As a new City Council prepares to take office in January, we find ourselves unhappy that Ron Rodgers and Mike Hall won’t be part of it.
Before we go any further, this is not our Monday Morning Quarterback routine bemoaning the fact that someone else got elected. But the two who are leaving were unique and we’d like to point out that their departure is our loss, even as we hope the new or re-elected councilors are our gain.
Hall chose not to run, and Rodgers was narrowly defeated, finishing sixth in a field of nine candidates, counting a write-in candidate.
While we may not have agreed with either individual on everything over the past couple of years, we have found both to be excellent councilors. Both are examples of committed, perceptive public servants who have little interest in public applause but a lot of interest in serving the public well.
Both stayed well-informed and were capable of leveling good arguments for their positions.
For example, while others made the same argument, Rodgers clearly articulated a position on city staff raises that actually caused us to alter our own opinion on the matter. We could see good arguments on both sides of that particular issue, but Rodgers brought it home, causing us to reverse a position we printed in an editorial.
Rodgers has taken the time to consider the merits of the issues that appear before the City Council. He considers and then speaks and votes.
Even when he’s taken a position, we tend to believe that he is open to changing it based on better information – perhaps the best quality a sincere politician can have. He offers a mature, thoughtful response to questions and criticism.
His work responsiblities have caused him to miss many meetings, but when he attended, Rodgers hasn’t missed a beat. He always had his homework done and was informed about city business.
We will miss him, and we look forward to seeing him enter the race again.
It may be appropriate to mention here that Rodgers isn’t the only public official whom we’ve regretted to see depart after losing out in the popular vote.
Another is former School Board member Diane Gerson, who was, we believe, a truly valuable asset to that body for the same reasons. As a retired school principal from another state, Gerson brought an understanding of the realities of education and administration to the table, but what really made her outstanding as a school board member was her dedication to researching topics on the agenda and asking the hard questions that needed to be asked.
We may not have shared her views on everything, but we appreciated the dedication and perceptive wisdom she demonstrated on behalf of the district.
Michael Hall is cut from similar cloth, having particularly exemplified something we’ve rarely – if ever – seen in a councilor in decades of covering city government here and elsewhere.
When we interview candidates, they often answer our questions with, “I don’t know enough to talk about it.”
Candidates are frequently poorly informed about how city government works, the power the council actually has and what it can do. Frequently, they know little about the issues the city is dealing with.
Sometimes, they are a resident with an ax to grind on a single issue, and sometimes they just want to help out and give back, but have little experience or background for the task before them.
When Hall joined the council, we put together a story on his appointment, and in that process we asked him a question he didn’t know the answer to. He told us so, and we assumed that would be the end of it, because that’s nearly always the case. They don’t know. OK.
The next day, though, Hall called us back and delivered his answer. Rather than letting it go, he researched the issue and called The New Era with an informed reponse.
We were impressed.
When we asked our questions this year for our reports on the candidates for the various races, one of our objectives was to see which were informed – and honest about it. In a few cases, they chose not to answer particular questions.
While we don’t necessarily know what those candidates’ reasons might have been for not answering, the example set by Hall raised him substantially in our estimation.
We regret seeing him leave the council, but we understand that it’s been difficult to pursue a demanding schedule as a restaurant owner and manager and try to serve as a public official too.
We look forward to seeing how well newcomers Dave Trask and Bruce Hobbs will do. We think they’ll be fine councilors as well. Both have a background of involvement within the city and community.
We expect that both will bring critical eyes to table. Neither strikes us as a “rubber stamp” guy, as they’ve proved while serving on the Budget Committee and as citizens. We certainly appreciate that.
It’s to all of our benefit as citizens when pertinent questions are asked and answered as these people have done for us. We thank them.