There’s probably no better illustration of how much the political climate in Burbank has changed over the last 10 years than to look at what happened when Susan Spanos was passed over for the mayor’s job, compared with the obvious snooze button that gets pushed every time Dr. Gordon is blanked out of existence.
When a mid-90′s city council refused to appoint Spanos as mayor it was a really huge deal. The Leader ran several op-ed pieces about how unfair it was, and even their own opinion columnist Will Rogers wrote extensively that this action was ill-advised and against precedent.
My, how things have changed. What the council did to Spanos back then was terrifically rotten, and Rogers was absolutely correct, there had been no precedent for such a blatantly insulting and discriminatory passover, even if they’d thought there was a good reason for it.
Their rejection of Spanos was obviously petty and mean-spirited. The only thing that had come close to it was earlier on, back in 1989 when a previous school board had refused to appoint Vivian Kaufman into the presidents’ job on the “grounds” that she was not educated enough for its duties.
But even they relented on this omission several years later and eventually installed Vivian into the top position, where she served with much distinction.
Spanos’ rejection was followed very shortly by that of Ted McConkey’s, who didn’t take his loss quite so heartily as has Dr. Gordon. And he shouldn’t have, either, because it’s totally unacceptable for our city council to throw away a hundred years worth of tradition just to make a political point about who they don’t like. The job of mayor is supposed to rotate among all of the council members by seniority and lack of previous service. If the voters had wanted a specially elected mayor then they would be making that choice for themselves.
The common denominator in all of these bad faith moves is, of course, the intensely petty Dave Golonski (who lost beaucoup points the other night that he doesn’t have, when he tried to silence Eden Rosen from complaining about his good friends the Cusumano developer family). Golonski engineered the Spanos precedent in the first place and he’s used it ever since to punish the people he doesn’t like.
He’s a chickenshit, too, because although in the old days the mayoral vote was taken publically in open session at night, now the council does it in the dark so that no one has a chance to point the finger at them as they’re seen screwing their colleagues.
There’s no better example of this sad group’s awfulness than that they have continually discriminated against Dr. Gordon with these two mostly ceremonial jobs. In Spanos’ case there might have been some valid considerations at the time about her emotional stability. But Gordon is a smart guy and is eminently qualified to lead the city. The fact that a person of his obvious intellectual level has been repeatedly passed over by this bunch of nitwits and petty operatives like Golonski is a true embarrassment to Burbank. And they’re letting it all hang out for everyone to see.
But where’s the outrage? When Spanos was passed over there was an immense negative outcry, and as we just pointed out, even her critics thought it was unjust. The same thing with McConkey. And when Vivian Kaufman was discriminated against the school board was on the public defensive for weeks.
The reason why Burbank is in such bad shape right now is because we people have let these clowns get this way, and with abandon. Think about it: any sensible city council member would at least feel some kind of personal shame for how they’ve been treating David Gordon on these jobs, even if it were just in the general spirit of fair play. After all, does Jess Talamantes really think it’s fair that he should go ahead of a colleague that’s been around a lot longer?
The fact that not one person on the council has spoken out or voted against this action just shows how awful they are. They are truly bad characters with no personal ethics or sense of fair play– just complete trash. This council majority goes out of its way to constantly prove what an arrogant, mean little town our old Burbank has turned into.
**UPDATE**
We’re taking bets on how long it is before Anja Reinke starts shutting people off at oral communications– she’ll last less than a month before the whip comes down. She’s gonna make Gary Bric look like Charles Ruggles.
You must have not gotten your rose colored glasses in our last BWP bill like the rest of the town. Most of the people I know don’t care let alone have a clue of how the City works as long as the lights are on and the trash gets picked up everything is rosy in Smallville. Heck we have a swell statue and neat bike path soon to be the only way we can get across town with the increased traffic and development to come with the four boobs we having running things. Pay no attention to the mess behind the curtain.
The “City Hall Click” seem totally unconcerned as long as they continue to have a blank taxpayer check to pay lawyers to try to protect them and continue the cover-ups and corruption. They have no shame.
I guess I don’t understand what you are angry about? They followed the rules – it is a majority vote.
If you don’t like it, perhaps you should have spoken up during the Charter Review period which could have changed all the rules surrounding the mayor’s election.
If I remember correctly – during the discussions on that part of the charter exactly ZERO people can to speak. It’s much easier to complain than to actually do something about it.
I thought about it, but it would have been pointless. The Charter commission was only concerned with consolidating power, not broadening it. They even wanted to make the city clerk an appointed job.
And the council did not follow the rules– the rules are to elect the person who has the most incumbency but hasn’t served as yet. That was the rule for almost 100 years.
Al I am so confused by you. You criticize people for speaking at council meetings and then you criticize them if they don’t speak. You create a no win situation that really says the public can’t win because the council is always perfect. This council is so far from perfect its hilarious.
No – I criticize people for airing their personal gripes with the world in front of the council.
However, if people were to talk about making a new city law requiring that the person with the longest incumbency get to be mayor – that’s a city matter.
But apparently “it’s too much trouble” or “it wouldn’t make any diff” or “oh well” or “maybe next time”.
My thoughts are if you can’t make the effort then your complaints should get as much effort as you put into correcting them.
I love this idea, Al, that the council-majority is going to consider passing a new law that will contravene a decision they just made. That’s right, blame it on the critics for being lazy losers.
The Cusumano senior apartments are indeed a city matter, too, when both staff and the mayor have gone down there to inspect the reported problems. And the Cusumanos accept city-paid Section 8 vouchers, too.
To claim that a subsidized Cusumano facility is not city business for the council to consider is nothing other than rank dishonesty– and a clear attempt to evade the issue and the criticism to protect the family.
Golonski showed a weak spot on this one, and he can’t afford more problems. It’s not the first time he has gone out of his way to protect the Cusumanos in public, either.
I don’t think he’s saying it’s perfect, but when people complain about things and nothing ever happens, then city defenders such as Al just mock them for their impotency. So they can’t win.
Al,
The Charter review was stacked and people have complained over the years to deaf ears on the Council. Your pie in the sky idea that if we speak up the Council will listen is disproved week after week when they disregard all public speakers like the majority AGAINST the RV ordinance and vote for it any way. Still waiting for the Council to admit the City Manager and City Attorney had anything to do with the BPD mess, don’t hold your breath for that one because the question has been asked.
What’s sad is that people have to do something about anything. We are suppose to have a representative government and not a lop sided group who maks it necessary for people to come and complain about everything just to wake them up from their sleep.
Looks like electing Gary Bric was a big mistake to me. Yes I voted for him but I won’t make that same mistake twice.
Honestly I was fooled by Reinkie when she ran and voted for her. Listening to her say yesterday after getting to be mayor she didn’t know anybody in Burbank before and now she has all the cities employees as friends I was shocked.
She obviously believes that everything is about her. That comment was so far beyond lame I was in shock. She honestly believes that with power comes friends ? She will have a rude awakening one day when we don’t re-elect her and her friends start ignoring her completely.
Small minds is what we have on the council and we all suffer from it.
Al you have never have any idea just how any people have emailed and called these council members only to find deaf ears and no reply.
I used to email them but gave up because the only one who answers you is Councilman Gordon. The rest of them ignore your contact and act like no one told them anything at all.
It’s been that way for a while and new people are always bringing up that when they had an issue they were ignored by this council.
Hell, when police officers try to talk to council members about problems and find that they are ignored what do you think Ms Reinke, Mr Talamantes, Mr Golosnki and Mr Bric do to the rest of us ?
Golonski writes back when he’s running for election. He even returns phone calls. But after that he disappears.
We sure should not forget how just last week Mr Golonski did not want to hear the concerns of Eden Rosen.
According to Al’ theory Eden Rosen came out and brought her concerns up. So what response did she get from Mr Golonski ? He tried to shut her up and didn’t want to hear it.
Eden Rosn was not making nasty attacks she was stating what the problems are and Mr Golonski didn’t want to her it.
That’s why people don’t waste their time Al. But Al, that does not mean people are happy. Burbank is getting pissed at this group of council members and their dismissive arogant attitude and more and more of Burbank is watching them.
I sure wich these council members would repair my street. It has never looked more like Los Angeles than it does today. What have they been doing and where is the money going ?
Reese I agree with you. Golonksi showed himself to be a petty little sh@!# by interrupting Mrs Rosen.
His grounds for it sounded like he doesn’t like Mrs Rosen. To bad for him he gets to listen to her and act on her requests anyway. He sits there in his high chair like a baby throwing food in a high chair. His interruption was an embarassment to the whole community of Burbank is you ask me.
Being a life long Burbank Resident I am ashamed of what Burbank has become.
We are now a notoriously nasty city that is so caught up in corruption.
Decisions are made here in dark smoke filled rooms and the selection of mayor and vice mayor were obviously done in the darkest of rooms yet.
Years of my life have contained respect for the positions of mayor and vice mayor of my city. This is no longer the case as the positions have become nothing but a game of political reward and corruption. It is no longer possible for me to respect these poitions or those who occupy these positions.
I have watched as they have gone from a position representing the public interest and the public good to a personal reward system that now serves nothing but personal ego.
Those two who occupy the positions today are filled with personal ego to the point that the public good has met it’s death all together.
Golonski made his mean spirited on Mrs. Rosen for no reason except hate.
Erase the hate in Burbank, erase Golonski from the city council.
Great comments! I’m one of those gadfly’s that most of you use to put down. Tried to tell you the Berlins were a better choice than Brick and Anja but you bought the Golonski scare tactic. I can only hope you’ll express your concerns next election and not buy the same old pony show. And quit voting for women just because their women! that carpet bagged in the last election almost beat the only trustworthy member on the Council.
Get “mad as hell” and don’t take it any more. Here’s the email for the Leader write a letter today! the letter to the editor section is lame and they need to loose the large worthless commentaries that take up the whole page. Stand UP!
burbankleader@latimes.com
Yawn ….
1. If it were codified – then the council would have no choice other than to follow it. Apparently it’s an unwritten rule – which means it has no meaning at all.
2. If your only answer is “it won’t make any diff – then get over it” – but truly it would have and no matter your cynicism over boards and commissions they are filled with people that have differing opinions – you need only look at the minutes (oh but that takes work)
3. In the years since I’ve followed local politics the crowd on Tuesday night has never really had anything positive to say about anything. That type of consistent negativity reduces the credibility I give anyone. So if you’re up there talking about the length of time it takes to do your laundry and how you don’t really like the look of the horse statues in front of PF Changs (Eden Rosen) then please move along, but if you come up with ideas and explain WHY your ideas are good, and are not a constant complain-a-holic then your ideas should and would get looked at.
Every election I’ve been through here in Burbank it’s been “an angry wave will throw out the council” and every election they get reelected so obviously there is a disconnect with those not satisfied and those that are satisfied. Notice I used the word satisfied because no – things are not perfect, but if the alternative is Dr. Gordon’s worldview of: no water saving, no mass transit, no social programs in schools, no coordination of non-profits, focus on paving streets surrounding personal interest property – then I am happy with the status quo.
The reason why the Tuesday night crowd is so negative is because there’s lots to be negative about. It’s hilarious to see someone acting like the only public criticisms have been about statues– I suspect the evidence is overwhelming now that the critics have been correct all along…
And reform was very possible in the mid-90s, until Susan Spanos blew it by refusing to fire Bud Ovrom and the rest of that corrupt gang.
If she’d had, we would have gotten someone like Steve Helvey in as CM, instead of the protege-criminal crowd that Ovrom trained to take over. Everything would be different now. In fact, things were looking so bad for the status-quo back then that “Leadership Burbank” was a panicked attempt to counteract the reformers.
Well Al
Where to begin. Your depiction here is so off fact it’s amazing.
“alternative is Dr. Gordon’s worldview of: no water saving, no mass transit, no social programs in schools, no coordination of non-profits, focus on paving streets surrounding personal interest property – then I am happy with the status quo.”
So no social programs in schools. Would that be something like the family services programs in schools ? Dr Gordon not only voted for it he was the one who located the funding and found a way to do it. Everyone held their breath because it was a dead deal and came back to the council with a way to fund it in this tight budget only because of Dr Gordon’s efforts.
You really need to begin watching the council meetings Al because your depiction of things is really not very accurate. All of us who support the counseling programs in schools applaud Dr Gordon for what he did as do those who saw a need for new school fields, again Dr Gordon voted in support of that project.
Thanks to Dr Gordon for his efforts.
I think that the horses infront of the chang resturant is some redevlopment giveaway and we paid for them with our taxes. If we paid for those ugly statues then she has a right to complain about them.
That chang resturant also got a whole lane of street if I remember right. They get to jam it up with parked cars for their valet parking.
If the taxpayers have to give away property and money to these so calleg great businesses then the taxpayers get a say about everything to do with them
I wish Rosen would run for council. I would vote for her because she makes sense when she talks.
P.F. Chang’s came up only because the council was debating whether or not to give them a part of Magnolia for valet parking.
Al,
After the BPD mess and the connection to he usual players Golonski, things might change. I only hope the people on this blog are serious about throwing out the bums and hopefully Fladd and Barlow will be gone by then.
Masked – seems like a sexist generalization to say that anyone that voted for Elise Stearns did so because “voting for women just because their women”.
Though coming from a former preacher I can understand your disdain of women.
I suspect that Masked is talking about Kimberly Jo and not the stearns lady.
Kimberly Jo came to my chuch to campaign and they set up a reception for her. Well I noted that questions about Burbank confused her. I didn’t vote for her because she did not seem to know anything about Burbank.
Yes looking now at Mr Bricks and Miss Renkee the Berlins would have been much better choices. It is always so hard to know how people will be when they are running because they are all overly nice to you when they want your vote. I saw the Berlins and they were not as nice to me so I voted for Bricks and Renkee. Maybe those two just took nice pills that day because they sure became meanies after we voted for them.
Yes – you’re right. Kimberly Jo.
You never know about anyone until once they are in office. You actually don’t really know if the Berlins would be a better choice.
If you can’t even be nice to people who you want support from – I can’t imagine what kind of council members they would be.
Just a though – I don’t know either.
It happens every election in this town unqualified except for their gender, women think they have to have one of their own in there for balance. Look at Ramos, couldn’t even run the meeting with out Dave’s help, Anja, clueless with out Dave, Spanos, cocaine, Murphy cocaine and guns all losers and totally out of touch. And I was referring to Kimberly Jo. If that’s all you have Al good try I see you didn’t respond to any of the other posters comments did you?
Wow – masked. Your resentment towards women is actually kind of scary.
I actually replied to most of them. =)
Al Al Al,
You have me all wrong I’m having lunch at Hooters right now dope! I haven’t seen a woman councilman with enough smarts to run the City since Mary Lou, the rest have turned out to be complete failures and an embarrassment to the community I’m sure Anja won’t disappoint.
Sure this council shows more bad faith but then we can all die of old age waiting for them to ever show any good faith.
Oh and on the interruption of E Rosen I could not agree more, it was Dave showing off his nasty side once again while his adoring 3 fans jumped up and down all excited in front of their big screens.
Clearly watching the council and how they handle serious issue we have elected the dregs of society.
All most of them do (like Talamantes and Renke) is talk and talk about how great the staff is. So if they are so great why is everything all screwed up ?
What does staff have on them that all they can do is talk abou how lucky they are to be friends with staff ? Lucky that staff keeps their blunders quiet or what ?
Maybe Mayor Renke will be the first sitting mayor to be recalled in the history of Burbank
From my view Gordon should have been vice mayor. Making Tellemontes vice mayor shows they have no respect for the voter citizens. Renke goes on and on about history but Burbank history would say Dr Gordon is vice mayor and Renke didn’t follow history. She is a sitting duck when it comes to running again for council.
That city council gives away money to their favorite businesses all the time. Ok so does everyone think a private business is really private when they operate with tax money ?
I ask this because from what I understood the tax money paid for that building Rosen was talking about. If we paid for it then I say we get to talk about it because its not private.
AL IS RIGHT and he is wrong. I drive Hollywood Way everyday and there is no new street there. The new street can be located in the alley behind Mr Golonski’s home.
Back when no Burbank Homeowner could get an alley even repaired Mr Golonksi made it a very high priority to quietly completely repave his own alley. The rest of us were left with pot holes.
I saw his new alley pavement with my very own eyes. Perhaps Al has the locations confused on this one.
The problem in Burbank is that far to many people have any idea how badly managed this city really is.
They don’t get any real news in the Leader and they get city propaganda on channel 6. More and more people read the blogs now but what about all those without computers ?
Somehow news has to reach every resident about just what is really going on here. I don’t know how Masked, but so long as many people don’t know the city is mismanaged and ready to fall apart they won’t get angry. When people find out they do get angry, so more and more they have to know what buffoons are running the city.
I’ll do my best to spread the word.
Since The Leader article was published about the reorganization I have submitted the comments below TWICE, and apparently there is no one home to approve putting these words up on their site because they have not appeared. So here is what I think about this situation:
“The Burbank City Council voted on this reorganization after the senior staff, Mike Flad and Dennis Barlow, actually had the audacity to recommend on the agenda who of our ‘elected’ officials would best represent them as spokes people for the City is the height of hypocrisy. While words of democracy were spoken today, experience and having been elected twice by the voters but passed over again by the staff’s recommendation and council action today shows a complete disregard for democracy and diversity in Burbank. Independent reasoning and democracy only exist in words in Burbank — certainly not actions. To use ‘not voting for the budget’ as an excuse when it has been cut and will continue to need cuts is the poorest excuse imaginable in these economic times. Further to raise utility and water rates on the backs of seniors who will not receive even a minimum cost of living increase is no way to balance a budget. Every organization and government entity has had to look at ways to cut budgets by streamlining and eliminating positions reorganizing departments more efficiently. A poor economy means less spending and work for everyone so why not vote for an elected official who actually runs a local business and knows something about financial accountability? No wonder lawsuits against the City by employees is at an all time high. Perhaps the voters could have an opportunity to vote on how the City is being run. A one-year councilman should NOT be vice mayor. The new mayor said she didn’t even know people in Burbank until she decided to run for office and she acts disinterested in sitting through many issues. As long as you vote the way Flad and Barlow tell you all will be well and the perks will continue. That is democracy Burbank-style. Dr. Gordon, please don’t be discouraged. Many voters want you to continue pursuing cost-cutting measures, reveal cover-ups and do your best to bring commonsense to the decision making process.”
Thanks for letting me post this without requiring any approval.
Send it as an e-mail letter– maybe they’ll print it on the op-ed page.
Flad has gone farther to control the Council than any prior City Manager in recent years.
In reviewing the City’s website my recollection was confirmed. Past agendas have never contained a ‘staff recommendation’ for Mayor and Vice Mayor. This is what the agendas said for 2007 & 2008:
“Recommendation: Select Mayor and Vice Mayor for coming year.”
When Senior Staff, Barlow and Flad, get to tell the others who to vote in as mayor and vice mayor, City Hall politics have reached an all time low — it’s time for them to go. So much for elected representation, democracy and diversity Burbank-style.
This comment was also submitted to The Leader and the following acknowledgment received:
Your comment has been submitted and will be viewable once it is approved.
Good catch, Shocked. I’ll check into it– there may also be legalities involved here.
Update: checked their agenda for 5/3– the word staff uses is ‘selected,’ which implies a decision was already made– although when? I don’t remember a vote in public session, though it may have happened.
Whether this was an actual recommendation or not is a good question– it’s written as if it is not, but when and how was this consensus gathered?
It’s funny how everyone continues to try to figure out what happens in the halls of Burbank city government. There is no doubt everything the city stinks. That’s because it is rotten.
It isn’t about what, when, or where, it’s WHO. Golonski, Flad, Barlow, Stehr, Talamantes, Brick, Wilke and now Reinke! These are a few of names that continue to screw up and more importantly spend millions of dollars to cover it up.
Until they are gone don’t expect zebras to change their stripes!
No Lee you named the wart hogs in the room and not the zebras.
Quick someone call the ask a psychic line about the new mayor. I bet they could tell you all about what lies in her future.
Does anyone remember a few years ago when Dr Gordon was denied the position because as either Bric or Golonski put it, with a re-election lomming about we are not even sure that Dr Gordon will be re elected