Sometimes, it seems that for District One County Supervisor Don
Gage, that when it comes to San Martin, no good deed goes
unpunished.
Sometimes, it seems that for District One County Supervisor Don Gage, that when it comes to San Martin, no good deed goes unpunished. Gage knew that San Martin Neighborhood Alliance members – many of whom have been sharply critical of him – would want to address the Board of Supervisors during a recent meeting about plans to add 100 hangars at South County Airport.
So when he saw that another supervisor had placed the airport hangars item on the meeting’s consent agenda – meaning that it would be voted on by supervisors in a bundle with other items, effectively limiting debate – Gage had it moved to the regular agenda. That was a considerate gesture on Gage’s part to allow constituents he knew would disagree with him another opportunity to address the board. Gage did not have to move the item, but he did. The item was placed at the end of the meeting’s agenda.
Because the agenda included issues that aides thought would generate a lot of debate and public interest, when SMNA members asked for a time estimate of when the airport item would be heard, aides gave them an estimate of 3:30 p.m. With that, SMNA representatives decided to go to the downstairs cafeteria to pass the time. Unfortunately, the supervisors progressed through the agenda more quickly than estimated and the airport issue vote was taken by 2:20 p.m. If SMNA members are upset that they weren’t able to – again – register their objections to the hangars with supervisors, then they need to look in the mirror to find the place to lay the blame.
These folks are not new to hearings and meetings. No one from SMNA had completed a speaker card – a standard practice at school board, city council and county supervisor meetings – to indicate a desire to address supervisors on the airport agenda item. Despite this, aides were sent into the hallway when the agenda item came up and no one from SMNA appeared to speak.
It’s unreasonable to expect that the county supervisors, staff, media and others in attendance wait while aides scour the several-story county administration building for SMNA representatives.
If SMNA members have a passion for this issue, then we’re confused about why their behavior doesn’t show that passion. Passionate activists would have at least completed a speaker card – more likely multiple speaker cards – and would have left a representative in the supervisors’ chamber. As experienced political players who have attended many public meetings of elected officials, SMNA representatives should understand that estimates for meeting agendas are just that – estimates. SMNA members decided that a coffee break was more important than addressing the board and now have to live with the consequences.
It’s important to note that this was not the only opportunity for input on the hangar addition proposal – which was originally approved by supervisors in 1982. There have been numerous meetings and reports; e-mail, U.S. mail, telephone calls and faxes to supervisors are also a continuous option.
We’ve reached the sad but inescapable conclusion that the cafeteria flap is a fitting end of this chapter for what has been an acrimonious process. We can’t find any evidence that anyone involved in this meeting behaved improperly.
Sometimes, as in this case, government officials do the right thing.
The hanger issue is likely to be with us for some time to come as opponents have vowed court action.
Editor’s note: San Martin Neighborhood Alliance officials are invited to write a guest column outlining their position.
