The Failure to Systematically Train the Leaders of Tomorrow

Gary Silbiger

For 7 years a Youth Advisory Committee proposal has been kicked around by the City Council and the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Commission. Now is the time for forward thinking leaders to finally create this program.

What good could a Youth Advisory Committee do?

• encourage youth involvement in Culver City Municipal government


• train the next generation of leaders


• allow the City to make better decisions on issues affected Culver City youth


• learn effective ways of running meetings

What practical activities could the Committee perform?

• advise Council members on issues important to youth


• offer feedback to the City Council, Redevelopment Agency, and Culver City Commissions and Committees


• work jointly with the City Council on increasing the involvement of young people in city government and municipal elections

This introduction begs the question: while many cities have had very successful Youth Advisory Committees for years, why hasn’t Culver City initiated this program? The majority of the City Council, other than Councilmember Christopher Armenta, has rejected creating a Youth Advisory Committee over and over. After more than 7 years of stalling, even in the face of very positive support from students, school staff, parents, and the community; students still do not have a voice in our city. Yet, Culver City has committees concerning disability, seniors, tenants, and the homeless, as we should. Why not include our youth as deserving of its own committee?

Attempts to establish a Culver City Youth Committee officially began on October 18, 2004, when as a Council member, I raised the issue of the City sponsoring a Committee and a majority of Council members agreed to agendize it, but first sent the proposal to the City’s Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Commission for a recommendation.

When this issue finally returned to the City Council on June 26, 2006 - having languished in the Commission for more than 1 ½ years - the City report raised the issues of having a 5 or 12 member Youth Committee, (which was estimated to cost annually as little as $26,000), or sponsor a 1 day event called a round table of civic affairs. When I made a motion to establish a Youth Advisory Committee, no other Council member seconded my motion. It was left for dead. The other 4 Council members - Alan Corlin, Carol Gross, Scott Malsin, and Steve Rose - voted to have the 1 day round table for youth and use the City’s Teen Center and leaders at the schools for input. Of course, not even this proposal was ever implemented, nor did any Council member ever try in public to have it established. It was simply a way of putting a halt to a real Youth Advisory Committee.

I have always maintained that the voice of our youth is essential to a well-run city. I therefore implemented an idea that would exemplify how meaningful such a committee could be to Culver City and the interest our youth have in participation in such a committee. As mayor at that time, I publicized Culver City Mayor Gary Silbiger’s Youth Advisory Committee with a 1 year term for individuals between the ages of 14-21 living in Culver City. With limited publicity, 22 high school students applied by completing a detailed application, 10 of whom became the members and the rest participants. The members were the leaders in Culver High School, involved in the Student Government (including the president, vice president, and class president), school clubs, music, Sister City, electoral politics, mock trial, the YMCA Youth and Government program, environmental and disability groups, the Academy of Visual and Performing Arts program at Culver High, sports teams and much more. Meeting at least once a week for that full year, the students began taking a greater interest in city government by attending and speaking at City Council meetings and learning about city issues. The Committee advocated for youth members on certain City Committees and the Council agreed to place one youth on its annual Community Development Block Grant advisory committee. Culver City newspapers printed favorable stories about the Youth Committee. And Committee members met with staff to discuss culture, music, and park issues. At the yearly Committee evaluation, the students said the experience was very meaningful to each of them. I know it was also meaningful input to the city.

With the positive experiences of that Youth Advisory Committee, I again raised the issue of creating a city-wide Culver City Youth Advisory Committee on May 5, 2008, and the then-newly elected majority agreed the following month to again send the issue to the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission to create a youth survey and determine whether there was a “need” for a Youth Committee. Earlier in that meeting, my motion to establish a Youth Advisory Committee and budget $5,000 towards expenses was defeated. I could not support yet another return to the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Commission so I dissented in that 4 to 1 vote.

The City’s youth survey was widely publicized and 117 individuals completed it with 31% stating they would like to be a member of the Youth Advisory Committee. These 35 “Yes” responses are many more than any Culver City committee has ever received. In fact, most Culver City Committees receive just 2-6 applications from candidates for those positions. Also, 16 of those “Yes” responders said they would volunteer 3 or more hours per week on the Committee. Everything looked very favorable. However, the Parks, Recreation, and Community Service Commission once again voted to oppose a Youth Advisory Committee.

When the Youth Advisory Committee topic returned once again to the City Council agenda for the umpteenth time on May 4, 2009, 8 individuals spoke, and several wrote comments, about the importance of initiating a Youth Committee. The Council unanimously voted to create a 2 member Council Committee consisting of Christopher Armenta and Micheal O’Leary to establish a “Youth Council”. Although Councilmember Armenta and I often tried to bring this vote to fruition, it has lingered aimlessly in limbo for the past 2 ½ years. It is shameful that our youth and our city have suffered from this neglect.

What are some of the fallacies in opposing a Youth Advisory Committee?

“Youth are not interested in politics”; yet, youth openly expressed their interest in participating in this committee, participated in the Mayor’s Youth Advisory Committee that I personally established during my term as Mayor, are involved in the YMCA’s Youth in Government program, high school student government, etc.

“Youth will not join a Youth Advisory Committee”; yet the city survey had 35 youth say “Yes” to serving and 22 others already served spectacularly for one year on my Youth Committee.

“Youth already have the YMCA Youth and Government program and do not need another one”; although the excellent YMCA program focuses exclusively on State, not local issues.

“The City has no money for a Youth Committee”; priorities, priorities, priorities should always be the mantra. A City Youth Committee will cost little, but give our youth a major boost towards becoming involved adults. If the City can pay more money on some of its 1 day events than a full year of student activism, these priorities must be changed

The real answer to all these concerns is that our community honors its youth and values their opinions. However, our city council has been stalling for over 7 years on implementing a committee focused on formally giving them input from students throughout Culver City. Why? There are student willing and ready to serve this community at the local government level and it is time to bring them into the picture. We need their input and they will benefit from the exposure to local government. What could be better!

Gary Silbiger is the Co-Editor of the Culver City Progress Blog and the Former Mayor of Culver City.