A small majority of those polled the week of March 29, 2012 disagreed with the City Council’s appointment of Council Member Mike Healy to the Oversight Board for the Successor Agency of the former Petaluma Community Development Commission, which will oversee spending millions of dollars on city capital improvement projects. 53.6 percent of voters disagreed, while 44.4 percent agreed with the decision. Three percent of respondents were unsure.
Here are some of the comments by those who responded to the survey:
——
“Actions speak louder than words. Mayor Glass’ history on the Rainier interchange alone leads me to not believe him when he states that he would do everything he could to achieve it. I think it is time for the “get in the way of progress progressives” to pipe down and seek employment elsewhere.”
——
“We need to move Petaluma forward. Glass is stuck in his anti-business ways. Bankruptcy is a real concern for Petaluma.”
——
“Mayor Glass understands the positive impacts this money can have on the welfare of the town’s 99 percent as opposed to the 1 percent. He raised the money and has the expertise to oversee it on behalf of all of us.”
——
“Healy is not the guy. If you decide on him you’ll see an asphalt plant, more streets that need attention and more staff pensions staying the same. Can’t afford that. Appoint David Glass. He’ll get more done with less.”
——
“It appears that the democratic way prevailed. Nobody should assume that they, because they are mayor, can do whatever they wish. David Glass should remember that he was elected and can be replaced.”
——
“I strongly agree with the appointment. We need somebody who wants to see the Rainier crosstown connecter become a reality, not somebody who doesn’t think it will ever happen. If you strongly believe in something you will do everything in your power to figure out how to make it happen. If you don’t, you won’t. Glass has voiced his opinion as not a believer.”
——
“Mike Healy embarrassed our city with his shameless self promotion.”
——
“Mayor Glass is an embarrasment to the City of Petaluma. His actions at the city council meeting were beyond childish.”
——
“A misguided misstep for the Council. The vote was an obvious inappropriate move.”
——
“Either person would do a good job of representing Petaluma on the Commission. What I do have a problem with is Mayor Glass’ meltdown like a 3-year-old thowing a temper tantum.”
——
“Mike seems like the one member of the Council that doesn’t have a built-in bias. Good choice.”
——
“Another ‘power grab’ by Healy and his special interest partners to transfer public assets into private hands. At least Glass is a little better, not much, but better.”
——
“Both gentlemen are quite capable and dedicated to Petaluma success. With his professional background coupled with his council experience, I believe Mayor Glass to be best suited to represent Petaluma’s interests on this board.”
——
“Financial decisions are best left to Mayor Glass who has superior financial skills. In addition, the reason Petaluma has a separate mayoral election is to distinguish his role as supervising Council function in working hand in hand with the city manager in running the city. Mr. Healy is simply attempting to sugar coat his obvious goal of another term on the council, perhaps as mayor. Reality is, Rainier never, but a handy election tool always.”
——
“First, capital improvements and redevelopment are not necessarily the same thing. Second, the media needs to stop perpetuating the myth that is a Rainier crosstown connector and report the real story on it. For one, it is not redevelopment. We need to move on from the years of lies, grow up, accept the truth about Rainier. Maybe then more will see Mike Healy for who he really is.”
——
“I would trust David Glass with directing millions of dollars over Mike Healy any day.”
——
“Glass knows far more about those funds and has been far more honest about Rainier than Healy. The appointment of Glass was well known weeks prior to the vote. If Healy wanted that position, why did he not make it known beforehand? Instead Healy, Albertson, Kearney, and Harris set up a secret and cheap power play before the meeting. How are we or the rest of the council supposed to trust those four when they resort to sleazy backroom politics like this?”
——
“Good on Healy for taking the lead on this and congratulations to Harris, Kearney and Albertson for having the courage to vote for Healy. Glass’ behavior was embarassing and frankly worrisome.”
——
“This maneuver pushes the political life of our community into increasingly polarized partisanship. There’s a difference between acting primarily to accrue power and “win” versus dealing with the complexities of governing equitably. Mr. Healy’s action diminishes comity, the consideration for all that is needed to govern rather than to dominate. When winning becomes the main objective, the community ends up with less. When someone acts so egregiously you don’t want to say hello to them on the street anymore, it is disappointing.”
——
“I thought the majority vote by the city council was appropriate. I think the mayor was pretty arrogant to believe he was entitled to the oversight position with no city council vote. I chalk this up as a victory to local democracy and I know Petaluma is better for it. Thanks for having the courage to take a stand Mike!”
——
“I am not fooled by the mayor’s political spin that he doesn’t think Rainier will ever be funded. This is his strategy to create cover for the fact that he opposes the construction of Rainier. Kudos to Healy for standing up to him. We cannot afford to have Glass in charge of redevelopment funds allocated to Rainier.”
——
“We need to start welcoming business to this town before it ends up bankrupt. At $4.60 a gallon, I cannot afford to drive to Novato and Rohnert Park! Not to mention, the impact of our extra driving on the environment.”
——
“David Glass has the experience and integrity we need, which is why he was elected as our Mayor by a majority of residents. Measure S was all about promises without the actual mechanism to fund a crosstown connector. Healy is simply playing politics and the reality is he probably won’t even still be living by the time the project gets funded (2040). Healy is a menace to this community and he does not deserve another term on the Council. It’s also clear the Kearney is in Healy’s pocket, which is exactly why he was appointed. Renee made a grave mistake in supporting Kearny’s appointment and she can now be blamed for the damage that fateful vote caused.”
——
“David Glass is a poor sport.”
——