Two weeks after a reshuffling on the City Council prevented Gary Silbiger from serving a second term as mayor, various ex-city officials and an attorney at a governmental ethics center added their voices to the political dustup.

Andrew Weissman was chosen to be the city’s mayor for 2009-2010 by a 3-2 vote on April 27, depriving Silbiger, who was the vice mayor and next in line, of serving a second term in the center seat.

Councilmen Scott Malsin and Micheál O’Leary voted for Weissman. Christopher Armenta who was chosen as vice mayor.

Carol Gross, who served on the council from 2000 until 2008, pointed out that she too was not nominated for mayor a second time, even though she was the city’s vice mayor in 2007. “Ultimately, it comes down to whoever the council chooses,” Gross said. “The council has the responsibility and the right to choose who it feels is the best person for the job.”

Like many charter cities in California, Culver City has an honorary mayor that is rotated among the five councilmembers. With rare exception, the councilmember who is the vice mayor during the year in Culver City has become mayor the following year. Some only serve one term in the honorary position, but in other cases councilmembers such as Albert Vera and Alan Corlin, who served three and two terms respectively on the council, were mayors twice during their tenure.

Santa Monica is one city that does vote each year on who will occupy the two spots on the council, and the public is aware of the policy.

The possibility that a plan to prevent Silbiger from becoming mayor had been the subject of rumors for several weeks, and many of his supporters believe that personal, petty politics was the driving force behind the vote.

Silbiger, who is in his last year on the council, believes that the vote had the hint of a political maneuver against him based on his positions on various social and governmental matters, which at times are in direct contrast with at least three of his council colleagues.

“I was definitely political,” Silbiger said recently. “I thought that it came down to different political philosophies among councilmembers.”

Besides Weissman, whose family was in council chambers to congratulate him that night, O’Leary also seemed to benefit from the reorganization: he is now ostensibly in line to become mayor in 2012, the last year of his first term in office and an reelection year.

While rumors about nominating someone besides Silbiger had been swirling for several weeks, there had been no public discussion of what has been a long-time tradition in Culver City. “People always want to know who is being elected or chosen to represent them,” Jessica Levinson, the political reform director at the Center for Governmental Studies in West Los Angeles told the News. “At the same time, there could be a sense that the voters do not want to weigh in on every single matter that comes before them.”

Levinson cited what some call “voter fatigue” regarding the state propositions on the May 19 ballot that are all trailing in the polls as an example of the possibility of the public’s lack of interest in having a say in every governmental decision.

“While the public often wants to be able to know what decisions their elected officials are making, (the Culver City vote) could be a case where some might not feel that this needed a public discussion,” she said.

Armenta, in an interview with the News, said that passing Silbiger over did not square with what had been a tradition in Culver City and many other cities. “I believe in the process that we had in place and that it worked well in the city,” said the new vice mayor, echoing Silbiger.

Deputy City Clerk Ela Valladares said that there is no written policy governing rotation as it pertains to councilmembers, but it is commonplace for the sitting vice mayor to become the next mayor.

“That is the norm,” she explained. “It has been more of a long-standing tradition than a policy.”

That is what Silbiger and his supporters were banking on going into the nomination process.

“I had known about the unwritten procedure and I thought that it has worked well in Culver City for decades,” said Silbiger. “There had been no public discussion of not following this procedure at any previous meetings.”

“There is usually not a lot of discussion when the new mayor is nominated,” Gross countered. “It is usually a very quick process.”

Bypassing a fellow councilmember for any reason-personal or political- was not a regular part of past councils’ legacies, said Vera. He remembered that after winning his first council race in 1992, his colleague Dr. James Boulgarides, who was next in line, was skipped over for mayor.

“I thought that it was a terrible thing to do,” Vera recalled.

He then deferred to Boulgarides, who had served longer on the council, and Boulgarides was named mayor, Vera said.

Valladares remembered one incident several years ago when the late councilman Mike Balkman was passed over for a council seat, a move that reportedly caused a great deal anxiety among Balkman’s supporters.

Charles Deen, a long-time Culver City resident, witnessed the incident. “I did attend the council meeting when Albert Vera was nominated for mayor by an ally early in his first term,” Deen said. “Serving as mayor early meant that Albert would also more likely serve again as mayor in his second term. “Because of that political play, Mike Balkman missed serving a second time as mayor in his eight years. Back then as a casual observer, I was not that keenly aware of how Mike's supporters felt.”

Vera feels that the situation with Silbiger could have been handled much differently.

“If it is determined that a mayor is not able to control the meetings properly or does not represent the city well, then you can make a motion to agendize a discussion to remove him,” Vera asserted. “At least the people will know then that he was not up to the job.”

Deen sees the vote for Weissman as a vote for the best steward of the city’s fiscal policies for the next year, when Culver City will be facing an estimated $6-8 million budget shortfall. “I view the mayor's election as choosing the best person available for a year of budgetary and possibly financial crisis. In the past, I think that self-interest and political considerations were the only choices that were made,” Deen, an accountant, stated. “I think that Culver City as a community deserves more effort in the choice of our mayor.”

Armenta voted against himself when he was nominated for the vice mayor’s position, putting him-perhaps- in line to become mayor next year. When asked why he voted no, Armenta responded, “I was voting as a statement of no confidence (in passing over Silbiger). I think that it sets a horrible precedent.”

This type of vote could now happen on a regular basis, Vera believes.

“The gates are wide opened,” he said. “I thought we had sealed those gates when we allowed Boulglarides become mayor.”

Armenta believes that having an established set of guidelines in place that would prevent what happened to Silbiger from occurring in future years. “It would not allow for something like this to happen again,” Armenta, a former Culver City city clerk, said.

Gross and Deen disagree.

“The council should have the opportunity to choose whomever (it) wants,” said the former councilwoman.

“There is no public need to have such a written policy. What is best for Culver City as a community should always be the governing policy,” Deen a former Parks and Recreation commissioner, added. “We elect our council folks to represent and serve the community - not themselves.”

After a tradition is not followed, it is not uncommon for the supporters of the aggrieved party to be upset, says Levinson.

“If there is a custom and practice that has been in place and has been followed for several years or several election cycles, then the supporters of the official that did not receive the nomination may feel that they had the rug pulled from under them,” Levinson noted. “Whether this merits a change is policy is another story.”

Silbiger says that while he does not harbor any ill feelings about the night of April 27, he thinks that some of his supporters and many members of the public came away very disenchanted. “While I congratulate Andy on becoming mayor, there was a different feel to the evening,” he admitted. “I’m concerned that now the public will view this as a political move and that brings into question whether they will trust their public officials decisions in the future.”

The councilman said that none of the reasons given that night for bypassing him rang true to him.

“If there’s another reason that (my fellow councilmen) haven’t mentioned to the public, I’d like to hear it,” Silbiger said.

The council is slated to the possibility of crafting a written policy of how the mayor and vice mayor are selected in later this year.