Regressive Politics in a Progressive City : Irvine’s Mayor, City Council Seem Intent on Actions That Are Counterproductive

The biggest disappointment with the way Irvine’s new mayor, Sally Anne Sheridan, has been running her city may result from the fact that, as one of America’s celebrated planned communities, Irvine has the opportunity to learn from the mistakes of older cities. But if Irvine’s futuristic city hall is a symbol of a fresh start for local government, the Sheridan regime seems determined to get bogged down in the same old politics. And Sheridan had raised hopes at the outset by promising to heal old wounds.

Mary Ann Gaido is still waiting to be sworn in as a City Council member in spite of a recent court ruling in her favor. The new city fathers don’t like her politics or those of former Mayor Larry Agran, and they are leaving no stone unturned to keep her out, despite the fact that she finished third in the spring’s campaign for two city council seats. Under the city’s prevailing petition process, approved as Measure D in 1988, she was entitled to the seat left vacant when Sheridan defeated Agran and was elevated to mayor. She was entitled, that is, unless 7% of the city’s registered voters petitioned for a special election to fill Sheridan’s term.

So eager were Agran foes to rid the city of any vestige of his Administration--which noticeably included Gaido--that they gathered petitions and geared for an election in November. But they should have been prepared to get on with city business once Orange County Superior Court Judge Eileen C. Moore ruled that Gaido should take her seat. She found that the election petition was misleading and vague, and that it did not adequately inform voters that if they did not sign, Gaido would be seated. Meanwhile, the City Council has voted to proceed with a November special election, as well as appeal the court order.

Further testimony to the new council’s preoccupation with things other than the conduct of important city business could be found at Wednesday night’s meeting. For more than four hours, residents and council members debated the merits of measures providing for a Christmas tree in the City Hall plaza and for beginning council meetings with a moment of silence.

Rather than hearing debate on the merits of holiday trees, the city would have been better served with four hours of that silence. Moreover, Irvine residents have a city ignoring a court, disdainful of orderly succession, and agitating to impose holiday trees on those who may not be celebrating a holiday. So when does this time of healing begin?