A Special Meeting (i.e., Public Hearing) of the Annapolis City Council will be held on February 25, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. The Council meetings are broadcast on Comcast channel 99 Verizon channel 34. I urge you to attend and testify against this bill and instead urge the Council to adopt a city manager form of government.
"CA-01-08 City Administrator [Israel]– For the purpose of clarifying the role of the Mayor as chief executive officer and the City Administrator as chief administrative officer; enhancing the supervisory powers of City Administrator with respect to departmental directors; barring the Mayor and Aldermen from directing the work of departmental directors; providing that the dismissal of the City Administrator must be approved by the mayor and four or more aldermen; requiring the Mayor to include funding in the annual operating budget to provide professional and administrative assistance to the aldermen; and generally relating to the powers and duties of the elected and appointed officials."
PLEASE--if you believe that the challenge in our local political system is not just a matter of the who is the mayor and city administrator, but the how and the what of their powers, you should come and testify against this bill. It will muddy already muddied waters but will detract from the real issue. It will ostensibly tie the mayor's hand, but it will still be the mayor who controls the city administrator. And considering the fact that we pay the administrator less money than any of the administrators he supposedly supervises, you can only imagine what this new scenario might mean. Will we have to pay this person more money? I think so. And finally, the Council, the people we elect directly, will be left in their current pusillanimous positions.
Currently all executive power and in fact, all real power in our government rests with the mayor who serves as CEO and Board Chair. The mayor appoints a city administrator who acts like a chief of staff, or in our case, pretty much does little of anything, maybe the term "sinecure" or lapdog would be more fitting. Supposedly this person oversees the daily activities of government and directs the department heads, all of whom are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the mayor and make more money than does he. We are talking about millions of dollars in salaries and benefits collectively. Remember--only the mayor can hire or fire these top administrators, and giving the city administrator more power WILL NOT CHANGE THAT. Therefore, this tells the mayor not to oversee or supervise people only he or she can hire or fire, but allows him or her to hire or fire the one person who oversees everyone else. This is worse than snakes on a plane!
Alderman Israel proposes to give the city administrator direct control over department heads and relieve the mayor of such executive responsibility. However, this does not address nor does it fix the current problem which is that IT IS STILL THE MAYOR WHO HOLDS ALL THE POWER.
The mayor has too much power and we have had little if any success from having a city administrator. This bill gives only a teeny-weeny amount of power to the Council by allowing four of them to join the mayor to vote out the city administrator. In fact, it will give that unelected but appointed person more power and weaken the mayor. Does the bill's language mean that the mayor has to be a part of that five person majority? Either way, the city administrator still reports to the mayor!
WHAT WE REALLY NEED IS A CITY MANAGER chosen by a super-majority of the Council, reporting to the Council and who can only be fired by a super-majority. And that Council will still include the mayor to serve as its chair. That may mean six or seven of the nine total, whether or not the mayor votes yea or nay.
A city manager is a highly qualified and certified professional who is trained to understand budget, finances and public administration and who is sworn to adhere to professional ethics which means being non-political. A city administrator does not necessarily have any of these qualifications, training or certification. Is it a perfect system? Of course not! Nothing we humans do is personal but our current system is seriously flawed because we never get appropriate professionalism and we can only fire the CEO by citywide election every four years. Now are we beginning to see the picture?
A city manager will set priorities and performance standards, run daily administrative functions and hire and fire the top administrators. The mayor and alderman have input and supervision but only through the manager who they oversee.
Below is a chart that compares the current strong mayor and city administrator situation with a a possible city manager/weak mayor scenario:
| What We Have Now | What We Might Consider Having |
Mayor chairs city council | Mayor chairs city council |
Mayor elected citywide | Mayor elected citywide |
Mayor hires City Administrator based on Mayor's interest and preferences and he or she serves at the pleasure of the Mayor. | City Council hires City Manager based on professional credentials and experience after a nationwide search and majority vote. City Manager serves at pleasure of City Council. |
City Administrator earns less than department heads that he or she supervises | City Manager will demand a higher salary yet provide more supervision, oversight, authority and a more managerial link to City Council. |
Mayor solely decides whether to dismiss City Administrator in case of incompetence or breach of trust. City Administrator is able to retain position even if exempt employees (department heads, police chief etc.) do not perform according to requirements. | City Council holds City Manager accountable through a contract based on performance measures and evaluations. City Manager able to retain position only if performing according to contract, which will require exempt employees (department heads, police chief etc.) to perform according to standard. |
Mayor can choose department heads, create new positions, and place political allies in these positions. Mayor and City Administrator are supposed to oversee city departments, but with varying regularity or consistency. Exempt employees are not hired or fired based on performance standards. | City Manager hires and fires all exempt employees based on qualifications and not political preferences. City Manager oversees city departments with consistency and regularity because his or her job depends on meeting performance criteria. |
Only Mayor or City Administrator can interfere with or provide oversight or supervision directly to city departments. City Council is not necessarily informed of or properly communicated with in regard to activities and operations. | Only City Manager can interfere with or provide oversight or supervision directly to city departments. However, since the City Manager answers directly to the nine City Council members, communication and involvement, if indirect, is at least much closer to being guaranteed. |
Non-performing officials can remain in office for years, even if not competent. Or, we see a major debacle (or a major success) and nobody will necessarily get fired (or promoted or rewarded). | Non-performing officials are more easily relieved of duties because of accountability and performance standards, and are more likely to be promoted or rewarded when so deserved. |
Today, the Board (I,e, City Council) cannot fire the CEO (the Mayor). Only the shareholders (voters) can do this, and only every four years. | The nine Board members elected by the shareholders can fire and replace the CEO at any time. |
The below table was provided by Dennis Conti and Trudy McFall of Citizens for a Better Annapolis:
Comparison of Existing Charter to Proposed Charter Amendment CA-1-08:
Roles of Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
|
| Mayor | City Council | City Administrator | |
| Hiring of City Administrator | Existing: | Mayor appoints | Council confirms hiring |
|
| Proposed: | Mayor appoints | Council confirms hiring |
| |
| Compensation of City Administrator | Existing: | Mayor fixes compensation |
|
|
| Proposed: | Mayor fixes compensation |
|
|
|
Supervision of City Administrator | Existing: | Mayor supervises City Admin. |
|
|
| Proposed: | Mayor supervises City Admin. |
|
|
|
Removal of City Administrator | Existing: | --- | --- |
|
| Proposed: | Mayor approves removal | At least 4 Aldermen must approve removal |
|
| Hiring of Acting City Administrator | Existing: | --- |
|
|
| Proposed: | Mayor appoints |
|
|
| Hiring of Department Directors | Existing: | Mayor nominates | Council confirms hiring | --- |
| Proposed: | Mayor approves | Council confirms hiring | City Admin. appoints |
| Compensation of Department Directors | Existing: | Mayor fixes compensation |
| --- |
| Proposed: | Mayor approves compensation |
| City Admin. fixes compensation |
|
Supervision of Department Directors | Existing: | Mayor may delegate functions to Dept. Directors |
| City Admin. supervises Dept. Directors |
| Proposed: | Mayor may delegate functions to Dept. Directors |
| City Admin. supervises Dept. Directors |
| Removal of Department Directors | Existing: | Mayor removes |
| --- |
| Proposed: | Mayor approves |
| City Admin. proposes |
| Hiring of Acting Directors | Existing: | Mayor designates |
| --- |
| Proposed: | Mayor approves |
| City Admin. designates |
|
| Mayor | City Council | City Administrator | |
| New hires and Terminations of all City staff | Existing: | --- |
| --- |
| Proposed: | --- |
| City Admin. approves | |
| Limitations on Conduct | Existing: | --- | --- |
|
| Proposed: | Mayor may not direct the work of a director or employee, subject to removal from office | Individual aldermen may not direct the work of a director or employee, subject to removal from office |
|
| Staff Support for Council | Existing: |
| --- |
|
| Proposed: |
| Council has 3 professional and administrative staff; employment and supervision is a matter for the aldermen |
|
|
| Mayor | City Council | City Administrator | |
|
Powers, Duties, and Responsibilities | Existing: | --- | --- | --- |
| Proposed: | Mayor formulates policy and long-range plans, recommends implementing legislation, has general supervision of City’s finances | Council has oversight of the expenditure of money and delivery of services | City Admin. has day-day administration of the government and delivery of services | |
0 Comments:
Post a Comment