Council debates stability, variety among planners

This story appeared in the Antelope Valley Press January 30, 2001

By BOB WILSON
Valley Press Staff Writer

PALMDALE - Which is better? A system that rewards experience and contributes to continuity, or one that prizes new ideas through frequent personnel changes?

That question is the topic for debate by the Palmdale City Council as the terms of three members of the city's Planning Commission - John Mayfield, Jeanette Glozer and Robert "Bo" Bynum - draw to a close.

The council began the debate Jan. 17 and will continue Feb. 21, when it considers adopting a new application form to be filed by Planning Commission aspirants.

If the new form is approved Feb. 21, it would be made available to those interested in seeking one of the seats now held by Mayfield, Glozer and Bynum, City Clerk Victoria Hancock said Monday.

Until then, no applications will be taken and the three will continue to serve their extended terms, Hancock said.

How soon the council will schedule a meeting to make its determinations is unknown, she said. Whether the council will change its decision-making process also is unknown.

Mayfield has served on the commission since 1986; Glozer since 1992; and Bynum since 1998. Their fellow commissioners, Steve Hofbauer and Dean Henderson, have served since 1992 and 2000, respectively.

The two-year terms of Mayfield, Glozer and Bynum were scheduled to end this past October, but the decision on how to fill their Planning Commission seats was delayed until January, when a newly revamped council, with five members instead of three, could weigh in on the vote.

Under the existing appointment process, prospective commission members turn in applications that are reviewed by the council.

During a special public meeting for interviews, members of the council would debate the merits of the applicants, move nominations and vote as a body to either confirm or reject nominees.

The process differs from that used in both Lancaster and Santa Clarita, where each council member nominates a representative to be seated on the planning commission. Nominees typically are approved on a quid pro quo basis.

Of 16 similarly-sized Southern California cities sampled, 44% allow council members to seat their own municipal planning representatives and 56% allow seating by majority vote.

According to a report prepared by Planning Director Laurie Lile, the city's history of approving commission members by majority vote has provided "a stable direction for development and the consistent application of public policy."

"As the current members of the Planning Commission can attest, gaining a full understanding of the range of planning regulations and concepts can require several years of effort. Therefore, a commission where members frequently transition may lack the technical ability to effectively address large, complex projects," Lile reported.

On the other hand, limited turnover among commission membership "reduces the council's ability to allow a large number of residents to contribute their ideas and experience," she said.

New membership "may bring fresh ideas to assist in resolving issues facing the community," Lile noted. "However, frequent changes and the uncertainly that would be brought about may negate any benefits realized by these new ideas."

Lile also pointed out that a commission member is obliged under state law to base his or her decisions solely on publicly presented evidence, not on the desires of the council member who appointed them.

Doing otherwise "may conflict with the provisions of these (state) due-process regulations," she said.

If the council chooses to change its appointment process to a method of direct appointment, "the commission is still mandated to implement the goals and policies of the city at large, even if those goals conflict with the goals of an individual council member," Lile pointed out.

Mayor Jim Ledford reinforced that point at the council's January meeting.

A commissioner's role "is more implementing what has already been approved and discussed as a community as opposed to promoting a particular individual's point of view," Ledford said.

Mayor Pro Tem Mike Dispenza said he liked Palmdale's selection process "simply because it takes it out of the political arena."

However, he would "like to see an application filled out each time we appoint or reappoint to see that everything is still OK," Dispenza said, offering a state questionnaire as a model for the city.

"The other thing I don't care a lot for is having these people testifying publicly in front of us," he said. "I think that we should make these decisions" in a more private manner.

Councilman Rick Norris agreed, saying the most recent public interviews seemed embarrassing to applicants.

Norris, who raised the matter as an issue after his election in November, questioned how well the city publicized the need for new planning commissioners when seats became available.

In August 1998, similar questions were raised by then-Councilwoman Shelley Sorsabal, who was displeased with an absence of interviews in the commission-appointment process.

Sorsabal called the existing process "a race to the microphone" for nominations.

Through her efforts, the council agreed to the current process of formally interviewing Planning Commission applicants.

Former council member Terry Judge also expressed dissatisfaction with the city's previous process because it favored those already seated on the commission and all but eliminated consideration of new viable applicants.