Candidate forum an interesting experience

By Bill Erin

Wednesday, March 4, 2009 | 2:22 p.m.

During my 26 years in Boulder City, I can't recall a local election that has stirred up as much discussion and interest as the upcoming contests for City Council. This was in evidence Feb. 23, when the organization BC Facts held a candidates' night with nine council hopefuls present to answer a list of questions.

Not only was every seat filled in the library meeting room, but people lined the walls. There was a list of questions provided to the candidates ahead of time and asked during the program.

It was interesting to see which candidates had done their homework and prepared answers, and which were speaking spontaneously. That in itself may have provided as much insight into their qualifications as their answers.

It is not my intention to critique the candidates, but to review the issues. We will not be endorsing or rejecting candidates during the campaign, but looking at responses to the issues along with any claims, accusations or misleading statements.

Somewhat surprising to me that evening was the attention and importance still given to the Boulder Creek Golf Course. This is the cancer that invaded Boulder City politics in the '90s and has spread through every facet of local government. It is the convenient whipping boy to which opponents of incumbents constantly refer.

No question, it is still a problem. But it is there, a plan has been implemented for it, and like a cancer the major question is, should it continue to be treated in hopes of healing, or should it be removed with all the attendant problems of surgery?

This question cropped up time after time in the candidates' answers to various problems. The consensus seemed to be to that it is getting better and should be treated with care. Only two candidates were for outright closing the course. Most fell back on the old dodge of leaving it to the voters.

Strangely, no one brought up the old municipal golf course. It is the one now losing money. There are apparently no thoughts of closing that.

On most questions, candidates were careful to tiptoe their way through the minefields. Very seldom was there a flat yes or no answer, even when asked to give one.

Only one candidate was outright in favor of changing city management personnel, with most of the others favoring a trial period of adjustment.

Most of the candidates felt that building up around the airport would be a bad idea and continued growth there should not be encouraged.

Everybody was in favor of more alternative energy development, and one candidate suggested it should be carried up into Dutchman Pass with some energy-producing windmills.

The question of how to reduce city debt and balance the budget brought a barrage of broad economizing ideas with no specifics. Cutting expenses and salaries was a popular solution, with department heads a target.

Such general ideas as "fiscal responsibility" abounded. Land sales were felt to be a last resort and probably not a current solution in view of the market. Raising utility rates was not popular. Alternate energy development and land leases were the favorite solutions.

Restoring teamwork to the council was also discussed by most of the candidates and was favored to "restore trust and confidence in the council." There were opinions both ways as to whether the current divisiveness and haggling during council meetings was good or bad.

Although a few of the candidates seemed to be swimming out of their depth at times, overall the quality of candidates seemed good. Even though there was a reluctance to take a firm stand on many of the issues, most of them most of the time seemed to understand the problems faced by the next council.

It bodes well for our future.

Bill Erin is a Boulder City News columnist.