Manteca’s municipal leaders and bureaucrats stepped up to the plate when it became clear the economic crisis was going to inundate local government if something wasn’t done quickly.
While most other cities kept their fingers crossed 30 months ago, Manteca started re-inventing how it delivered services. It allowed the city to avoid a major hammering while finding ways to shed jobs - read that expenses - and streamline government.
The tone was set by City Manager Steve Pinkerton who - unlike many others in key positions even to this day - believes things will never go back to how they once were in public financing.
Now get ready for the real litmus test.
Can Pinkerton and his staff overcome decades of bureaucratic instinct to not just regulate but to over-regulate?
The Manteca City Council on Tuesday did something that is almost on par with the uprising in Egypt. They want to relax the entrenched regulation mentality when it comes to signs that are off buildings, off-site and not permanent. It goes against the grain of nearly 30 years of sign regulation in Manteca.
It may prove to be an easier task for Pinkerton to balance the city budget in today’s trying economic times than it is to implement sign rules that are more accommodating.
Implementing council directives that run contrary to the thinking of bureaucrats has been the Achilles Heel of some of Pinkerton’s predecessors. The worst example was a clear 5-0 council vote a dozen years ago to eliminate off-site parking requirements for businesses that open in existing storefronts in downtown Manteca. Planning staff resisted implementing them for the better part of a year after the council handled down the edict. The reason? Staff thought it was bad planning so they chose to ignore the directive until the council got angry enough that they were ready to take out the human roadblocks.
In the case of signs, the council hasn’t taken a formal vote on a specific course of action. They did, however unanimously agree that staff needs to rethink the sign ordinance to make it more accommodating to small business.
It would be a safe bet that 90 percent of the signs you see in Manteca today are illegal if not more. It is about as futile to think one could ever enforce all of the rules and restrictions to begin with as it is for Sacramento fans to believe the Kings will end 2011 as the NBA champions.
The easiest - and most effective enforcement solution - would be one that strictly addresses where such signs can be placed in terms of not blocking sidewalks and certain visible hazards, that they must be removed nightly at sunset, they must be neat and professional looking, and puts a specific lid on the number of signs one business can have.
In exchange for sweet, straightforward language, businesses would have to realize the city can simply remove all offending signs at will and hold onto them for five days before dumping them. That will give the businesses a chance to retrieve their offending signs for a price of a $50 fine.
Those fines can pay for code enforcement overtime to make sweeps two to three times a week of the entire city to remove offending signs until there is universal compliance. A similar mass enforcement effort resolved most of the issues with Toters being left in front of homes for an entire week.
The sign issue doesn’t have to be studied to death. It needs to be boiled down to simple rules that are not only enforceable but will actually be enforced without relying on complaints.
If Pinkerton and the municipal staff involved in the sign regulation and enforcement can pull this one off, it will indeed signal that the times really are changing at City Hall.
While most other cities kept their fingers crossed 30 months ago, Manteca started re-inventing how it delivered services. It allowed the city to avoid a major hammering while finding ways to shed jobs - read that expenses - and streamline government.
The tone was set by City Manager Steve Pinkerton who - unlike many others in key positions even to this day - believes things will never go back to how they once were in public financing.
Now get ready for the real litmus test.
Can Pinkerton and his staff overcome decades of bureaucratic instinct to not just regulate but to over-regulate?
The Manteca City Council on Tuesday did something that is almost on par with the uprising in Egypt. They want to relax the entrenched regulation mentality when it comes to signs that are off buildings, off-site and not permanent. It goes against the grain of nearly 30 years of sign regulation in Manteca.
It may prove to be an easier task for Pinkerton to balance the city budget in today’s trying economic times than it is to implement sign rules that are more accommodating.
Implementing council directives that run contrary to the thinking of bureaucrats has been the Achilles Heel of some of Pinkerton’s predecessors. The worst example was a clear 5-0 council vote a dozen years ago to eliminate off-site parking requirements for businesses that open in existing storefronts in downtown Manteca. Planning staff resisted implementing them for the better part of a year after the council handled down the edict. The reason? Staff thought it was bad planning so they chose to ignore the directive until the council got angry enough that they were ready to take out the human roadblocks.
In the case of signs, the council hasn’t taken a formal vote on a specific course of action. They did, however unanimously agree that staff needs to rethink the sign ordinance to make it more accommodating to small business.
It would be a safe bet that 90 percent of the signs you see in Manteca today are illegal if not more. It is about as futile to think one could ever enforce all of the rules and restrictions to begin with as it is for Sacramento fans to believe the Kings will end 2011 as the NBA champions.
The easiest - and most effective enforcement solution - would be one that strictly addresses where such signs can be placed in terms of not blocking sidewalks and certain visible hazards, that they must be removed nightly at sunset, they must be neat and professional looking, and puts a specific lid on the number of signs one business can have.
In exchange for sweet, straightforward language, businesses would have to realize the city can simply remove all offending signs at will and hold onto them for five days before dumping them. That will give the businesses a chance to retrieve their offending signs for a price of a $50 fine.
Those fines can pay for code enforcement overtime to make sweeps two to three times a week of the entire city to remove offending signs until there is universal compliance. A similar mass enforcement effort resolved most of the issues with Toters being left in front of homes for an entire week.
The sign issue doesn’t have to be studied to death. It needs to be boiled down to simple rules that are not only enforceable but will actually be enforced without relying on complaints.
If Pinkerton and the municipal staff involved in the sign regulation and enforcement can pull this one off, it will indeed signal that the times really are changing at City Hall.
