Since we rotate Mayors every year, shouldn't these types of decisions made by the whole City Council?

Nope.

The Mayor is the Mayor. His views are his alone. He need not succumb to the irrational views of other council members.

Our current Mayor Inks is the most level headed, rational mayor that Mountain View has seen in years.

Decisions based on reason, not passion. That is what our city needs. Not some pie in the sky utopian nonsense.

GREG DAVID

NOT AFRAID TO IDENTIFY MYSELF IN THE VOICE FORUM

WHY DOES EVERYONE HERE HIDE ANONYMOUSLY FROM THEIR COMMENTS?!?

If his views are his views alone (and he's entitled to his), why didn't he just take a pass? Instead, it really sounds like he's projecting his views as the views of the City of Mountain View.

He did take a pass. He declined to join to group of mayors advocating that only government agents and criminals should have guns. Apparently, the local "press" was demanding an explanation from Mr. Inks.

@Scott - Maybe next time, instead of regurgitating his libertarian doctrine, he can simply state that this is not in the Mayor's purview to join any organization on behalf of the City. In fact, I'd welcome him make this clarification.
@Scott/Greg - What if the next Mayor's opinions (and his/her opinions alone) are in favor of joining that group?

I applaud Mayor Inks for making his decision based on his own analysis of the matter rather than simply joining MAIG, which would clearly have been the popular and politically correct thing to do in our decidedly liberal area.

I agree with the above comments. The council has no business wasting time on this and other federal or state issues. While individual council members are free to endorse whatever cause they want, I applaud Mayor Inks for passing on this issue. I took a look at the web site and most of the points are useless since all they require is the enforcement of current laws. However one of the points takes aim at law biding citizens and their right to bear arms, so the group is also against legal ownership of guns. I also found a web site that lists Mayors who have taken their names off the list.

@Curious (it would be nice to address you by your name, but apparently you feel you need to dispense your ideology anonymously)

If the next mayor were to choose to join MAIG, I would try to expose the true agenda of MAIG to them and would encourage others to do the same and encourage to not join and/or rescind their membership. If they do join as mayor, they are not joining on behalf of Mountain View, but rather as an individual that just happens to be mayor. I think any mayor that joins an organization like this, that has a hidden agenda to undermine the constitution, is being irresponsible in their position as mayor and should be censured or recalled. The City of Mountain View City Council Code of Conduct states the following in chapter 3.2.1 and 3.2.2:

3.2.1 Recognizing that stewardship of the public interest must be their primary concern, Councilmembers shall work for the common good of the people of Mountain View and not for any private or personal interest. Councilmembers must endeavor to treat all members of the public and issues before them in a fair and equitable manner.

3.2.2 Councilmembers shall comply with the laws of the nation, the State of California, and the City in the performance of their public duties. These laws include, but are not limited to: the United States and California constitutions; the Mountain View City Charter; laws pertaining to conflicts of interest, election campaigns, financial disclosures, employer responsibilities, and open processes of government; and City ordinances and policies.

Joining an organization like MAIG is something of a personal interest and supports a group attempting to violate the Constitution of the United States.

John Inks has acted appropriately as Mayor and hope that all future Mayors do so as well.

Greg David

@Greg

The only point I made is that a one-year rotating mayor elected in a non-partisan election has no business deciding to join (or not) any organization on behalf of the City. As an individual, he's obviously free to do as he wishes; just don't mix our City with it.

What ideology do you see behind this statement?

@Curious

Apparently we agree. My bad. John did the right thing.

You, on the othe hand, are still hiding behind a moniker.

Cheers!

GREG DAVID