Copyright © 2019, Los Angeles Times | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

News-Press Endorsement: No on Measure C in Glendale

Measure C is a perfect example of a case made by government officials to free themselves of public accountability constraints in an overly wordy way that they hope will dupe voters.

Don’t fall for it.

Despite unnecessary provisions for setting a deadline for submitting a budget — particularly given that Glendale has always met its obligation to adopt new-fiscal-year spending plans — and rules for petty cash accounting, at the core of Measure C is a proposal to allow the city to enter into private, direct negotiations with bond issuers.

This would be a big change from the current practice of going through an open, competitive bidding process.


The city would like you to believe that getting rid of that constraint can be a good thing because “in some cases, negotiated bond sales are more efficient and result in lower rates paid by the City.”

But according to the Securities and Exchange Commission, it can open the process up to, at the least, less transparency, and, at the most, pay-to-play dynamics in which bond issuers seek to gain favor with the holders of the purse strings — and your tax dollars.

Voting “no” on Measure C not only maintains the status quo of public accountability and transparency, but keeps Glendale away from the edge of a slippery slope.