What are Council member Noble’s motives when casting votes?

The business of government, as we all know, can be complicated, and even messy at times. But generally, how we expect it to work in our nation is that we elect people to represent us at, say, a city council, who then vote on our behalf on issues of public policy, based on their judgment -- upon having heard and weighed all the pertinent facts – of whether or not the particular public policy is in the best interest of their constituents. We can (and do) disagree on the exercise of that judgement, and on whether or not a policy is a good fit or not, but the idea is that our elected representatives will make that vote based on an objective analysis of the merits.

That, unfortunately, seems not to be universally the case in the Commerce City Council.

During the December 16th Council hearing, a resolution was brought up to approve an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) between the City of Commerce City and South Adams County Water and Sanitation District (SACWSD) for water infrastructure improvements along 96th Avenue. Now objectively, this IGA would be to the great benefit of all parties, and to the city as a whole; basically, it allows for new water and sewer lines, needed to service the planned new development east of Tower Road, to be installed during the widening of 96th Ave. when the road will already be under construction. The alternative is to come along later, after the road is finished, and tear it back up to install those lines, at a much greater cost, and potentially causing problems with the brand-spanking new road. So, the IGA would seem like a win-win on the merits. 

Here is how Mayor Pro tem Susan Noble considered the issue:

“The resolution says that South Adams Water has appropriated the funds but they may be coming from rate payers since that is their source of revenue. And I would just like to take a moment to point out that on October 2nd the city council voted unanimously to support South Adams County Water and Sanitation District's ballot measure that would enable them to apply for state grants. That was the understanding we were given. We were also told that there would not be a rate increase. The rate increase was announced this past week of 7.5% to all rate payers in South Adams County Water and Sanitation District. To say I am disappointed that that has occurred when we asked specifically is an understatement, and I on that basis will be voting no on this resolution.”

Now, whether or not Ms. Noble is right to be “disappointed” in the Water District for the rate increase is absolutely beside the issue. That has nothing to do with the resolution that was put in front of her. To torture a metaphor, Noble is talking about oranges when being asked to vote on apples. She did go on to vote against the IGA,(along with two other council members for presumably the same reason) not because it was a bad policy for the city, but because the Water District made her mad on another issue. This is the kindergarten school of public policy.

This is disturbing, and calls into question her previous actions on City Council; we have to wonder how many other votes Mayor Pro Tem Noble has taken that were based on emotion and hurt feelings, rather than on objective, unbiased analysis of the issues.