Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: Burbank HomeCollections

Will Rogers

September 08, 2001
(Page 2 of 3)

the Grand Canyon. If the church or hospital battled Measure A, or spent

funds to back either side, they'd be in trouble. But to claim that

someone taking a public stand on an election risks the status of

charities they serve is ludicrous. Why didn't Rothenbach mention the men

have also worked for other community groups and service clubs, from the

Boys and Girls Club to the Chamber of Commerce and many others, all of

which are prohibited by law and their charters from lobbying? Are the

Advertisement

Kiwanis and Zonta Club doomed, too?

By Rothenbach's asinine judgment, only citizens who don't serve

charities could be activists. The absurd standard would assure that only

Rothenbach and his cohorts can voice opinions in Burbank, their recurring

theme over the years. They're always eager to explain why their

dissenters aren't really entitled to speak or vote. Once, on the dais and

before he lost reelection, McConkey angrily claimed Mayor Bob Kramer

could not make a motion for or vote on a certain proposal McConkey

opposed, this because Kramer supposedly had a "clear conflict of

interest' by virtue of Kramer having publicly said there was a need for

the proposal being considered.

There's no shortage of examples of Rothenbach, McConkey and their

minions sanctimoniously announcing that everyone disputing their opinions

has violated some ethical or legal provision by speaking, this while

complaining that virtually every gust of wind is a devious attack on

their own rights to free speech.

As for Stamper's participation, that bad idea was dropped even before

Rothenbach's assertions. Rothenbach and McConkey should have hoped for

him to join in. Stamper, after all, was one of yesteryear's elected

officials blithely neglecting airport debacles and the push for

unrestricted expansion. When officials and voters later began objecting,

Stamper joined in ridiculing efforts to thwart expansion as the political

grandstanding of anti-business zealots.

That dismal record is immaterial to Measure A's fatal flaws, but

Stamper's opposition could have served perceptions of an imperious City

Hall, perceptions that fans of Measure A must cultivate in the absence of

favorable facts or credible leaders.

In what looks like similar reasoning, McConkey won't join Rothenbach

to defend the initiative they wrote. Rather than have constant replays of

the televised forum cement an association between Measure A and someone

soundly rejected for reelection, one whose temperament and credibility

Burbank Leader Articles
|
|
|