It Belongs to the Mayor?
He is on a mission to retain what he is certain is rightfully, and legally, his. No matter how long it takes, he is laser-focused on obtaining what he believes will be the one, true independent, objective ruling on his case from Sacramento. At issue is an interpretation of state law regarding service on light rail’s Expo Metro Line Construction Authority. There appears to be disagreement at the highest level over whether the pivotal phrase in the law says an appointee “may” or “shall” serve “up to four years” or for “not more than four years.” That does not appear to be as pivotal as the subject of removal. Once a definition of length-of-term is made, Mr. Silbiger will go on to the subject at the heart of the Council’s flaming debate: Can an appointee be summarily replaced, “without a compelling reason,” after a single year?
How Long Is Four Years?
Those are the mysteries Mr. Silbiger ardently is trying to demystify. Clarifying and strengthening a statement he only hinted at during Monday night’s meeting, the Mayor said yesterday he is prepared to wait “for another week or two, however long it takes,” to receive a length-of-term ruling from a legislative counsel. When Mr. Silbiger disclosed at Monday’s meeting that he was awaiting his version of the verdict from the office of state Assemblyperson Karen Bass, some of Mr. Corlin’s supporters rolled their eyes. Ms. Bass and Mr. Silbiger are allies and mutual admirers. But that, said the Mayor, is not why he conducted his own path of research through his friend’s office. When he recently contacted a legislative counsel in Sacramento for enlightenment — he noted that legislative counsels “draft and interpret state laws — the counsel told me the request needed to be routed” through the counsel’s employer, the state Legislature.
Mr. Corlin and his supporters would counter that a final, City Hall-certified verdict already had been issued by Carol Schwab, the City Attorney, at Monday’s meeting. Several components of this issue have been heatedly challenged and conquered, including the seemingly unorthodox fashion in which Mr. Corlin gained the seat from Mr. Silbiger. The Mayor thought he had been elected a year ago by his colleagues for a four-year term. But Mr. Corlin won a favorable ruling from Ms. Schwab on April 24 to hold a same-night vote on the Council’s annual Reorganization Night. Subsequently, Mr. Corlin captured the seat in an acidly played-out three to two vote.
When Mr. Silbiger receives the (presumably favorable) legal opinion from Sacramento, he will have two stops to make, first with his colleagues on the City Council and then with Ms. Schwab in the City Attorney’s office. “We will figure out which ruling is correct,” Mr. Silbger said. Of Ms. Schwab’s fully anticipated ruling on Monday night, the Mayor said: “That is her opinion.” Between them, the Mayor and the Vice Mayor have logged ten years on the City Council. Although both have insisted, publicly and separately, that there wasn’t anything personal in their unrelenting duel, it is possible that neither gentleman ever has fought harder for a position than this one. Addressing his motivation in fighting for a seat on the Light Rail Committee, Mr. Silbiger was direct and uncluttered. “I am a strong advocate of light rail for Culver City,” he said. “I know what the community wants. I have experience at fighting for what Culver City wants. There is no reason to take away this job, after a year, especially after (fellow Councilperson Carol Gross and I) have built complicated relationships, and after we have learned how everything works.”
It took him and Ms. Gross half a year to master the process, Mr. Silbiger said, and it just would not be practical to rewind the clock and start over with a new person.
