Category: General

Partisan politics played a significant role in the recent election even though the Council positions are supposedly non-partisan.  This was especially evident in the mayoral race as the two republicans effectively split the vote opening the door for democrat Pat Furey to take the election.  With the upcoming appointment, it is likely that partisanship will once again affect the outcome.

Twelve individuals submitted applications to receive appointment to the council position.  The one that would probably engender the most support in the community is Leilani Kimmel-Dagastino.  Many would consider her the people’s choice after she finished 5^th in the recent election.  As a women and a minority she would also bring needed diversity to the Council.  Perhaps in an attempt to curry favor with the Council, she stressed in her application that during the recent election she “did not say anything bad about the current council or any of my fellow candidates.”

The 6^th and 7^th place finishers in the election would also bring diversity to the Council.  Restaurant owner and former rocket scientist Alex See could be a voice for the Asian business community.  The Council could also choose to make history by appointing Milton Herring who would be the first member of the black community to serve on the Council.

All of the above choices, however, were heavily backed by the Republican Party in the recent election.  Mayor Furey, as well as recently elected Councilmembers Weideman and Goodrich, are democrats.  Mayor Furey, and the other democrats, will almost certainly want to appoint someone that adheres to their same political ideology to ensure they have the votes on the Council to fulfill their agenda.  This may be the reason why other names have surfaced as possible appointees.

An appointee that will likely be more acceptable to the democrats and that will also bring the needed diversity to the Council is Ray Uchima.  His selection, however, may now be tainted by rumors in the community that a back door deal was cut several weeks ago in a “pay for play” scheme to make him the appointee.  In his application, Uchima touted his ability to “attract High Technology and Solar Electric Industries to Torrance” that will provide high paying jobs in the community and replace those jobs that will be lost with Toyota’s departure.

To avoid the controversy surrounding Uchima, the Council may opt for one of several intriguing compromise candidates.  The most well known of these is probably recently retired City Clerk Sue Herbers.  Sue reiterated several times in her application that she “will not under any circumstances seek a seat in the 2016 election” and that her decisions on the Council would be based “on the best interests of the City and not for any future political gain.”

Jimmy Gow also offered himself as an appointee.  As the current President of the Torrance Democratic Club he campaigned hard on behalf of Furey, Goodrich and Weideman and was instrumental to their success.  He claims he would bring a commitment to “uniting the members of the Council in a non-partisan partnership.”  That assertion, however, is hard to believe given his current role in the Democratic Party and the list of references he provided that includes such names as Maxine Waters, Janice Hahn, Al Muratsuchi, Betsy Butler, and Sandra Fluke.

Should the Council want to avoid partisan politics completely, then Mike Griffiths would make an attractive choice.  He was the highest finishing non-party affiliated candidate in the recent election and brings a wealth of City experience as a current Planning Commissioner and a previous lengthy stint on the Environmental Commission.

Recent candidates Rahmat Kahn and Ryan Mand also applied for appointment.  Rahmat Kahn shot himself in the foot with falsified endorsements in the past election and Ryan Mand continues to make a name for himself by showing up for council meetings in his now signature chicken suit costume.

The slate of applicants is rounded out by Environmental Quality Commissioner Charles Deemer, Cable TV Commissioner William Dan Feliz, and retiree Mario Obejas.

Should the Council not be able to come to a consensus they still have the option of placing the burden on the public through a special election.  The main deterrent to this option continues to be cost.  Though it will likely be expensive, the exact costs of this option are not known as the Council has not sought firm quotes from potential vendors for the various means (i.e. vote by mail, vote by precinct) that could be utilized to conduct a special election.

Most people that visit Ken Drennon are certain that he lives in Gardena.  As Ken will readily tell you, however, he is a proud resident of Torrance.  Ken claims nobody believes he lives in Torrance due to the condition of his street.  He has lived just off 164^th street (pictured right) for the past 35 years.  Not once, in all that time, does he recall 164^th being paved.  The street is in such disrepair that Ken can fit a full sized stapler in many of its cracks.

Road repairs, or the lack thereof, is a big issue in Torrance.  Former Mayor Scotto recently stated in a Daily Breeze article that residents are “seeing a lot of potholes, because they [the roads] are 10 years past when they should have been fixed.”

Ken has a bad back and says that constantly traveling the bumpy road is painful.  He’s called the City several times a year for the past 10 years to see if they could do anything about his street.  At his wits end, Ken recently decided to show up at City Council meeting to complain.  The timing was ironic as the Council recently budgeted an additional $1 Million for road repairs to address the poor condition of Torrance streets.  Unfortunately for Ken, however, it does not appear any of that money will be going to fix 164^th  or any other street in his neighborhood.

A staff report indicates that money will instead first go to paving streets in some of the wealthiest areas of town.  Those neighborhoods can be found here and include such streets as Reese Road (pictured right).  Another recent staff report reveals that decisions on what roads to pave are based on the existing pavement conditions, current maintenance needs, and the length of time that has elapsed since previous repairs were completed.

Whether Reese Road and the others designated for repair are truly the highest priority or whether some neighborhoods receive preferential treatment is difficult to say for certain without additional information.  Ken, for his part, can’t say for sure, but what he will say is that he doesn’t believe his street would look like it does if he lived on the other side of town.

When I initially heard of Car2Go my first thoughts were neat concept and great use of technology.  I also liked the idea of giving the public more affordable transportation options.  As I’ve become more educated about the company, my opposition to it has grown to the point that I now think Car2Go should go – go as in leave Torrance.

My biggest concern is the use of public property to gain a competitive advantage. I believe public property, especially here in Torrance, is extremely valuable and that each taxpayer has a stake in how that property is utilized. Selling a license to use public parking virtually without restrictions in residential areas for as little as $108 dollars is a devaluation of public property and opens the door for other corporations to take advantage of the same offer. According to Council meeting notes, Taxi companies pay $210K a year at as much as $35K per company to Torrance just for the right to utilize Torrance streets (not park). Allowing Car2Go such favorable terms to operate their service, while not affording other similar companies the same deal, exposes the city to costly lawsuits not in the best interest of the taxpayer.

If allowed to continue to operate, I believe it opens the door for other companies to utilize public parking in residential areas on the same terms.  Some residents may not be bothered by a Smart car parked in front of their house.  I wonder, however, if those same residents might be concerned about a U-Haul truck.  What about an Ice-Cream Truck, a Hot Dog Stand, or a Food Truck?

The Car2Go operation is also a fairly clear violation of City Ordinance 88.5.9 and I think allowing them to violate that ordinance for such a small price sets a bad precedent and again exposes the city to lawsuits.

The convenience of the Car2Go service already exists in the form of buses, Taxis, and other companies like Uber. You could make an argument it’s more affordable for some, but I think those savings would be minimal. An Uber from my house to my work in El Segundo, a ride that generally takes 30 minutes, is quoted by Uber at $13 – 18. A City bus, which I’ve taken many times, costs $1.50. Car2Go would be around $13.

In my mind, the possible cost savings to what will likely be a very, very small percentage of Torrance residents, is overshadowed by the concerns described above as well as the inconvenience many have expressed due to further reductions in available parking. The parking inconvenience is a real issue to me as evidenced by the many complaints received by City Staff, and the number of folks speaking out against it at public meetings and on social media.

The Car2Go issue needs to formally come before the City Council and the Council should decide whether to renew the business license instead of the deal being brokered behind closed doors by City Staff.  At the very least, I think the Council should consider having designated parking spots in the City similar to bus stops and that Car2Go should only be able to park in those spots and I think the City should negotiate a much better deal to the taxpayer for the license to use those designated spots.

Some might also find the link found here eerily similar describing the Car2Go experience in England. It didn’t seem to be very popular there.