By Mary O’KEEFE

The Glendale City Council meeting on Tuesday evolved into another meeting where conspiracy theories were shared – not just by those in the audience but by a member of the council.

The discussion was supposed to be a review of “subject matter and language of proposed charter amendments pertaining to a directly elected mayor, council districts, councilmember compensation, contract procurement and miscellaneous changes to the city charter.” However, Councilmember Ara Najarian took time to voice his opposition to a district voting process.

To review, the City has been conducting outreach community meetings to talk about the possibility of moving from a citywide council election with a rotating mayorship to a district specific election with a citywide elected mayor. There was also a suggestion of going from five councilmembers where one serves as mayor to a six councilmember setting with a separately elected mayor.

Throughout Southern California councils that still conduct citywide elections are deciding to shift to district elections. This is inspired in part by lawsuits filed across the state claiming citywide elections are in violation of the California Voting Rights Act. The majority of the city council had voiced its interest in being proactive and exploring changing the way councilmembers are elected.

During a discussion on approving the Fremont Park Renovation Project, on which council unanimously voted in favor, Najarian took his first shot at the proposed district specific election saying he would not vote for the Fremont Park Renovation Project if he had been elected via a district. He said he would not vote for this project if he would not get something in return.

“When are you going to put a park in my district?” Najarian asked regarding a hypothetical situation if he were voted in by a district election.

In response Councilmember Ardy Kassakhian said he would hope that although councilmembers may have been elected from a specific district they would still care about the city as a whole.

“We are all concerned about our own neighborhood, our own friends and people we know in some respect. It is easy to get into that tribal mentality, but we need to put our better community interests [up front],” he said.

Kassakhian noted that Congress used to be elected statewide but then moved to specific districts and yet its members are able to vote for the state’s best interests while remaining close to their own district.

City Attorney Michael Garcia shared research results he and staff had gathered at the request of council concerning the district voting. This information included, if the proposal is passed by voters, the mayor would begin his/her first term in 2026. It appeared that Garcia borrowed much of the verbiage from other cities, like Santa Barbara, which have already gone through the process of changing from citywide to district specific elections.

The council also looked at a number of changes if district specific elections were implemented, from how to transition from citywide to district specific elections to changes in salary for those elected.

Some councilmembers had questions about the presentation. Garcia will bring an updated presentation next week to Council for the public hearing on the subject.

During council’s comments and questions, Najarian was very passionate in his disagreement not only with the proposal but the way the proposal was being portrayed to the citizens of Glendale.

He took offense at the City’s portrayal of certain areas of the city, specifically South Glendale, not being represented by a councilmember from that area.

“From 2010 to 2013 I lived in South Glendale,” he said.

Najarian added that for those three years he was a renter in an apartment in South Glendale.

“The City is pulling one over you,” he said.

Although it is a majority of the council that has supported this effort to explore the change in electing councilmembers, Najarian said he felt his “First Amendment rights” were violated because his opinion was not shared with the public.

“We are going down the wrong path with the city council,” he said. Then he suggested there was something else going on, but he didn’t elaborate on what that might be.

When Mayor Dan Brotman attempted to speak and stated this was not supposed to be a debate on the voting process, Najarian once again became angry and told Brotman to “keep it to yourself.”

“To say that staff has lied … it is a conspiracy theory that we are trying to ram this through. Something is amiss and shameful,” said Mayor Dan Brotman.

Brotman pointed out this was not to be a debate on district voting but a discussion on charter amendments. Najarian then left the dais.

To note: Other than the three years Najarian lived in South Glendale there has not been a recent member of the council who has been from that area. The far north Glendale – 91214/91020 – has had only one representative elected from the area in recent history, and that ended with his resigning due to legal issues. He was the first representative to live in far north Glendale and the last to date.