen after the election?

Tom Long, current Mayor and longtime city councilman -- Supporter:

“If it passes, the council will look at which ordinances it should adopt, most notably exempting the city from paying prevailing wages,” Long said. “If it doesn’t pass, I suspect nothing will happen. I know some opponents say, ‘We’re not against all charters, just this one.’ The problem is, they don’t have an alternate charter, and it’s not a multiple-choice issue. If you start saying, ‘let’s elect a charter commission and gather everybody’s pet provisions,’ you’ll end up with a cobbled-together thing and they’ll never be any agreement.”

Sharon Yarber, longtime RPV resident and No on C spokesperson -- Opponent:

“If the council wants to move forward with a new charter, then I think we need to hear from other people besides (city staff), have some forums and really discuss it, so we can become much more informed than we are now," she said. "Even if it passes, the good thing is that the press and the residents will be watching this council very closely. Nothing is going to past this community in terms of what the council will do between now and when new council is seated in November.”

Jeff Lewis, RPV Planning Commissioner -- Supporter:

“My prediction is that in the first few weeks (after the election), the city council would pass ordinances exempting us from prevailing wage requirements,” he said.  “And like the city of Oceanside, we’ll save potentially hundreds of thousands if not a million dollars in the first six months that Measure C is enacted.”

Barbara Ferraro, former RPV mayor and councilwoman -- Opponent:

“If the council is genuinely interested in seeing us become a charter city, they could certainly put another six months into studying this before the general election and possibly craft a good charter to put on the ballot.”

Ken Dyda, former RPV Mayor and Councilman -- Supporter:

“Regardless of what happens, the city’s day to day operations are not going to change … (and) the direction the city has taken since it was formed, both in terms of land use and very conservative fiscal policies … that’s going to continue.”

Arline Glotz, former RPV commissioner, leader in local charities -- Opponent:

”We have to meet with other cities, meet with the school board, get all these people together and figure out what we want to do. And I think the city council should take the lead. They’re the ones who think this is a good idea. They hold forums and call meetings on this issue and that issue -- so why not the charter?”

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?