Despite Council behavior, recall isn't the answer

An interesting AZ Republic opinion article on the City Council recall. I'm in complete agreement with the article's premise, which is that a recall is not the right answer.

While people are free to recall those officials, a recall campaign at this time would be a mistake. As outrageous as the action against Pentz was, the people pushing ahead with a recall risk some backlash. Yes, there has been factionalism on the council, and yes, it was ugly the way they treated a decent, ethical city manager. But a recall is not the answer every time voters are unhappy with something their officials do.

A recall is an extreme tool, best used only for extreme cases. Although we agree heartily that Sepulveda and Orlando, along with lame ducks Donna Wallace and Phill Westbrooks, did the city manager wrong, we also acknowledge that it's done. There is no gain to the city to push out Sepulveda and Orlando, and certainly the recall effort will continue the divisiveness in our community.

Meanwhile, though, the May 16 city runoff election is in a sense a referendum on the council's ousting of Pentz, with candidates Trinity Donovan and Jeff Weninger opposing it and Becky Jackson declaring neutrality.

What the citizens made clear last week is they want City Council to attend to the business of the city. A recall would take away any chance of that happening.

Thursday's meeting, with its mostly cordial discourse, is reason to hope that the council has heard the resounding message.

Sepulveda and Orlando come up for re-election in two years. If residents don't think the councilmen have measured up to standards by that time, they should vote them out.

I couldn't agree more. If folks aren't happy with Orlando and Sepulveda, the appropriate conservative approach is to vote them out of office when their term expires in 2008. Not to foment a destabilizing, distracting, community-dividing recall.