Annapolis Capital Punishment

The following commentary is provided by Greg Stiverson, former director of Historic Annapolis Foundation and the driving force behind last year's Envisioning Annapolis workshops. He read these at last night's city council hearing--at about 10:15 pm. I have asked to publish his comments because I feel they are among the most concisely and thoughtfully composed on the subject...which is heating up daily. CP will be posting more about this shortly.:

Madam Mayor, Members of the City Council;

I strongly support, and urge your adoption of CA 04-08, which would create a council/city manager form of government for Annapolis.

In 1996, a blue-ribbon panel of Annapolitans issued the Duden Report, which explored ways to reform city government. Members of the Duden Commission looked at the council/ manager form of government and decided that Annapolis wasn’t ready for it. Today, opponents of the city manager proposal cite the Duden Report as proof positive that the idea of a city manager has been considered before and rejected out of hand. But let me quote to you the opening paragraph of the section of the Duden Report that deals with a city manager: (quote)

"The major benefit of having a City Manager is the assurance that a growing and increasingly complex municipal system will be run by a professional administrator. . . . The management of the City would no longer be subject to the whim and vagaries of the electoral winds, or to the 'pot luck' character of mayoral election results every four years."

The Duden Report ultimately concluded that Annapolis was not yet ready for a city manager, but this was in 1996. Things have changed mightily over the past dozen years. Annapolis government is much larger and more complex than it was then. All of the benefits of a city manager that the Duden Report cited in its opening paragraph are so much more critical now.

Last Saturday, a Buffalo, New York, newspaper had a story about that city’s need for a council/city manager form of government. It put a fine point on why a city manager is important to a progressive, 21st-century city like ours:

"How would you like it if [our town’s] chief administrator had no favors to pay back - or even any possibility of owed favors? Or what if that person had been educated and trained in municipal governance? What if he or she never had to worry about re-election and could maintain their focus on city services instead of campaigning? What if department heads were appointed because of their abilities, and not their connections? What if the City's chief executive was completely non-partisan, with a strict professional code of ethics?

Finally, what if the City's chief administrator could be terminated at any point if that individual underperformed? Such a person does exist: a City Manager."


Madam Mayor, members of the Council: There is a difference between likability and ability. We vote for politicians because we like them, not because they have the abilities—the skills and experience--necessary to manage efficiently and effectively the day-to-day operations of a large and complex city government like ours.

With a single exception, we recognize the value of professionalism in every aspect of our lives. We demand professional licenses or degrees from our doctor, lawyer, accountant, plumber, electrician, and hair dresser. The only position that affects us daily where we say that professional qualifications and experience are irrelevant is in the executive management of our city. We need professional city management. We need someone in charge who is trained and experienced to know what they are doing. This should not be controversial. It should be plain common sense. Please give us a council/city manager form of government.

Please send comments, subscribe, share with your friends, and support our sponsors. Join us at Ahh Coffee! in Eastport almost every Thursday from 8-9 am.