Editorial: Yes on measures CC and WW

Oct 31, 2018
Oct 31, 2018 Updated Apr 13, 2025
1

Belmont voters are facing a choice of whether they want to move toward having an appointed versus elected city clerk and treasurer, which has been the direction municipal governments are going.

The main point of contention seems to be whether the city’s citizens want to give up having the ability to choose the people for these positions themselves. The argument in favor of both indicates a possibility that someone without the proper experience in election law, municipal procedures or accounting might be elected with little recourse aside from a recall or waiting until the next election. That’s an outside chance, but still a possibility. But it’s not enough to keep with the current system. Voters already elect a council, which then hires a city manager capable of decisions on who to bring in for department heads and other positions so oversight is still there.

(1) comment

Tim E Strinden Oct 31, 2018 9:21am

I believe the city clerk should remain elected because the benefits of elections far outweigh the potential negatives. The primary benefit of elections is the independence provided to the office holders, and the potential increases in transparency of city operations that may result. That is of more value to residents than any possible increase in competence that appointments might provide.

Any increase in competence resulting from appointments is offset by the fact that the appointees would report to City Manager Greg Scoles. While the appointees may be more qualified than elected officials, their primary loyalty is to their boss. This means they would be less likely to report or pursue information critical of city operations than independent elected officials.

Currently, minutes prepared for the Audit Committee by a subordinate of the finance director contain few details of public comments critical of city operations. These minutes are not prepared in a professional manner, but the city manager has not responded to complaints about this over the past three years. As a result, I do not believe he would ensure that an appointed city clerk followed professional guidelines.

I also don’t believe this city council would act to ensure that an appointed city clerk was independent and professional, because this council has actually decreased transparency in city government over the past four years by approving sanitized "action minutes," with few details, for council and committee meetings, failing to video or audio record meetings of the Audit Committee and Measure I Committee, approving changes to the rules for Council meetings that limit public input, and ignoring input from residents who disagree with them.

City Manager Scoles has too much power right now because none of Belmont's current elected officials question him on key issues. Making the city clerk appointed and report to him would make him even more powerful and less accountable. This power grab by the city manager should be defeated.

Thank you for visiting the Daily Journal.

Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading. To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.

We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.

A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!