Hollister voters have two monumental choices on next week’s ballot.
One of them, the mayor’s race, has manifested clear differences among the four candidates. The other, the proposed Measure E sales tax extension, will test an electorate fed up with shrinking wallets and growing distrust in local government spending.
As for the mayor’s race, this local election is historic not only because it presents the first time in Hollister’s 140-year history when all voters will make the decision, but also because the role will demand leadership, boldness, transparency and accountability if the city hopes to reverse its misfortunes.
Marty Richman maintains all of those traits and is clearly the best choice for mayor on next week’s ballot.
Richman has a career in the military and private sector defined by integrity, public service and responsible management. As a citizen, he has been the most outspoken critic of city and county officials – largely targeting irresponsible spending – but also frequently gives credit when credit is due. He has spoken at almost every council or county board meeting in the past half-decade. With every public speech, weekly column or input as an editorial board member for this newspaper, he has stood up for the citizens.
As a candidate, his agendas are clear: Work hard to repair the budget, reform a broken management system and revitalize the economy. Here is what voters should expect from the other candidates:
Ignacio Velazquez has said many of the right things during his latest in a string of runs for office. He is a businessman with a conservative mentality. He supports examining the budget to find waste and would advocate for economic growth.
But voters have to wonder: Where has he been over the past eight years while city leaders have straddled Hollister with unnecessary spending and long-term obligations, while officials have made so many questionable decisions to hamper the business community – such as Councilman Doug Emerson and others using the last $5 million in redevelopment money to build a Fire Mansion downtown.
What has Velazquez said? What has he done, until now, with yet another election at stake?
Certainly you cannot blame him for dedication to his work, but his habit of occasionally coming out of the woodwork for higher-profile campaigns – while running two businesses – does bring into question the time and commitment level he actually maintains to focus on the mayor’s job. While he has served on the county planning commission in recent years, he would start from square one during a two-year term in trying to learn city functions and politics.
If voters want to continue the same deficit-spending policies and passive leadership that led to Hollister’s fiscal and economic collapse – and the cancellation of the revenue-rich motorcycle rally – Emerson is their candidate.
Emerson has a record of rubber stamping city management’s irresponsible decisions. He was a staunch backer of the city’s biker rally T-shirt debacle that preceded and further solidified the event’s demise. He was chief proponent of the secretive, no-bid, multimillion-dollar, 30-year contract with a firm for solar power at the sewer plant – and recipient of a trip to China funded by the same company.
Emerson has nothing on his council resume over eight years to show any serious efforts to improve the economy. During the campaign, he has repeatedly referenced a shelved plan for the airport that he claims would somehow generate 4,000 jobs. Voters should see the airport project claim for what it is – totally unrealistic political hyperbole. To put his assertion into perspective: The latest county jobless figures from September reported there were 2,500 residents on unemployment in a workforce of 25,600. This means that Emerson – counting on an airport plan promoted by departed Economic Development Corp. President Nancy Martin – expects to rid the county of joblessness and create a bountiful surplus of jobs here, all at the airport and without the help of a genie.
Moreover, Emerson in campaign materials has inaccurately taken credit for the airport proposal as his “vision” – he did the same with the west-side beautification project and downtown masterplan, both devised by consultants at the behest of others – yet another sign that he is grasping at straws.
As for the fourth candidate, Keith Snow, he deserves credit for giving the campaign his all. But he is a relative newcomer with little knowledge of Hollister government. His lacking presence at organized campaign forums, such as those put on by the chamber and farm bureau, underscores a major concern because the mayor must attend an array of events and be the city’s voice.
Richman is the right candidate to fulfill those and other responsibilities.
To get an idea where he would stand as mayor, look at his track record: He has supported reducing public pensions and benefits out of line with the private sector; investing in economic development and reserves; serious planning for the expiration of the Measure T and Measure E taxes; better reporting; more attention to the west side, particularly its economy; reviving the biker rally; and improving accountability with a concrete line of command.
He has been a staunch critic of the non-competitive contract at the sewer plant; employee raises handed out after the Measure T approval; lacking consideration for consolidation; and the city’s plan to sell T-shirts at the biker rally.
His sole intention is to improve quality of life in Hollister, and he should be elected mayor next Tuesday.
Voters will have another choice that will greatly influence the direction taken by a future mayor.
Measure E, the proposed 1 percent sales tax extension to raise about $3.2 million annually for maintained services, reflects a need partially caused by poor planning at the city.
Still, in the short term and considering the inevitability of massive cuts to already depleted public safety departments with a no vote, reluctant voters should give Hollister officials one last chance to revive a structurally deficient budget and remove the city from its sales-tax lifeline within five years.
