Yesterday, San Diego City Councilman Kevin Faulconer voted against a council resolution to impose strict guidelines on city spending should November’s sales tax/financial reform ballot measure pass.
Faulconer, an opponent of Proposition D, said the resolution wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on.
“What is binding,” Faulconer said during the meeting, “is the language in Proposition D.”
But four years ago, Faulconer did the exact opposite on a resolution addressing a ballot measure he supported. It happened one month before city voters would decide on Proposition C, a charter amendment that opened up city services to competitive bidding, known as “managed competition.” Faulconer moved a resolution declaring that Mayor Jerry Sanders and the council’s intent was to exempt public safety services from competitive bidding even though the ballot measure allowed it. Voters approved Prop. C in Nov. 2006.
Why did a resolution mean something to Faulconer then, but not now?
Here’s an e-mailed response from Faulconer’s spokesman, Tony Manolatos:
First, the resolution council adopted in 2006 directed the city attorney to include the language in the managed competition ordinance. The resolution council approved yesterday made no mention of an ordinance; it is simply an unenforceable resolution. Secondly, Kevin believes the city should never outsource police and fire services. He does not believe the City Council would achieve $72 million in annual budget savings if taxes are raised by $100 million a year. Lastly, yesterday’s resolution committed the City Council to aim to meet savings goals for the next 10 budget cycles, meaning it would take 10 votes on 10 budgets from different City Councils to meet the intent. Conversely, exempting public safety from managed competition was accomplished with one vote on one ordinance.
A hat tip to Murtaza Baxamusa of the Center on Policy Initiatives, the left-leaning think tank, for tweeting the 2006 vote.