Annapolis Capital Punishment

This is going to be a very long post. On Monday night, January 14, an amendment to the city charter is being introduced by Alderman Israel. This would give extra powers to an already underpaid and under-qualified city administrator and with this set-up, we'll never find a qualified person to fill that position. CP has worked under a handful of city administrators under two mayors. Only one or possibly two were adequate in their managerial or leadership skills. The City Administrator position has not worked in Annapolis. It will not work. What we need is a City Manager form of government. Below is a letter I sent to all Aldermen and I plan to testify on Monday bight by reading this as well. It is followed by a link to a table I created on this issue and then by articles published in The Sun and The Capital:

As a longtime resident, former city employee and longtime observer of our government and politics, I voice strong opposition to CA-01-08 . I also come here to support creating a city manager form of government. It pains me to speak out against Alderman Israel as I know he invests great time and consideration into the deliberative process of being an Alderman, but it is wrong.

I worked as a professional staffer for nearly eight years under two mayors and I know that not one of the handful of city administrators hat have come and gone had any idea what went on in my department, nor did any of them seem to know what was going on in most city departments. When I ran for alderman last year, one of my top three goals was to create a city manager form of government. Although this was against the advice of my closest supporters who believed it was politically naïve to do so, I believed then, and continue to believe, that professional management that is likely to be found only through hiring a competent and certified City Manager, is crucial to running our 70$ + million bureaucracy and our 600 or so employees. The current system of an underpaid city administrator appointed by an overpaid elected mayor has proven to be unworkable for too long.

I’d like to think that my short-lived candidacy helped spur this issue on, and I am pleased that Alderman Arnett, the man who did win that election, has since become a supporter of a city manager form of government. I believe more citizens are behind this idea as well.

The current structure of government makes the mayor CEO and Board Chair. There is no separation of powers. This is a major problem. This bill does not change that. Would we consent to having County Executive John Leopold also serve as chairman of the county council? I think not. Would we consent to have Governor O’Malley serve as Speaker of the House or Senate president? I think not. Why then do we allow out mayors to also serve as City Council chairs? Would we tell Mr. Leopold or Mr. O’Malley that they could not direct the departmental secretaries that they appoint? This bill keeps our mayor as CEO and board chair and then tells the mayor not to run the departments headed by the people he or she has chosen. Even worse, it says that dismissal of the City Administrator will requires a majority of City Council including the mayor. This makes no sense. It completely muddles up who hires who for what purpose to tell who to do what and makes it harder to get rid of someone who is not performing well.

At present, the city administrator serves at the pleasure of the mayor, yet is paid less than any of the department heads he is supposed to supervise, even though they serve at the pleasure of the mayor. Now we are asking to codify that person’s job with yet more authority and still pay him less than those department heads. This bill tells Mayor Moyer, or her successor to stay out of the business of the department heads who she hired and who serve at her pleasure, giving the city administrator clear authority to supervise them without the authority to hire or fire them. So--does it really change anything since it still leaves real executive power with an elected mayor--a person who may not have the leadership or managerial skills to do this? Oddly, at the same time, it tells the mayor to not run city business. This bill will make things much worse while ignoring the real problem.

Now imagine this. You are a city department head hired by the mayor, serving at her or his pleasure. The city administrator ostensibly supervises you, although you make a lot more money than he does, and you know that he cannot fire you because only the mayor can do that. You might be incompetent and you might make the city administrator look even more incompetent because he has no authority to really control you, and as long as you are a friend or political ally of the mayor, you keep your job. Does this sound familiar? I have learned from long experience in business and government never to accept a position where you are given responsibility without authority. Never. This bill asks an underpaid city administrator to do just that.

When the time comes to find a new city administrator, how we will find a qualified person willing to take on this job at this low pay? If we are going to tell the mayor not to get involved with department heads jobs, then why allow them to serve at the pleasure of the mayor? Would we tell the CEO of any corporation not to direct his or her Chief Financial Officer or Chief Information Officer in his or her daily tasks? Of course not. Only a CEO should be able to dismiss the CAO. Boards should weigh in but never have the authority to make such decisions.

We should not pass this bill. What we should be doing is acknowledging that our city is a large and complex enterprise that requires the managerial expertise of a qualified and appropriately paid City Manager. We must admit how unlikely it is to find the right person to oversee the multifaceted challenges of complex, multi-million dollar contracts for renovating police stations, Market House and pensions for fire department retirees from among our own residents is small indeed. That is further constrained by paying them under $100,ooo dollars per year when the going rate for such a person is more like $150,000 dollars to $200,000 per year. Is it any wonder, that with the unusually low pay we have for the city administrator position, that we have had such difficulty finding a qualified person?

We must revisit the charter review commission from 1996 whose report said another review would be needed in ten years. That was two years ago.

To see a table I created when I ran for Alderman that laid out the differences our current form and an envisioned form of government, please go to:
www.willgetitdone.com/paulfoerward8/ and then click on "Issues" and go to "Ensure professionalism and transparency in our government" (sorry but this is the only way I could do it)

This is Alderman Israel's opinion in support of his amendment:
www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/annearundel/bal-ar.column13jan13,0,3964714.story

This is the Sun's article:
www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/annearundel/bal-ar.administrator13jan13,0,5183499.story

This is the Capital's article:
www.hometownannapolis.com/cgi-bin/read/2008/01_10-19/TOP

The Capital's editorial board weighs in but shows a rather remarkable lack of understanding of this issue.
www.hometownannapolis.com/cgi-bin/read/2008/01_13-38/OPN