About Last Night...

What Did We Learn Last Night?

Reflections on the civic event at Caldwell Snyder Gallery

First, thank you to everyone who came last night, both candidates and members of the public, and to Oliver Caldwell for hosting an evening that gave our community an opportunity to listen, ask questions, and make distinctions between those seeking to represent us.

I believe some important distinctions emerged.

Accountability to our Municipal Code matters.

David Prueter provided an update on his group's efforts to correct the City's actions in relation to the Spring Street development projects at issue. It is my impression that three candidates present last night have made a serious effort to understand what occurred: Bonnie Schoch, Joshua Parke, and myself.

The burden of correcting these failures should never have fallen on David's group. Yet this is one of the difficult responsibilities citizens assume when they participate in their own governance. David and his fellow citizens deserve credit for doing that work.

Joshua Parke and I have repeatedly researched these matters and brought our concerns forward publicly. That record matters.

I believe there is a clear distinction between having an opinion about a particular project and holding a consistent belief that our Municipal Code matters and must be applied universally to every proposal.

When development proposals fail to meet the objective standards of our Municipal Code, the City's responsibility is to reject them or require that they be brought into compliance. When the City evaluates proposals without applying those standards, it undermines the fundamental covenant between citizens and their government.

When citizens identify specific instances of noncompliance and the City fails to address or even answer those concerns, it erodes the trust on which good government depends.

And when safety officials are placed in the position of interpreting objective safety requirements subjectively, in ways that accommodate a particular developer, the public has every reason to question whether the City is honoring its civic obligations.

These are not simply disagreements over individual projects. They go to the heart of accountable government.

A credible housing strategy matters.

A healthy community needs an actual strategy for meeting its housing needs, not simply a series of development proposals and the assumption that, collectively, they will get us there.

Responsible governance requires understanding the relationship between our housing needs, the City's policies, State mandates, and the development those policies and mandates actually produce. I believe last night's discussion exposed significant limitations in our current approach.

As the two Spring Street development proposals demonstrate, our current approach will simply chew through our available space and will not come close to achieving our RHNA goals.

Of the candidates present, Bonnie Schoch, Joshua Parke, and I have specifically engaged with these questions and worked to understand the underlying mechanics of our housing strategy. Last night's discussion also made clear that housing does not occupy the same place on every candidate's list of priorities, and that not every candidate has given the question the same degree of consideration. That is an important distinction for voters.

Understanding the problem is the necessary first step toward developing a better approach. We need to examine what our policies promise, what they actually deliver, and whether the results will meet St. Helena's housing needs.

Our water quality demands more than assurances. It demands a plan.

No serious candidate can pretend that addressing our water quality is not a priority. The distinctions here may be harder to discern, but they matter just as much.

Who has submitted substantive questions about our water quality? Who has attended Water and Wastewater Committee meetings? Who has demonstrated the problem-solving skills needed to help address this challenge, both in the near term and over the longer term?

This goes well beyond the ability to hire and fire. It is about asking the useful questions that lead to solutions.

What can we test now, and what will those tests tell us? What do we know, what remains uncertain, and what specific steps will move us closer to understanding and resolving the problem?

This is a complicated, multifaceted challenge that demands urgent, detailed direction and follow-through. Part of the solution requires understanding the chemistry and technical workings of the water system. Another part requires clear communication, sound direction, and the discipline to pursue answers methodically.

Ultimately, we must do more than explain what is being done. We must demonstrate what has been accomplished, communicate the evidence that the problem has been addressed, and restore public confidence.

Recognizing that we have a problem is only the beginning. The work lies in understanding it, directing the response, measuring results, and following through.

Of the Council candidates present last night, I believe Joshua Parke and I have demonstrated that methodical, problem-solving approach. I also believe Bonnie Schoch has demonstrated the communication skills needed to bring the community along as we work toward a solution. These are important and complementary strengths.

This is how we move forward.

I am grateful to all the candidates who attended and shared their perspectives on governance. I appreciate the questions asked, the answers given, and the opportunity for the public to hear different approaches side by side.

I am pleased that meaningful distinctions emerged. That was the purpose of the evening.

We ask questions. We examine the record. We expect accountability. We distinguish between promises and an understanding of how to do the work.

Ultimately, it is up to the public to decide who it wants representing St. Helena. Voting is both a privilege and a responsibility — one of the most consequential ways we participate in our own governance.

There is still time to ask questions and seek answers before casting your vote on November 3, although not much. I hope last night's discussion helped make some of the important distinctions clearer. If not, reach out. Ask.

Thank you again to Oliver, to the candidates who participated, and to everyone who came.

Sincerely,
Daniel Hale