Management woes in Enron By The Sea........

[patgund]

November, San Diego City Mayoral Election. While write-in canidate Donna Frye gets more votes, enough of her votes are ruled as void that she comes in second place, and Mayor Dick Murphy gets re-elected. (which really seemed to piss-off Supervisor Ron Roberts, as he's ran for mayor several times and keeps failing to win.)

Seven months later, amid scandals about how he handled the city pension, a recall effort, and ending up in Time Magazine as one of the three worse mayors in the US, Murphy announced his resignation.

San Diego Mayor Leaving Post (LA Times)

Murphy Resigns (San Diego Union-Tribune)

The city of San Diego will have an interm mayor until a possible special election. Namely Deputy Mayor Michael Zucchet, who goes on trial May 3 on federal corruption charges due to supposely taking bribes from the owner of a strip club.

Ironically, Murphy said that he believes that "...to be effective, the city will need a mayor elected by a solid majority of the voters and with a clear mandate" The irony is that, last election, the voters tried to do just that and elect Donna Frye. Thankfully, Ms. Frye said she plans to run if a special election is held.

Comments

[darrelx.livejournal.com]

Ironically, Murphy said that he believes that "...to be effective, the city will need a mayor elected by a solid majority of the voters and with a clear mandate" The irony is that, last election, the voters tried to do just that and elect Donna Frye.

What you're leaving out is that Frye, even if she did end up with more votes (although not valid votes) than Murphy, she still did not have a clear majority.. and netiher did Murphy. Frye being allowed to run as a write-in candidate on the General election was against the city charter, and created a 3-way race which is only permitted in primaries, not in the general election. Frye and Murphy both got less than 35% of the votes, which is what the "clear majority" line meant.

This time around, the city will make sure that there are only two candidates on the ballot... either by having a primary election first to decide the top two candidates, or by requiring a run-off election after the first election if there is not a 50%+1 majority voting for a single candidate.

Keep in mind that 65% of the city voted republican (either for Murphy or for Roberts) and if it's a two-way race, a republican will probably win. Frye only made a showing because she was the only Democrat running, and the republican vote was split between Roberts and Murphy.

As for Murphy stepping down, Murphy saw that because he was not elected by a clear majority (whether or not Frye got more votes than him, that's a fact in question still) the City could not work cohesively enough, especially during this time when we are on the brink of bankrupcy, corruption charges, and other serious matters that need the City Council working together, not at eachother's throats. Everyone in local politics is applauding his decision to resign, especially his supporters, because this allows the city to move forward, and past this ugly last 6 months.

Murphy even had the foresight to remain in office until July 15, so that the 2006 budget could be completed. If he were to leave office earlier, it would be a disaster not having a complete budget for several more months, or even a year before his replacement was up to the task. Zuchett (the current Deputy Mayor) would not take office until July 15, and his trial will be well under way by then, and he might even be exonerated. If there's a problem, though, the City Council can appoint an interim mayore until the Special Elections (probably Nov. 8th)

[patgund.livejournal.com]

I think Murphy may have squeaked by due to his being the incumbent, not GOP loyalty, (since mayor is, at least in theory, a non-partisan position). I suspect that if Donna Frye hadn't had entered the race as a write in, his reelection would have been higher.

I don't think party is going to matter much here. If anything, party ties may work against the GOP if a special election is held - since Murphy is a Republican. The aim now should be finding someone who can fix this mess and work with both sides in the matter - and party affiliation shouldn't be an issue. If the best person to fix San Diego is a Republican, fine. If the best person to fix San Diego is a Democrat, *also* fine, because the aim shouldn't be partisan in this case.

I don't see Ron Roberts as having a chance, as he's lost three times now, the last time to a write-in. Pete Wilson has already said no to the idea of returning to City Hall. Donna Frye made a good showing as the "anti-Murphy", but the idea of electing someone that's not *in* City Hall already may work against her. Dede Alpert may be a good choice, as she's shown a good ability to work across party and ideological lines. Steve Peace is not an option - he's tied too closely to the deregulation fiasco.

If they decide to appoint a mayor rather than hold a special election, that's going to seriously work against City Hall in the long run - I suspect any councilperson who voted in favour of that can kiss reelection good-bye.

[darrelx.livejournal.com]

I agree that party politics should play a very small role in mayoral elections, but consider the fact that Donna Frye's supporters urged her into running because the only two names on the ballot were Republicans. I don't think she would have even been on the ballot if there was another democrat, or even an independant on the ticket last november.

I heard last night that some members of the City Council are looking outside San Diego for an appointee, so that the job can get done without local politics getting in the way. The city is in dire straits, and that might be just what we need to get through the problem.