Brian Burley is a declared candidate for Huntington Beach City Council in 2018.
When he entered the race, I was interested in his candidacy, due to the fact that Burley was a dark horse with no presence in City affairs, up until he declared for the 2018 Race, identified as a Republican and appeared to be unaffiliated with any of the factions currently dominating “Conservative” (or pseudo Conservative, as the case may be…) thought in local politics.
HBSledgehammer will outline the details of those “Factions” and the players, in an upcoming piece.
After reviewing Burley’s website, observing his initial forays into the social media quagmire and watching his first nervous attempts to speak at City Council meetings, I published a piece on Burley and my impression of him as a “Nothingburger” candidate, one with no real plan, other than getting elected.
Burley comes to the table with a USC degree in the political arts. USC must be a training ground for aspiring politicians, having spawned Matt Harper.
Click here for “Brian Burley, Grow a pair….”
I make no secret of the fact that I have no love for politicians who lack real world private sector problem solving skills, having learned the concepts from textbooks and lectures.
People that spend their entire post university lives, moving from political position to political position, without having to endure the financial consequences of their political decisions or failures to drive change.
Burley is too young at this point, to have suffered much real economic damage at the hands of stupid politicians, having been a student at the height of the last economic meltdown, and has accumulated little in the way of hard knocks related to decisions made by our “Elected Public Officials”. But I guess the same could be said for Harper.
I like Matt Harper. He’s bright and funny and votes the conservative line. I’ve known him since he was a high school kid, a budding “Alex P. Keaton”, riding on a HB 4th of July Parade Float.
Now he rides in the parade in one of the classic cars that all of the local Pols fight over, both cars and parade position.
I once spoke with him a while back out back on the patio at a mutual friend’s Christmas Party while a lovely young lady I know was playing this on the Steinway in the living room…
After some casual conversation, my parting shot to Matt , was that if “I didn’t see his name in the paper on a consistent basis, pushing conservative issues, then he wasn’t doing his job.”
Haven’t seen much in the paper Harper. Get busy.
This was the same Christmas Party where I gave Congressman Dana Rorabacher an elbow in the side, figuratively speaking, for voting for Paul Ryan for Speaker of the House, while standing at the punch bowl…only to be thwarted by one of those ” Fake Call” apps on Rorabacher’s Smartphone.
Rorabacher wasn’t having any of my shit, figured out how to get rid of me and wisely avoided me.
In hindsight, I would have done the same thing myself…after all, it was a Christmas Party…
Lets get back to Burley.
There is little doubt in my mind that Burley took offense to my characterization of his candidacy as that of just another smiling baby kisser, without any plan, other than getting elected.
Apparently Burley wanted to rise to the challenge I threw out, and recently released his platform,
Click here to download it …
Bravo Brian Burley.
Thank you for attempting to articulate your positions.
Burley publishes what he refers to as “30 Positions, Proposals, etc…”.
A combination of policy statements, positions & proposals.
It seems to be an outline of where he stands on a variety of issues.
So far, he is the only declared candidate to actually articulate where his head is at.
While I may disagree with many of Burley’s “proposals”, the fact that he put the effort into spelling out just what he represents demonstrates that he has, at least, some substance, and has taken the time to educate himself on a variety of the issues we face as a City.
As Burley mentions, his competitors, one of which, I am not in 2018, despite the gadfly rumor mill, “will nitpick his plan.”
I am still waiting for Ron Sterud, the only other declared “Conservative” candidate at this point in time, to elucidate his positions. For now, he seems content to smile, shake hands, and stress his background as a financial planner and all around “nice guy” as being unique qualifications for the position.
Don’t forget, Bob Citron had a lot of people convinced he was “good with money”. Certainly many thought Bob was a nice guy, before he drove Orange County into bankruptcy in 1994.
At this point, Sterud appears to be sticking to a strategy of having his Proxy reps on social media, attack the incumbents that don’t belong to his faction, by repeating an ongoing nonstop mantra, accusing them of baseless charges of “Corruption” & “Cronyism”, and plotting to bolt his campaign, in a slate, to that of Incumbent, Erik Peterson, in much the same way Sterud attempted to do with Councilwoman Lyn Semeta’s 2016 campaign.
I think it would be wise for Ron Sterud to run on his own merits and perceived strengths. I feel it would demonstrate his belief in the quality of his candidacy. Running on the accomplishments of another is kinda wimpy if you ask me…
But then again nobody asked so…
Back to Burley.
If you have a problem with people scrutinizing your plan, then don’t bother to release it.
Let’s nitpick it… just for fun,
1- I am against unsustainable High Density Development.“I will not vote or support any project that leads to more High Density Development (HDD). Let the market and the people dictate what kind of housing they want in HB. Residents must be aware of projects such as Hilltop and the redevelopment of the Magnolia Tank Farms. I am not against development; it is essential that we construct more housing to benefit the economy. I will prioritize low-density and medium-density projects where it makes sense. Our infrastructure was not ready for the recent HDD projects including Bella Terra and Pacific City….”
Brian, are you familiar with SB35?
Click here for more details.
Local control, even in “Charter Cities” is a thing of the past, thanks to those awesome “Elected Officials” in Sacramento.
If Burley’s “Anti – HDD Council Majority” screws up and can’t figure out how to navigate the post SB35 minefield, we will wind up with the State in charge of our housing development decisions.
The fact that Burley is unaware of the tenets and mandates of SB35 is troubling.
“I oppose HDD” may soon become,
“Um, Sorry, I brought State Control to our City’s development decisions due to my obstinance, ignorance and inability to figure out the reality of the new mandates….Save us Michael Gates!”
Blanket Opposition to HDD makes for a great Campaign slogan / platform… one that many candidates will use to dupe the uninformed, who have no clue what the State Government now has in store for ALL cities, Charter Cities included. Perhaps they are uninformed themselves.
The lower the density, the higher the price of the housing product. HB is built out. The only place to go is up.
As I have stated previously, unchecked growth solely for the purpose of growth…is the philosophy of cancer.
Well managed, mitigated thoughtful growth, is a sign of leadership. That growth can include well sited and mitigated HDD projects if they are done correctly. A simple knee jerk “Anti-HDD” stance sounds great but signifies ignorance in light of SB35.
The best we can hope for, in my opinion, is representatives that will demand proper mitigation, prior to, or concurrently with, project development and insist on architectural excellence, instead of the Hansenite, rat mazes championed by the 2010 City Council that emerged in the HDD Blitzkrieg that ensued, with mitigation efforts, an afterthought.
2. I am in Favor of Reinvestment in our City’s Infrastructure.
I think its safe to say that we all would like to see increased spending on infrastructure. No Brainer. The challenge is how to accomplish it, without sacrificing something else.
3. Proposal: Raise Infrastructure Spending from 15 percent to 17 percent of General Fund Spending.
“I am calling for an increase in infrastructure spending from 15 percent of the General Fund to 17 percent of the General Fund by the end of my first term (FY 22/23). This will be a steady increase of 0.5 percent per year.”
Burley’s proposal to boost spending from 15% to 17% of the cities General Fund, makes no mention whatsoever of what programs that 2% will come from, as a percentage.
It has to come from somewhere else, Brian.
Burley also fails to mention whether this will be accomplished by amending the City’s charter, which will result in a decrease in flexibility, in years when the budget may require some flexibility. 15% is just fine.
The real task is to identify where to spend the existing mandated 15% of the budget in the most effective way.
4.Goal: Complete 100 Percent of Projects Identified in Capital Improvement Project
“In FY 2016/17, 86.7 percent of all CIP projects were completed. According to the proposed FY 17/18 budget, the goal is 85 percent. I endorse that our City should not cut corners. Our city needs to make it a goal to complete 100 percent of all CIP projects and my infrastructure spending increase proposal will help us do just that.”
This appears to be Burley’s lack of real world experience showing through.
Certainly 100 percent is indeed a noble target. As stated, Burley hasn’t identified which parts of the budget will be cut in order to accomplish this noble goal.
Nobody is “Cutting Corners”.
That is simply ludicrous.
An 86.7 percent completion rate is outstanding in a public sector environment, where insane Union Job rules of firms operating under the City Mandates for Prevaling wages and PLA’s , drive up the cost of doing just about anything in this City.
You want to get more done for less money?
Ban all Project Labor Agreements.
Click here to learn more about banning PLA’s…
5. Goal: Improve Traffic Technology
“According to our city’s Public Works department, the city oversees 140 streetlights citywide and of those only ⅓ are connected, synchronized and can be seen by a computer in City Hall. We must set a goal to get all street lights synchronized which can lead to less wait times for residents at stop lights.”
Fact: Based on data from six separate studies, the costs of synchronizing traffic signals range from $2,500 to $3,500 per signal per update.
Burley is proposing to synchronize all of the lights, at a potential cost of up to almost $400,000. This proposal is obviously the outgrowth of his technology background, and the belief that technology solves all problems.
Frankly, I don’t mind waiting at a well timed light on a non arterial street for a few minutes if we can save that kind of money. It’s seems to be a “Chicken in every pot” feel good throwaway proposal. That’s just my take.
6. I am in Favor of a More Secure Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP).
“According to Assistant City Manager Lori Ann Farrell, five years is the standard for “long-term” budgeting in our city. After searching for the budgets and revenue estimates for the next five years, I found that our most recent LTFP only covered through FY 2020/21. This is only 3 FY from the current FY we are in. If we are not even planning five years in the future, then we definitely need a culture change in City Hall. We must install a more secure long -term plan.”
7. Proposal: Budget 30 Years Ahead of Time.
“I call on our city to establish a tentative 30-year budget to help us plan future General Fund expenditures. This will be a template for each financial year through 2050. The Council can add amendments on what should be included in the plan. I will add amendments for funds described in HB2050. These funds will be a Rainy Day Fund, Homeless Initiative Fund, Infrastructure Reinvestment Fund, and a Pension Pay down Fund.”
Again, Burley’s detachment from real world experience renders him unable to understand why, Cities don’t budget that far out ahead.
5 years is standard in the corporate world.
The City should have a 5 year budget plan.
One that is just that. A plan.
Not a rigid document from which there is no deviation.
Since Burley has yet to experience the joy of a recession as an adult, having been in school at the height of the most recent severe downturn, he seems unable to fathom the fact that your whole world can change in a matter of months, and the best laid plans get blown straight to hell.
Its hard enough to budget for the current year, let alone a year 30 years hence.
A 30 year plan is largely a symbolic exercise in a Charter City, and not worth the investment in time required.
In the HOA environment, reserve studies plot those expenses well into the future, but it is a useless document that fluctuates based on real time funding levels and realities, as HOA’ s are free to move and redeploy reserve funds as needed, subject only to a vote of the Board of Directors.
Heck, even the “Five Year Plans” popular in the former Soviet Union and China… never quite worked out…
Burley’s “Chicken in every pot” feel good initiatives, again, fail to say just how they will be financed.
This is the stuff I rail on. Politicians who propose a bunch of feel good solutions without having a clue as to how they will be paid for. Much of it is utter nonsense.
Burley appears to be literally trying to tick off every box on the awesomeness checklist.
8. Proposal:Establish Homeless Initiative Fund
“Our budget calls for two dedicated police officers on the issue of homelessness. These officers are tasked with responding to reports as well as getting homeless individuals in touch with non-government organizations that can provide help. Two officers are simply not enough. This fund will make up 0.25 percent of the budget. The Council can decide where the resources will be allocated at a later time. I am advocating for more specialized police officers that can keep residents safe while still getting homeless people the help they need.”
The people of this city are already impacted enough as it is.
The state has amassed over 7.5 billion dollars since the passage of Proposition 63, a 1 percent tax on millionaires passed by voters in 2004 to fund Mental Health services. Where did it go?
Why are we not demanding the State help fund programs for the homeless? A problem they largely created through enaction of yet more stupid legislation?
The majority of the homeless are mentally ill and / or addicted. 90 percent refuse help.
How about we just enforce the existing laws and stop wasting our time trying to “help” a group of people that do not want our help?
Burley wants to lock up another mandated percentage of the budget(which is already pretty much spoken for in Charter resolutions) in a feel good initiative to “help” the homeless, again, without describing what the percentage will be deducted from, in the existing budget, as he will do yet again in the awesome proposal below…But hey.. its sounds good right?
“Johnson, how could you be so heartless?”
I can hear it now. I’m not heartless, just a realist.
9.Proposal: Establish Rainy Day Fund
“During times of recession the first reaction of government is to lay workers off or cut services. I am proposing a Rainy Day Fund in our budget so that we don’t have to make these types of cuts when recessions take place. Our city currently has an economic uncertainties reserve but those can only be used if revenues drop by 5 percent or if there is a serious disaster. This fund can be used w hen revenues are down by a number that is less than that five percent. I am proposing that this fund makes up 0.5 percent of the budget. It will be phased in slowly starting in FY 19/20 with it making up only 0.05 percent of the budget in that year.”
Burley is about to send me off the rails with this ridiculous statement.
This is precisely why we need to demand proposed plans and policies from prospective candidates…so that we can find out how truly uninformed they are…
“During times of recession the first reaction of government is to lay workers off or cut services.”
Easily the stupidest thing so far in this platform, again highlighting how out of touch with reality Burley is.
Again Mr. Burley, what gets cut to fund this percentage? The pie is only so large, sir.
When the shit hit the fan in the great recession, how many City Employees were laid off, Brian?
Read this Brian Burley and tell me how the city reacted in the last downturn.
Google the following search term:
“City of Huntington Beach Lays Off Workers.”
Tell me what you see… all references to Private Sector Layoffs.
It is appears from your proposal that you want to appease the City Employee Unions by making their positions “Layoff Proof”.
Yet another one of Burley’s Al Gore style “Lockbox” proposals.
City officials had to “struggle” to tell the “Poor City Employees” that they would have to forgo a salary increase?
When private sector workers were losing their jobs and their homes?
God forbid our “public servants” lose their jobs when revenue declines…
Here’s my alternative to your proposal, Brian.
When City revenue falls, City departments cut their budgets and issue pink slips…just like in the “real world”, Brian.
The cold, hard, real world.
You know, the world where politicians are immune from the impacts of their actions or lack thereof…
We already have the equivalent of a contingency fund. We certainly don’t need another, especially when it comes in the form of some mandated percentage that has to be shaved off of some other section of the budget.
Brian, again, you only get one pie to eat and its already 3/4 gone.
Last time I checked, all the pieces, when sliced in any configuration, add up to 100 percent. Check it out:
10. I Am in favor of paying down unfunded pension liabilities.
That’s great. Most people recognize the fact that these pension liabilities will slowly strangle the city.
Click here to read “A Slow Death’ for more information…
I agree that we need to adopt a strategy to increase funding of pension liabilities, but in the end, it is pointless until we slow or stop the growth in these liabilities by moving City employees of all types to a defined contribution, 401k style plan and stop the bleeding.
Burley’s proposal is sadly, incomplete. He left out the most important part.
Absolutely no mention from Brian Burley on where he stands on this situation, which again, leads me to perceive him as more concerned with the welfare of the City Employees Unions and less so with the citizens who foot the bill.
Thus, we get the following proposal, that like the others, ignores the concept of a single pie that’s already 3/4 eaten.
11.Establish Pension Pay down Fund.
“As a Councilman, I will call for the establishment of a Pension Paydown Fund in conjunction with 30 years of financial yearly budgets. This fund will start out at 0.5 percent of the budget, and become much larger as time passes. By the end of FY 43/44, my budgets accumulate over $ 453 million in this fund, assuming a six percent rate of return. This is below the recent Callers rate reduction from 7.5 to 7 percent.”
Again, Burley offers no substance on what he intends to do to staunch the bleeding, only how he intends to pay the hit man.
” This fund will start out at 0.5 percent of the budget, and become much larger as time passes.”
How much larger Brian? And as usual, no word on what part of the budget takes the hit to pay for this proposal.
“By the end of FY 43/44, my budgets accumulate over $ 453 million in this fund.”
Brian, what happens to our budget after The Great Tidal Wave of 2028?
The Great Earthquake of 2036?
Yeah. Kinda like Burley’s assumed rate of return and the ability of the city to fund this proposal at the levels cited.
I like the fact that Burley placed it below that of CalPERS. Especially since CalPERS just sets whatever hypothetical expected rate of return they feel like, then demands the city pony up when they miss their “projections”.
Certainly we need to fund our liabilities. No question about it. But this issue requires far more thought than what you have proposed in order to come up with a realistic, workable solution, one that includes fundamental changes in how the City funds the retirement of it’s employees.
Remember Burley, Just one pie is all you get. Most of it is spoken for already Brian.
You are now dealing with only what remains after expenditures mandated in the City Charter.
Discretionary spending, Brian. Thats all that remains.zzz
If you give a massive slice of the remainder to the “Bumpus Hounds” of the Employee Unions, somebody is going hungry.
Lets pause for a moment for a quick lesson in slices of a pie…
OK. Lets get back to Brian Burley’s “HB2050″…
12. I am Against the Poseidon Desalination Project
“I am against the current Poseidon Project. We should not sign on to a long term contract when this technology is not ready for prime-time yet. I am also against it because desalination plants have a history of raising water bills and threatening marine life. Option 5 of the Orange County Water District even goes as far as to suggest replacing groundwater with Poseidon water. This is a bad deal any way you look at it and a desalination project such as this is not in our best interest. I am in favor of improving water collection and preservation as an alternative measure. We need to end our dependency on other cities and states in terms of importing water. Huntington Beach should be a leader for other cities to follow when it comes to ending this dependency. Once desalination technology is efficient and effective, we should reconsider implementation. Partnering with other neighboring cities that are implementing desalination should also be a key component of desalination projects.”
Large scale Desal is currently in widespread use worldwide.
The largest plant, Ras Al-Khair in Saudi Arabia, produced 1,025,000 cubic meters per day in 2014.
Kuwait relies exclusively on desalinated water for all of its needs. In 2014, the Israeli facilities of Hadera, Palmahim, Ashkelon, and Sorek were desalinizing water for less than $0.40 per cubic meter.
As of 2006, Singapore was desalinating water for $0.49 per cubic meter. The city of Perth, Australia began operating a large scale reverse osmosis seawater desalination plant in 2006. A desalination plant now operates in Sydney, and also in Wonthaggi, Victoria, Australia
Not ready for Prime time yet?
Give me a break, Brain Burley.
“I am also against it because desalination plants have a history of raising water bills and threatening marine life.”
Read ” What’s out there? ” for my take on the whole Poseidon debacle…
We live in the equivalent of a desert, Brian Burley.
The offshore ocean environment included.
However, we sit on a massive aquifer and with the 10 City Owned wells and 4 Huntington Beach reservoirs, we have the ability to be completely self sufficient.
The ” Environmental” argument is bogus, readily apparent to any surfer who has opened his eyes underwater.
The only concentrations of marine life off of Huntington Beach, are near piers, jetties and other man made structures, such as the Sanitation District’s 10 foot diameter sewage outfall.
Stingrays? Clams? Sand Crabs? Plenty to go around. The ones that die off in the brine plume will be eaten and become part of the “Circle of Life”.
Why no mention of the HB Shitpipe, if you are so concerned with environmental degradation?
I oppose Poseidon as negotiated, because we have the ability to negotiate from a position of strength and cut a fantastic deal with OCWD.
One that puts the costs of Desal squarley on the backs of the people this water is really intended to serve, Ladera Ranch, Rancho Mission Viejo…gated communities that prefer not to see all that messy infrastructure.
Get us off the grid. No imported or Desal water for HB. Just the inexpensive water that lies under our feet. All the water we need.
Thats what we need to negotiate with OCWD if we are stuck looking at an industrial facility right across from the beach on prime coastal real estate for the next 50 years. We hold the final card.
Without a conditional use permit, they cant flip the switch to start the plant up.
This is yet another bandwagon “Hot Button” issue in Huntington Beach. Candidates think opposition to Poseidon will be a popular stance, without realizing that they are reacting to the vocal minority that dominate local social media forums.
13. I Support our Small Businesses
“I believe our City should do everything in its power in order to foster a business friendly environment. This includes limiting regulations and attracting job producers. I am also in favor of lowering fees im posed on small businesses. Our business environment needs to maximize our tourist economy while also making Huntington Beach an attractive destination for technological jobs and manufacturing jobs.”
Finally something we can agree on. Bravo.
14. I am Against Community Choice Aggregation
“At this time, I cannot support Community Choice Aggregation (CCA). With the current information available, it is unknown if residents could save considerably in energy costs. I am weary (sic) of CCA as I don’t think it is a great idea for the City of Huntington Beach to become an intermediary in providing energy. We can barely maintain all of our current services. More research must be done before such a dramatic change in energy transactions is made.”
“At This Time?”
How about just plain “No” Brian?
CCA is based on dubious claims of environmental benefits, and appears to be the mutant offspring of the California energy crisis of 2000- 2001, when market manipulation by “Energy Traders” like Enron, stuck it to the California ratepayers hard.
My opinion? Hell no!
You have to think twice about this?
Of course that was 16 years ago, so your lack of knowledge regarding energy scams can be partially forgiven, I suppose. You never got hammered by the corporate criminals.
15.Goal: Renegotiate Garbage Collection Rates.
“I endorse the goal of renegotiating garbage rates with Republic Services. Rates increased to $20.57 per month this year and will likely continue to rise as long as we are in this contract with Republic Services. The current contract puts Huntington Beach at having the fifth-highest waste rates of the 11 cities that contract with Republic. It is essential that we guarantee a top two rate or that we get out of this contract so that we can shop for a better deal for residents.”
Burley conveniently ignores the fact that previous ineffective “Elected Officials” negotiated a really shitty contract.
I am a Contract Administrator by profession. I laughed when I read the Rainbow/ Republic contract, because it was just so bad and one-sided.
But, as the Clash sing in “All the Young Punks”, “a contract is a contract when they get em’ out on you”.
There are specific legal requirements regarding contract termination, this contract having an insane clause that requires an 18 year notification for termination, unless Republic is in breach.
However, other clauses give them ample opportunity to cure any breach.
In other words, it is almost a contract in perpetuity, unless they can be found in breach and fail to cure the breach.
Great Job City Officials!
Sounds good though Burley. And perhaps that’s the point of this proposal?
16. I am against districting.
“Districting will strip all Huntington Beach voters of six votes. Opponents say that districting gives minority groups a stronger voice, but that simply is not the case for our community. Our city has great geographic diversity of minority populations and districting will simply hurt all voters instead of helping a few . It is important to mention the other negative externalities of a districting system. Special interests will likely have to spend a lot less money to have an influence on district elections. Council members will undoubtedly make backroom deals with fellow members on votes that can improve their districts. We don’t need the “you scratch my back, I ’ll scratch yours” mentality that comes with districting.”
17. I am in Favor of Improving Public Safety and Combatting (sic) Rising Crime.
“I believe our reaction to rising crime needs to have a three-pronged approach
that includes diagnosis, prevention and evaluation. Diagnosis- Our Police Chief mentioned that we have had slight crime increases in each of the past four years. He described this as one to two additional crimes a week. For further diagnosis on the increase of crime and what our city does, I believe we need an independent review of everything our city does in terms of public safety. Prevention – While we need officers patrolling all around our city, from my perspective, we haven’t done a good enough job at putting officers in our crime hot spots. I would prioritize having enough officers patrolling parts of our city that are more susceptible to crime. This issue is partially because of the low number of officers we have available. Police Chief Handy mentioned that we are operating at bare minimum numbers in terms of Police Officers on patrol. When an officer must go to book someone,no one is available to take that officer’s place. Evaluation– Transparency is important. Residents currently must do their own research to find out the facts, such as that this year has seen the highest amount of officer-involved shootings in the last decade. The city should streamline data for public consumption and our city should report to the people on the results of the changes being made to address public safety concerns.”
Really Brian? an “Independent Review”?
Political Science majors tend to be enamored of “Task Forces”, “Commissions”, “Independent Reviews”, etc.
They usually wind up being a collection of pointy heads pontificating and bloviating and result in little real change.
I think the Chief of Police has his finger on the pulse of whats happening and is doing his best at deploying his resources in an efficient manner.
“I would prioritize having enough officers patrolling parts of our city that are more susceptible to crime. ”
We already maintain substations in high crime areas.
I think Burley’s proposal is just another expensive waste of time and resources.
If Burley disagrees, perhaps he should pursue the job of Police Chief.
Let the professionals handle the task of implementing Law Enforcement.
We don’t need to politicize it any more than it already is, with Council-members micromanaging the process.
The job of a Councilperson is Governance, not Management.
18. Proposal: A Call for an Independent Review of Public Safety
“I am calling for an independent review of everything our city does regarding public safety concerns. An impartial and credible group should conduct this review. The outcome of this review should show our shortcomings when addressing the issues of drugs, homelessness, theft, drunk driving, assaults and shootings. After this review , I want our Council and Police Chief to acknowledge our problems and thereafter craft a proper plan on how to prevent crime and make Huntington Beach a safer city.”
How about a “Consent Decree” Brian, if you think our problems are so severe?
Give me a break.
Again, Let the professionals handle the task of implementing Law Enforcement.
We don’t need to politicize it any more than it already is and we don’t need Political Science majors running the show.
What exactly would this “independent review” cost the city Burley?
Again, The job of a Councilperson is Governance, not Management.
19.Proposal:Restore Police Department to Pre-Recession Numbers by 2025.
“Our Police Department currently has 222 sworn officers.Before the Great Recession, there were 237 sworn officers. Police Chief Handy has asked for four additional officers a year. We should set a goal of 237 sworn Police Officers by 2025. This goal will give our Police Chief more flexibility and manpower to confront the rising crime in our city.”
Brian, there is a standing job posting on the City website.
The Police Department is always recruiting.
Yes we need more Police Officers and no, a City Councilman is not going to expedite the hiring process through dictates, proclamation and sheer force of will.
20. I Support Police Chief Handy
“At the time of this proposal the Huntington Beach Police Officers Association (POA) and Police Chief are not on the best terms. When I asked Police Chief Handy how this would get resolved, I did not get a clear answer. I understand the politicization of this topic currently. Our Police Chief wants our officers to wear cameras for accountability as do most residents including myself. The POA has concerns about adequate resources for fighting crime. Both sides are understandable and should be equally valued. If I am fortunate to serve on the Council, I will give our Police Chief a chance to address the problems we face. But if the political back and forth continues to overshadow the goals of our Police Department, all options will be on the table.”
Handy is ambivalent towards Illegal Immigration issues, refusing to cooperate with ICE and creating what is a de facto Sanctuary City.
In addition, his hands off approach to dealing with the homeless in Huntington Beach has only exacerbated the problem.
Not my favorite guy in Huntington Beach.
But Handy is open to changes in pension formulas and hiring new recruits from the academies, that are not vested in the abusive CalPERS system.
The POA is against body cams because it records their behavior and removes the ability to engage in activities like reprisal beat-downs behind shopping centers and openly hostile responses to things that cops tend to get pissed about.
But I think Body Cams are a good idea, if only for the fact that if a cop and is shot and killed in the line of duty, it might result in the apprehension of the killer, or show that a defendant is lying when he claims to have been the victim of excessive force.
Besides, a little Vaseline on the lens will fix that right up.
The Union thugs need a lesson in reality.
Consult with the OC Sheriffs Dept. and obtain an estimate for the cost of replacing the HBPD. We own the cars, the motorcycles, the aircraft, the facility.
The HBPOA merely represents hired staff. They can be replaced. Easily.
Despite my lack of love for Handy, I would rather see him prevail then the Union Thugs.
21. I am in Favor of the Preservation of Open Spaces, Parks, and Beaches.
“Much like my position on High Density Development, I will do everything in my power to preserve the details that make Huntington Beach such an amazing place to live in. That is why I will make it my goal to preserve our open spaces, parks and beaches. I am
in support of the 17th Street Park and the Huntington Beach Playground on the sand. My proposed infrastructure spending increase will allow us to maintain some of the best parks around.”
I Agree. Preserve Open space and Parks.
I don’t think there’s much danger of losing a Beach.
Your “proposed infrastructure spending increase” results in a reduction in some other area of city spending.
Please identify the part of the budget that takes the hit.
22. Goal: Huntington Beach Becoming Fully Non-Toxic
“Our city began a pilot program to test non-toxic pesticides in our parks earlier this year. In my opinion, Huntington Beach going non-toxic is a must. The use of non-toxic pesticides will realize long -term economic savings and improve the health of our residents. As long as we can control costs and ensure safety of any alternatives, our City should work to become fully non-toxic in the future.”
Great. Why not. Sounds good.
Check off all the boxes, Brian.
23. I am in Favor of Local Government Reform
“I understand that some residents fear that changes to the way we do things in government will make things worse. I tend to think reform of the way we do things can make things better as long as we have the people’s wants and needs in mind first and foremost. If we don’t make any changes to the way we do things then things will only continue to get worse. It is often said that doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results is the definition of insanity”.
Can anybody figure out what the heck Brian Burley is trying to say here? I can’t.
It’s like one of those statements politicians make at a debate that sound good at first until you realize that they have said absolutely nothing.
24. Proposal: Call to Remove City Manager Fred Wilson
“With all respect to our City Manager, it is time for a change. Fred Wilson was in many ways the crafter of the debacle that was the City of San Bernardino bankruptcy, and that alone is reason to not allow him to lead our city. We need change at the top of our leadership structure and that starts with our City Manager.
I agree with Burley that Fred Wilson needs to go.
The only problem is he will no doubt be replaced after a “diligent search” ( that the city will probably outsource) with some other loser.
City managers bounce around from city to city on a regular basis, with each having been shown the door somewhere else.
That’s why they are available.
In my opinion. they are all hacks.
25. Goal: Impose Strict Term Limits on City Council and Mayoral Office Holders
“Currently we have pseudo-term limits. Council members serve two consecutive terms, then they take two years off and can come back for two more terms. This system is pointless; either we are going to have strict term limits or we are not having term limits at all. I am calling for stricter term limits to help put an end to the revolving door of special interest candidates. My plan is to enforce two four year terms. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. Our current system allows special interest groups to harvest and it breeds a good ol’ boys mentality in City Hall. There is an overabundance of qualified candidates in our city. Unwillingness by Council members to change this system shows their lack of faith in the abilities of qualified individuals in our community. This will take a charter amendment. We should work to end this system and implement a more functional, credible term limit system .”
Good call. 2 terms period. Up or out.
How would you accomplish “Your Plan” Burley?
That is the real question here.
This requires consensus.
26.Goal: Implement Mayoral Elections
“Another faulty system we have is that of ‘appointing’ mayors. We do not have Mayoral
elections, yet on our city’s website, it states that our mayors are ‘elected in (insert year)’. The people of the city should choose their own Mayor. I am calling for an end to this system of illegitimate Mayors. We need real elections in order to have real Mayors. I believe in the people’s right to vote. I believe in a government by the people and for the people. Those who want to be Mayor should have to campaign for it on a set of ideas and proposals – this is something lacking from our current system . Mayors should have two four-year terms and that is it. This will also take a charter amendment. We should strive to make our Mayoral position more than just a resume builder and ballot designation for politicians to exploit during their re-election campaigns”
I agree. Lets elect a real Mayor in 2020.
27. I am in Favor of Reining in Government Spending.
“With unfunded liabilities, a depleted police force, and other inadequate spending, there is a growing need to reduce spending. I am calling for more efficient spending from our city and that includes looking at different departments’ shares of the budget a
swell as excessive salaries.”
Burley just got done calling for an expansion of spending.
Granted, it was all bullshit, so I am inclined to think this is more of the same, although I agree with the principle.
28.Goal:Pay Decreases on City Manager and Assistant City Manager Positions.
“Our City Manager makes over $260,000 and our Assistant City Manager makes over $200,000. These positions could easily be paid $160,000 and $100,000 respectively and our City would still draw strong candidates. I f we are going to continue to pay this much for our City Manager, then maybe we should hire someone who did not oversee the bankruptcy of another California city. Cutting the salaries to the numbers suggested above would save our city over $2million over a decade.”
Brian now wants to branch off into Human resources territory and set what he feels are appropriate salary levels.
Why stop there Brian? Lets just revamp the whole city salary schedule. They are all overpaid.
I find a City Council candidate that wants to micromanage HR decisions, highly problematic and troubling.
Council members Govern, Brian, they do not manage.
29.Goal: Police and Fire Spending Below 50 Percent of Budget by 2050
“The Police and Fire budgets in the proposed 17/18 budget total 54.7 of the budget. I believe that our Police and Fire should maintain increases in dollar amounts in the budget, but the percentage of the pie needs to get smaller over time so that we can have a well-balanced budget. That is why setting the goal of getting our Police and Fire combined budgets under 50 percent is a goal we should set out to achieve.”
Ludicrous. Somehow, the paradox of “increases in dollar amounts” vs. The ” percentage of the pie”, escape Burley.
I guess if you wish for it, it will happen.
30.Goal: Prioritize Hiring of PEPRA Employees.
“CalPERS reforms came in 2013 in the form of California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act (PEPRA). PEPRA set caps on pensions of “$118,775 for New Members participating in Social Security and $142,530 for New Members not covered by Social Security” for 2017. While these pension caps are still high, it is in our city’s best interest to hire employees that will fall under PEPRA pension as their pension costs are much more affordable than classic CalPERS costs.”
This statement tells me everything I need to know about Brian Burley.
He has no backbone for demanding fundamental change and throwing off the yoke of the Public Employee Unions.
All that effort wasted Brian.
To end on that note, was everything I needed to hear, in fact if you had simply started with that assertion, I could have tossed “HB2025” Straight in the trash and done something productive.
“HB2050 is the most sophisticated platform any Huntington Beach City Council candidate has ever run on..”
Brian Burley, you are simply delusional. It’s full of holes.
We already have our share of delusional politicians and candidates.
I’m glad we have an opportunity to see what you represent.
Frankly, im not the least bit interested, nor impressed.
Congratulations. You have climbed the ranks from Nothingburger to Grilled Cheese Sandwich.
Looks good, smells good.
No meat whatsoever.
Feel free to respond Brian. You have me blocked on social media, but my comments run wide open, without moderation.