Saving money is not old-fashioned

Re: “Primary election will stay,” May 25. No sooner is the City Council election over when council members decided that saving the citizens of Burbank $72,000 a year is too “minimal.”

I bet the underfunded local nonprofit and social service agencies could have used that “minimal” money to serve our city. Yet once again it seems the self interest of some council members like Gary Bric, who feel that without a two-step electoral process he would not have been elected to office, are more important. Why couldn't the city council allow the old-fashioned democratic process of letting the voters decide this issue? Hard to believe only one council member supported placing this proposal on the ballot.

Let me remind the city council they were elected not to serve their own needs, but to serve the citizens of Burbank. You have been entrusted to manage the services and city employees that make Burbank a desirable place to live and do business in. How can you request hikes in salary, city fees and services when you consider saving $72,000 a year minimal?

David Gordon, in response to your comment “I really don't care what other cities are doing — I don't care if it's old-fashioned”, I wonder if in your optometry practice you are still using equipment and techniques from when you first started or whether you consider them too old-fashioned. It would serve you well to do some homework on what other communities are doing and how Burbank may benefit from their experiences.

Alberto Arce

Copyright © 2019, Burbank Leader
EDITION: California | U.S. & World