Five Syllable City

On May 13, a majority of the City Council denied Atascadero voters the opportunity to decide whether to have an elected mayor. Councilmember Jerry Clay made a motion to put on the Council’s agenda for a future meeting the question of whether an initiative measure should be included on the November ballot allowing voters to elect the mayor directly and, if so, whether the mayor’s term should be two or four years. Councilmember Tom O’Malley supported the motion. Councilmembers Luna and Beraud and Mayor Brennler opposed it. So, by a 3-2 vote, the motion was defeated.

The rationales given by Councilmember Beraud and Mayor Brennler for opposing the motion had the ring more of pretext than of truth. Councilmember Beraud put herself on record as favoring age discrimination in selecting a mayor, and used that dubious position to support an even more dubious argument of false economy. She said that whoever gets the job of elected mayor should be young, and that since such a young person would have more need for compensation than an older person, it would be necessary to pay an elected mayor more than the $300 per month that other members of the City Council get paid. So she voted against the motion because, she said, in its current strained financial condition, the City of Atascadero cannot afford to pay an elected mayor the additional compensation that he or she would have to get. Mayor Brennler, meanwhile, used a different line of suspect reasoning to justify his vote to deny residents an opportunity to vote on whether to have a directly elected mayor. Starting with a statement that an elected mayor is something that Atascadero should have in the future, he said that that future time has not yet arrived and that it is necessary first to address the subject of election campaign finance reform. No reason was given for why the subject of an elected mayor could not be put up for decision by the voters in November while the subject of campaign election reform is being addressed.

Councilmember Luna provided an explanation for his opposition to the motion which was more candid and coherent. It was also disturbing in its substantive content. He made the point that Atascadero is a divided community, and that different councilmembers have their different constituencies. He also made reference to what seemed to be painful memories of a past time when, he said, he was on the short end of a 4-1 division on the Council and was passed over for mayor. He then expressed concern that allowing the voters to elect the mayor would somehow recreate the situation he faced when he was an oppressed minority member of the Council. From those comments, the message came through that Councilmember Luna represents a certain constituency; that he feels he is now part of a majority faction of the Council; and that he does not want to let the voters elect a mayor because it could alter that favorable status quo by producing a mayor who might not be just another member of his Council majority.

There can be little doubt that the political concerns that Councilmember Luna expressed are at the heart of the opposition by the majority to allowing the voters to decide whether Atascadero should have an elected mayor. The rationale expressed by Councilmember Beraud to justify her opposition to Councilmember Clay’s motion does not withstand analysis. The additional amount of money that it would cost the city to pay a mayor even as much as $2,000 a month is just not material in the whole scheme of things. As to the explanation given by Mayor Brennler for his opposition, there is no reason why campaign election reform cannot be pursued on one track while the question of whether to elect a mayor is being pursued on another. Unless we are to assume that the Council majority acted on the basis of flimsy rationales unsupported by logic, we can only conclude that they were motivated by the political calculations presented by Councilmember Luna.

The Council majority’s opposition to a motion to consider allowing the voters to decide whether to have an elected mayor represents a defeat for the interests of Atascadero. As has been discussed in detail in previous postings on this blog, and elsewhere, Atascadero is at a great disadvantage in trying to operate its municipal corporation without a chief executive officer. The absence of an executive disables Atascadero’s government by leaving it without an individual whose job it is to proactively promote a vision for progress and improvement, to initiate action and to stand personally accountable for the results. There is a void, and no individual Councilmember or faction of the Council has stepped up to fill that void. Indeed, the majority faction which is now straining to preserve its power has shown little unity, much less initiative, and has not provided the leadership that is so sorely needed by Atascadero during these challenging times. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that this majority will even remain in tact after this November’s election. Nonetheless, the majority voted to put its questionable, short-term political interests ahead of the obvious best interests of the residents of Atascadero, in a decision that is not easy to reconcile with the duty of Councilmembers to promote the best interests of the community.

The explanation given by Councilmember Luna for opposing an elected mayor serves to point up yet another important reason why we need an elected mayor—because members of the Council apparently regard themselves not as representatives of all of Atascadero but of only their supporters. Councilmember Luna was up front in disclosing that he regards himself as the representative of a limited constituency, and that his role is to advocate the interests of that constituency as an avowed partisan. Other members of the Council might not be so up front about it, but the fact is that their respective profiles, actions and voting records strongly indicate that most, if not all, of them have a similar view of their roles. That is not the way it is supposed to be, as members of the Atascadero City Council should be fiduciaries for all of us, duty-bound to protect and promote the interests of the entire city and not just the interests of their supporters. That being said, it is, of course, not uncommon in the partisan world in which we live for politicians to view themselves primarily as representatives of the interests of their supporters and, if questioned about the propriety of that view, to claim that the interests of their supporters are completely congruent with the interests of the larger community.

It is another political reality that an elected mayor would not be able to get away with representing a limited constituency as easily as members of a city council are able to do. To get elected as mayor, an individual would have to succeed in finishing first in the voting. Mayoral candidates would, therefore, have to seek support across the community and present platforms recognizing the interests of the whole city. In contrast, candidates running to fill two or three open council seats can focus their campaigns on a particular constituency, based on the calculation that winning the votes of the right-size group will be enough to finish among the top two or three vote-getters in the race. In addition, after a mayor wins election, he or she will be called upon constantly to serve the interests of the entire community, to be accountable for all of the city’s ups and downs and to field approaches for assistance from every segment of the community. In contrast, after members of the City Council get elected, they enjoy the cover that comes from being just one member of a group of five and are spared personal accountability for all of the city’s fortunes, as well as many pleas for help from non-supporters.

Having an elected mayor might also bring some sorely needed unity to the divided community of which Councilmember Luna spoke so matter-of-factly. It is not an advantage for Atascadero that it is so divided, and that its disparate groups always seem to be vying to impose their identities and wills on the city. When a city reaches the size of Atascadero, there needs to be general acceptance that not everyone is the same or shares the same tastes and values. And there needs to be recognition that different elements of the population are entitled to pursue their lives and have a place in the community. That is an essential part of the growth process of a city. On that point, much of the success that Paso Robles is enjoying these days can be attributed to the way the ranching and wine cultures have come together harmoniously and productively in that city. Those are two very dissimilar groups of people, and it can easily be imagined how there could have been a disastrous collision when they found themselves sharing the same town. Those two groups adapted and cooperated, however, and in the process succeeded in putting together a community that was greater than the sum of its parts. They created a community with a unique character formed from elements of the old west and California and European wine backgrounds. In Paso it seems that a place was made for everyone, with a civilized shopping, dining and cultural hub in the downtown, a center for the ranching and farming interests at the fairgrounds, convenience and big box shopping on the south side of the city, and an infrastructure area concentrated on the east side of the freeway along Paso Robles Street.

Admittedly, there was a powerful incentive for cooperation in Paso Robles, in that there was real money to be made from the wine boom there. While that same incentive may not be apparent in Atascadero, it should be becoming clear that money is being lost in Atascadero by having a business community which is one-dimensional and disordered. And it should also be clear that if Atascadero does not find a way to diversify its commercial sector to serve all segments of its population, its sales tax revenues will continue to languish and the financial crisis which is currently in progress will intensify. In the face of these realities, there should be motivation enough for Atascaderans to find a way to come together.

To accept complacently that Atascadero is a divided community, and that it is your group against their group, does not serve the interests of the people of this city. Hopefully, the voters will recognize this and demand that members of, and candidates for, City Council commit themselves to represent the best interests of the entire community and not just the interests of a limited constituency of political supporters. Hopefully, also, the subject of an elected mayor will be revisited again soon, because the need for an executive officer accountable to the entire community has never been proven so convincingly as it has been proven by the refusal of the Council majority faction to let Atascaderans vote on whether the mayor should be elected by the voters.

It is time to break the impasse about what use to make of Atascadero’s historic City Hall building. That can be done by recognizing that the highest and best use for it would be as the site of a major museum. A work of art itself, this grand building would be an ideal showcase for a world class collection of art or artifacts. Such a lofty purpose would be worthy of this historic structure, and would be a great benefit for Atascadero.

Among the Hearst Castle and wine country tourists who are already being drawn to northern San Luis Obispo County, such a museum would become another site to see while they are in the area. And the presence of a major museum in Atascadero’s historic City Hall building would attract additional culture and wine seeking tourists to come to the area for a few days, as well as give them a reason to base themselves in Atascadero while they are here.

In addition to that market, quite a few travelers on their way between Los Angeles and San Francisco could be expected to like the idea of stopping to pay a visit to a major museum located right off the freeway in a place that is almost exactly equidistant between those two metropolitan areas. If, as is likely, the museum’s collection could be viewed in an hour or two, motorists passing through might well consider Atascadero the perfect place to break up their drive with a short visit. They could get out of the car, go through the museum, have lunch, coffee or a snack, do some shopping and maybe even spend the night, in addition to gassing up. They might even choose to stay a little longer in Atascadero, taking in other parts of the area, before continuing on their way. It is easy to imagine a substantial number of north-south travelers being attracted by such a plan. Beyond that, a high-caliber cultural institution in Atascadero would be used by residents throughout the Central Coast and parts of the Central Valley, and would be an especially valuable resource for students at all levels.

Considerable due diligence remains to be done, of course, to verify the viability of locating a major museum in the old City Hall. In addition to figuring out the best financial strategy to follow in rebuilding the structure for the purpose of such a use, the idea needs to be tried out on some individuals having expertise and hands-on experience in the museum and arts communities. Among the initial questions to explore with such individuals are: Should a permanent collection be sought from an individual who has amassed an important art collection and who would feel gratified to find an impressive place to showcase it? Or would it be preferable to rotate collections of works loaned by private collectors? Would it be more advantageous to try to partner with other institutions which have more items than they can currently display and which are looking for a suitable venue to exhibit them on a temporary or permanent basis? For example, might a partnership be workable with Hearst Castle or one or more major museums in the Bay Area and Los Angeles? Are the approaches listed above mutually exclusive, or could they be used in combination with each other?

Those are just some of the preliminary questions to explore in the course of considering the possibility of housing a major museum in the historic City Hall building. Some of us will be attempting to educate ourselves on such matters on an informal basis. If the responses to the preliminary inquiries are encouraging enough, though, this is the type of undertaking for which it would definitely be worthwhile to retain an expert consultant to formulate a professional, strategic plan befitting a major museum with an important collection.

There is every reason to be optimistic about this possibility. Any assistance that can be provided to advance consideration of it would be most welcome. From this perspective, all indications are that using the historic City Hall building as the site of a major museum would be the highest and best use to which that majestic structure could be put. And if we could put that important building to such a productive use, it would be a major breakthrough for the Atascadero community.

It is a practical necessity for our community to have a business-friendly orientation. That is because Atascadero’s financial fortunes depend heavily on revenues from sales tax receipts and real estate development in the city. In states where municipalities are allowed to control property tax rates or assessments, affluent bedroom communities often adopt a hostile or indifferent attitude toward business, and simply adjust property taxes when they need more revenue. Under the Proposition 13 amendment to the California State Constitution, however, property taxes in California cannot be manipulated by local governments. That leaves California municipalities with limited options for raising money. The two most important of those are stimulating business activity to increase sales tax revenues and supporting real estate to increase property tax revenues. In the context of these realities, it is apparent that it is in Atascadero’s financial interest to encourage business.

That raises the question of the best way to encourage business. Especially in the matter of sales tax revenues, there is room for a great deal of improvement. On a per capita basis, Atascadero’s sales tax revenues are lower than every city in San Luis Obispo County except Grover Beach. That is due to the fact that Atascadero’s retail sector has been developed along only one dimension and, as a result, serves only the roadstop needs of freeway passers-by and the basic convenience requirements of residents. No diversification has been built in by development of upscale shopping, dining and entertainment options, much less by the creation of a destination business district that might attract business and expand its base. To the contrary, the sprawling unsightliness of the business district which has been allowed to develop tends to deter even locals, however subliminally, from doing business there, except when necessary.

The point has been made before that Atascadero’s government bears much responsibility for the deficiencies of the city’s business sector. But the challenge of building a diverse and healthy business environment does not, and should not, fall entirely on government. Leadership in such matters should also be expected to emanate from the business community, which is directly affected and should be out front in initiating measures to improve overall business conditions in an area.

Of course, when the subject of leadership in the business community comes up, one has to look first to the local Chamber of Commerce. What the Atascadero Chamber of Commerce sees as its role in shaping the business climate of Atascadero, however, has become a matter of some concern among many of us hoping for leadership from the business community. At the Planning Commission meeting of April 15, the President/CEO of the Chamber came forward to speak in favor of a commercial project that was under consideration. The project was Rite-Aid’s plan to relocate from its current location in the Von’s shopping center to a new building in the same shopping center, closer to the gateway corner of El Camino Real and Highway 41, where there would be a drive-thru. In expressing the Chamber’s support of the project, the President/CEO said: “We’re trying to get the cars off of the highway—the tourists coming to town—buy their gas, buy their food, visit the Rite-Aid, visit the grocery stores, and then get back on the road. That’s what we’re all about, you know. We need to get our share of what is driving by every day, all those thousands and thousands of cars.”

It was not exactly inspirational to hear that the Chamber views the gateway intersection of the entire city as a mere pit stop for freeway drivers. Roadstop status might be adequate for some of the other freeway exits in town, but to relegate the gateway of a city of 28,000 to nothing more than a quick refueling stop for freeway passers-by is a bit degrading. Even more startling, however, was the statement by the Chamber President/CEO that “[t]hat’s what we’re all about.” That line caught more than a few of us up short, as it put the Chamber on record as saying that getting a share of the refueling business of the passing freeway traffic is what the business community of Atascadero is “all about.” The fact that Atascadero’s business district has the appearance of an overgrown convenience strip does indeed convey the impression that the roadstop business is what Atascadero is “all about.” But many of us have assumed that that state of affairs developed more or less by accident. The idea that, at this time in Atascadero’s history, the Chamber’s conscious, considered opinion is that the roadstop business is “what we are all about” dispels the accident hypothesis and is more than a little disheartening. If the Chamber’s view of the retail business community in Atascadero is that it is all about quick, impersonal roadstop convenience business for freeway passers-by, even in the gateway of the community, then there can be little realistic hope for Atascadero getting out of the hole it is in anytime too soon.

It would be good if the Chamber would clarify, and hopefully, amend its stated position on this matter in the not-too-distant future. In addition, it would be a tremendous benefit to the entire community if the Chamber would come forward with some large-minded, far-sighted proposals to improve the overall economic environment in Atascadero. While many are quick to complain of intrusion when the government intercedes in business matters, if leadership fails to emerge from the private sector then who is left to depend on but the government? It would be preferable if the leadership that is needed to reverse Atascadero’s sagging business fortunes originates in the private sector, with the assistance of government enlisted only as needed, in activities voluntarily undertaken jointly by business and government, acting as partners.

In many places, it has proved helpful for business owners in various districts to work together to create attractive and inviting commercial environments in their districts. Among other things, they agree to use similar signage or lighting designs to create a unifying look in the area; they adopt cleanliness and orderliness standards; they cooperate in having joint promotional events; they post signs identifying the district as, for instance, the “Atascadero Central Strip” and advertise for business collectively for the district; to give just a few examples. Business district organizations engaged in such cooperative activity have succeeded in improving business in many places with bigger problems than ours, and there is no reason to think that they could not do so as well in Atascadero. Off the top of one’s head, it is easy to think of three distinct districts in the heart of town—the downtown district, the gateway district, and the central strip—that are of particular importance to our overall business community. If business owners were to organize effectively, and complementarily, in those districts, and if some targeted support by government were applied, the chances of making Atascadero a better place for business in general might start improving.

The idea of business districts is just one example of how the business community can start taking responsibility for turning around the business prospects for Atascadero. The basic point, though, is that private sector should not be waiting for government to do it all. Energetic, far-sighted leadership is needed from the business community itself. In that regard, it is only natural to turn first for such leadership to the Atascadero Chamber of Commerce. We need for the Chamber to step up to enable our retail sector to graduate from the roadstop strip of the small town that Atascadero once was to become the diversified hub of the medium-sized city that Atascadero now is.