Opinion: It All Boils Down to the Process

Reading the recent stories and community responses to the latest controversy over the has been both a joy and a disappointment.

While it is indeed encouraging to see an enlivened in the issues that most directly affect their quality of life in West Hollywood, the joy is tempered only by the disheartening tendency of so many to resort to political mudslinging to press their point—boiling all problems down to a “corrupt” City Council, rather than stating their case on its own merits, which are considerable.

All of it boils down to the core issue with the current and previous controversies in West Hollywood: the process. Whether filling Sal Guarriello's Council seat, the Laurel Mansion () fiasco, the Great Debate debate of the recent , or the among others, the heart of the problem is not corruption, which is the biggest smokescreen and cheapest venality in town, but rather a flawed and at times disingenuous and intellectually dishonest process.

From an average citizen's point of view, it’s easy to see why community input often feels like so many canonballs bouncing off the oaken flanks of Old Ironsides, leaving nary a trace of impact, let alone altering the course of the “ship of state.” And from a council member’s perspective, it must be difficult at times to discern which is worse, the more often than not, flawed process or in the case of Plummer Park, seemingly, no process at all.

So let me attempt to propose a solution for council members and citizenry alike by offering up a third way - cumbersome as it may be - an authentic, responsive, and substantive process, whereby we all agree that West Hollywood is neither Las Vegas nor Mission Viejo, lay aside our quivers of condescension, and meaningfully engage as a community to address the development and quality of life issues that affect us all.

I know some of the things the Council hasn’t considered, but do they realize the Protect Plummer Park advocates, who tend to be the greatest users of the park, live in the immediate vicinity of the park and will be the most negatively impacted by the construction, have considered who will be the greatest beneficiaries of the parking facility? They will.

I don’t know how many people that amounts to, but it’s a far cry less than the 34,000 who call West Hollywood home and for whom the total tab will be $1,200 a head, according to one respondents' calculus. But if the only interests we are supposed to consider are the sacrosanct interests of those who currently use the park and how they currently use it, then perhaps we do truly need to recalculate the $41 million price tag and take another look at who and how many are really benefiting in the long run from such an expenditure.

about one thing, we all have much to be grateful, living as we do in such a vibrant and solvent urban enclave. Our ability to honor that truth and share in its variable gifts and burdens will determine whether or not it remains so for generations to come.

West Hollywood is and can do better than the tenor of our increasingly uncivil dialogue about the redevelopment and quality of life issues that affect us all. May we embrace that challenge with as much vigor and more grace than we embrace our pet issues within the process.

—Rev. Scott T. Imler of Crescent Heights Church, resident of West Hollywood for 16 years

West Hollywood Patch accepts commentary from residents. Please e-mail yours to Local Editor Danielle Jacoby.