The Manhattan Beach City Council voted 5-0 on Tuesday night to name Council Member Suzanne Hadley as the town's new mayor.

What might have been a routine vote followed weeks of public debate, including petitions, emails, social media posts, and other discussion about Hadley's tenure and the tradition of mayoral succession in Manhattan Beach.

"I will work with compassion and humility," said Hadley at the meeting. "I think I am an open book. What you see is what I am. That’s not an excuse; but there is nothing hidden about me. I just welcome a clean slate, I welcome a fresh start. It’s spot on that I have work to do and I have fences to mend... I have a coachable spirit and I want to learn."

Council Member Richard Montgomery, who stepped down as mayor as of last night's vote, asked for the council and the town to come together. "My hope is that Mayor Hadley now can put aside those negative emails and comments. We need to keep our eye on the ball. The only common enemy we have is kicking COVID."

Although rumors had been circulating for weeks, the debate began in earnest on November 17 when Council Member Hildy Stern requested an agenda item for the December 1 meeting to discuss "city council organization" and the mayoral rotation. 

The position of "mayor" in Manhattan Beach traditionally rotates among the council members with each member holding the position for 9 1/2 months. 

City Clerk Liza Tamura said that she and her staff had researched the tradition and found nothing official about the rotation in writing, although it appeared that the tradition had started in 1978. 

Before the vote, there had been a significant number of residents expressing concern about Hadley taking the helm as mayor, and asking for either Montgomery to stay on as mayor for one more term or for Hadley to be skipped over altogether.

Those concerns, expressed in petitions, in letters to City Council members, and in various online forums, stemmed from public remarks and social media statements that Hadley had made regarding the pandemic, Bruce's Beach, and school and business reopenings. Many had also expressed concerned about Hadley's ability to have good working relationships with state and local authorities she had previously criticized.

As those voices grew louder, a similar faction rose to Hadley's defense. Those supporters argued that Hadley had earned the highest number of votes in the last election and had earned the right to take her seat according to the mayoral rotation. At the same time, many decried city council for taking up time with the issue on the agenda in the first place.

Montgomery said that it was the largest number of public comments he had ever seen on an issue. At Tuesday's meeting alone, there were 100 e-comments, 400 emails, and multiple residents on Zoom speaking in person both for and against Hadley's succession. 

"I don’t think I've ever seen so many emails. Residents do feel strongly about this issue. I wish we'd get this much attention about our budget," said Montgomery.  "Nonetheless... when you get so many emails from residents, you have to respect and respond to them. Not necessarily agree or disagree, but just listen."

Montgomery continued: "Council Member Stern was smart to put it on the agenda. That gives us to a chance to share the tradition of mayoral transition... This is an appropriate discussion to have and now is the time to do it."

Council Members Hash It Out

Some critics had painted the transition question as a partisan issue, as Council Members Stern and Hersman had been the first and second on the motion to discuss the mayoral succession.

Hersman spoke out to clarify that issue on Tuesday: "The issue of the mayoral rotation came up because many residents reached out to say they were concerned about Council Member Hadley's ability to lead during a pandemic."

"Having a discussion on this matter didn’t seem like a radical idea," Hersman continued. "We discuss everything we vote on. Many views [we received] were about the process, [saying] 'It’s a tradition and shouldn’t be changed.' But this decision requires a vote. If we wanted it to be automatic, we would have made it that way. Some people have demanded that we remove the item from the agenda. Why is a transparent discussion so threatening to so many in our community?"

Hersman said she had heard from residents who were concerned that Hadley had rocky relations with county officials, was not grasping the severity of the pandemic, had made it harder for the school board to do their job, and had made comments on social media inappropriate for a sitting council member. 

"She says she wants to unify the community. I do hope that can be done, because I've never seen our community as split apart in divisiveness as we are now. We all have to work together to make it through this pandemic," said Hersman.

Stern also spoke out about the criticism about having the item on the agenda. "Protecting health and safety isn’t partisan; coronavirus isn’t political. Truly, if we didn’t have this conversation, that would be silencing views. Is that divisive? It would be if we weren't listening to residents. We listen and we discuss especially when dealing with health and safety. Why should we not listen this time?"

Stern then addressed Hadley: "Suzanne, you rightfully have dedicated support in Manhattan Beach, as you should. We have heard from so many people who recognize your intelligence and energy. So now I ask you to address the concerns of the many who have contacted us. I’ll paraphrase those concerns: Will you continue to ignore advice of health experts and defy orders? ... How will you repair relations with the school district? How will you approach the governor, state representatives, and county government officials whom you have openly criticized? The stakes feel very high to our community. Please speak to the residents who are concerned about their health and safety. If we just followed an automatic process, those concerns would be ignored. Please assure all of those in Manhattan Beach that you will do so as mayor, especially during this unprecedented time."

Once the concerns were aired, however, it appeared that the council would move forward together in support of Hadley. 

"I am concerned about the mayorship for the reasons mentioned; on the other hand I am concerned about divisiveness in our community," said Hersman. "I have decided to support Suzanne for mayor - not because of tradition, not because of things she did - but because I support what she says she will say and do. She has to recognize many will be unhappy, but she has to be willing to heal the wounds she has created."

Montgomery made the motion to support Hadley as mayor, and Councilmember Steve Napolitano seconded the motion.

"I wish I could make everyone happy, but it's nature of this job. Some folks are going to be unhappy with the result. There's only one person who can fix this situation, and that is Suzanne Hadley," said Napolitano.

"I am humbled for the motion [Montgomery] made," Hadley said, "and I am thrilled to have the second of Steve Napolitano. Nancy and Hildy, I have heard what you said. Nancy, I will miss you and I am grateful for your vote. I am tickled pink that we will find ourselves on the same side on this vote. Hildy and Nancy, I love discussions, I love open debate, and I'm gratified that you brought forward concerns of the community."

Following the 5-0 vote for Hadley as mayor, Councilmember Hildy Stern was then confirmed as Mayor Pro Tem, or next in line for mayor under the current rotation.

Council Moves Forward

The council then moved forward with more pressing business with Hadley at the helm as mayor.

The council discussed rising cases of COVID in the county and in the community, as well as ways to help restaurants work through the temporary closure of in-person dining.

The city is looking at expanding areas where customers can eat their takeout outside of restaurants, such as in the currently constructed restaurant "parklets" or by closing down parking lots or certain blocks of streets.