Does anyone honestly believe there would have been a big change in the rules if Wiggins had beaten Gordon back in 2006?


Of course not. The old council member succession rule required an actual voter election if there was still a lot of time left in an unexpired term.

But the local establishment/booster crowd went absolutely bananas in outrage when David Gordon had the temerity to actually beat their big choice with the voters, businessman Bill Wiggins. So a year later they went out of their way to immediately seek a gigantic change in the rules.

Now the remaining city council members get to pick the successor no matter what. And you just know it won’t be a dissident-questioner kind of guy like Dr. Gordon.


This is not the first vacancy of an elected office that the City Council has needed to act upon. How the Council handled past vacancies was dictated by the Charter requirements in effect at the time of the vacancy.

For example, in February 2002, Mr. Kramer’s resignation from the Council caused a vacancy. The City Council had 30 days to appoint someone to the position. The Council advertised the position and held interviews in open session and appointed Mr. Vander Borght to serve out the remaining term through May 1, 2003. When Ms. Murphy resigned from Council in 2005 with nearly 4 years remaining on her term, her seat was filled by a special election. In 2005, the Charter required that if 16 months or more remained on the term, then a special election had to be called to fill the position rather than the Council making an appointment.


Think there will be “interviews in open session” like before? If Rogers was still around and it was for someone else’s slot, maybe. Keep in mind too that with less than a year left in his term the old Charter rule wouldn’t have applied to his vacancy anyway.

But if Will had retired a year ago like he should have, and didn’t try to stick around for their big life insurance payout as he did, it would have.

Btw … note how in their example above staff makes no mention of David Gordon as a successor? Vander Borght, sure.

Instead of mentioning who the voters’ choice was in 2006, they just refer to it as a “special election”(!)





Filed under Uncategorized

10 responses to “Does anyone honestly believe there would have been a big change in the rules if Wiggins had beaten Gordon back in 2006?

  1. Zora

    Konstantine Anthony is the name being rumored LOL

    • semichorus

      The guy with the wacky ideas.

      I do notice he’s been sucking up to people lately on all the sites. Laurell II.

  2. Old Grandpa

    Konstantine Anthony is a moron !
    If he gets on board city council ?
    That makes three dedicated bicycle enthusiasts !
    That’s bad news !!!
    Bicycles belong on side streets only !!!

  3. Anipnymous

    I am hearing the plan is Constantine the nut case or Rizzotti the terrible intolerant man trained by the protectorates.

  4. Terry

    Is the rumor true that they want us voters to extend their terms in office by about two years ? If that is true then if we do extend their terms they are appointing someone for about three years. I can not even imagine Mr Anthony being appointed for 3 years if that happens we will see a lot of crazy stuff maybe a ghost bike on every corner.

    • semichorus

      Yes. Because of the consolidated elections now required by the Sacramento “Democrats.”

      Which will destroy the last vestige of any kind of true local control. And, it will also make the injection of Big Money into local politics absolutely necessary to the success of a candidate. Only those with the Biggest Names will win local office, and that means $$$$$

      That guy thinks a lot of himself, doesn’t he?

  5. Eileen

    Honestly can you show me the state law that extends their terms of office ? I have yet to see one or hear of one and if there is one why is the city asking the voters and the schools are not asking ???

    • semichorus

      In order to abide by the consolidation requirement, they have to re-stagger their elections to correspond to the state and national.

      That means they can’t be re- elected/kicked out until then — the next “even” year. There are no state or federal elections in 2019, when Burbank would normally have theirs.

      Rogers for instance would be up for re-election in 2019. But, there’s no big election then. So, they have to wait.

  6. Stacy

    Did you know that Anthony Konstantine wants to get rid of “under God” in our schools ? I am surprised that Springer has not tried to do that in all of Burbank, like make a law that brings a fine if you say God.

  7. Old Grandpa

    Constantine … Konstantine ???
    He’s still a moron !
    Three years with him would be a devastating
    blow to City Council !
    Too bad Dr.David Gordon won’t be askedback ? We need someone with everyone’s interest’s at heart . Instead of the special interests groups the council is supporting!
    I guess there’s no slowing down the city’s growth ???

Leave a Reply- (comments take a while to appear)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s