Of the nine mayoral candidates, only Republicans Dave Cordle and Frank Flyntz and Democrats Josh Cohen have come out clearly in opposition to the council/city manager style of government. From what I gather, Zina Pierre is lukewarm to the idea but not outright opposed and Wayne Taylor, well, what are his positions on anything? However, Democrats Renaut, McFall, Shropshire and Independent Fox strongly support this change. Due to the petition now being circulated, I believe this will become the "wedge" issue and therefoer, this is why Cohen has spent so much time on it as he realizes the growing sentiment in favor of the council/manager. I have given Cohen space before to advocate his positions and now that he is circulating an email, I provide him the same opportunity. I add some comments in red:
"One of the reasons I am running for mayor is to raise the bar for professional and accountable management at City Hall. As Mayor, I will appoint a team of experienced professionals in public administration, finance and the law. I will give them the latitude to perform their jobs professionally and without political interference (Hmmm..an interesting concept for Cohen and I suggest he try it more often), and I will hold them accountable for doing their jobs well. The voters in turn will hold me accountable for how well City Hall is working. This accountability is the essence of our democratic system.
Recently, a group of well-intentioned citizens (Hey--even some folks believe I am well-intentioned but I always found it a backhanded compliment) mailed a petition to every voter in Annapolis. The petition is to place a proposal on the ballot this November to change our form of government from the current mayor-council system to what is called the council-manager system. Several people have asked me about my views on the proposal, so let me share them briefly. (This shows he is worried....he is probably concerned about such a well organized effort--including this recent mailer. He already devoted his entire talk at a recent Democratic beakfast to defending his views on the issue)
First of all, as Mayor I will serve our city to the best of my ability, whichever form of government we have. (If he gets elected and we get a city manager, you can bet that he will do everything possible to keep the five votes to maintain control)
Secondly, I admire the tremendous effort that these activists have put into the council-manager petition. We all share a common goal of improving professional management at City Hall. We differ on how best to achieve it. This dialogue is a healthy one for our community to have.
In my view the council-manager proposal is the wrong way to go because it would lessen the accountability of city government. Why does accountability matter? Currently the buck stops with one person -- the mayor -- who is directly accountable to every voter in the city. The voters hold the ultimate trump card. Every four years the voters have the ability to change course by electing a new mayor. (Uhh..that's kind of the whole point-yes?..Four years versus anytime based on a council vote? However, the average city manager stays seven years!)
Unfortunately, if the proposed ballot initiative is successful, voters would no longer be able to bring in a new administration by electing a new mayor. The reins of government would be in the hands of an unelected manager who would be unaccountable to the voters and could only be replaced by a majority vote of the City Council. (WRONG--the city manager holds no reins. The council will hold the reins. The city manager is the horse) As you know, aldermen are only on the ballot in -- and are only accountable to -- their individual wards. When everyone is in charge, no one person is accountable. (Kind of like what we had the last eight years--yes?)
Too many cooks in the kitchen spoils the broth, as the saying goes. (Yeah--and too many bureaucrats in the Market House spoiled that kitchen. Josh-my Mom used to tell me the same thing. Who are the cooks in your kitchen? Who writes the recipes?) Having the city's manager serve at the pleasure of the full council, many of whom have competing political views and agendas, can be a recipe for confusion, indecision and dysfunction. (Kind of like what we have now--and what you will have when you stack the council in your favor. Is Cohen against competing political views on council?) That's why many cities such as Fresno, Hartford, Little Rock, Richmond, San Diego, Sioux Falls, Spokane, St. Petersburg and Tulsa have all recently switched back to the mayor-council system. (A recent Sacramento Bee column describes how Fresno's change back to the mayor-council system renewed the city's "clarity of purpose" after years of a council-manager system "that produced seven 'mini-mayors' on a dysfunctional city council": http://www.sacbee.com/740/story/1569485.html). (That's nice Josh. No system is perfect but to be honest with us--there is a whole other side that shows this to be much more successful and accepted. We can and have easily shown how many cities work well with the council/manager system. Who is doing your research? Is it Don Lamb Minor or Bob Agee?)
Again, while I respect the effort and sincere intentions (well intentioned..sincere intentions....yeah yeah, we're just misguided and you know better..) behind this proposal, the fact is that no system of government will function well if we don't elect good people to serve in it. (Amen to that! Of course we could also add that when good people get elected, they need to focus on the job and not the next office..) The best way to bring about professional, transparent and accountable government is to elect a mayor with the judgment, temperament and experience to make it happen. (Okay Josh, you win on temperament and judgment when it is your own and not that of those whispering to you, but what about experience?)
I am interested in your thoughts on this issue, and I invite you to read more about my plan to raise the bar for professionalism and transparency at City Hall. Visit the Issues page of my website at http://www.cohenformayor.com/issue and scroll down to the bottom.
Thank you as always for your support. Please feel free to forward this email to others you know who are interested in this issue. Josh"
Be sure to read my column in tomorrow's The Capital about this topic. There is a message in there for all mayoral candidates but I think the real reason Cohen opposes it are because it would lessen his power as mayor and that of the Democratic machine to exercise its power.
NOTE TO READERS: After I published this, I received a letter from alderman and mayoral candidate Dave Cordle:
"An alert supporter says (and I haven't confirmed...) that you have written I am against City Manager. WRONG. Capital wrote it wrong, corrected it AND published my letter to the editor. I have ALWAYS supported the referendum and allowing the citizens of Annapolis to decide- and I'd live with whatever the decision/outcome is. Initially, I was against City Manager in the pure form. When elected, I would utilize strong City Manager anyway- that's how I operate. State my vision and goals, then hire competent, trained AND qualified people to make it happen in the day to day ops of the City. In fact, if the referendum fails and the question doesn't make the ballot in November, I will re-introduce my City Manager bill. The only difference is in my bill the Mayor, w/ consent of the Council (approval) can hire thee City Manager and Department heads. The Mayor could also fire the City Manager for not being the vehicle to achieve the vision and goals the citizens "hired" me to do. Also, there is a "no interference" clause to keep the Mayor and Aldermen from directly ordering a Department Head to do things.....Lastly, the Department Heads would report directly to the City Manager and could be fired by him/her. "
CP RESPONDS: Thank you Dave for the clarification, but I never said you were against the referendum petition. (Cohen on the other hand does not even encourage people to review and sign the petition but he encourages us not to support the change...) However, there are notable differences between what you propose and what would be a true council/manager form, in that the mayor cannot have any particular say so, more or less than the other members as far as the manager. I still beleive that youtr proposal is seriously flawed in many respects, not the least of which is that power still resides with the mayor AND no self-respecting city manager would take such a position. However, you and Josh Cohen of course promise to hire qualified professionals, yet Mayor Moyer has repeatedly claimed that she has done this.
Please send comments, subscribe, share with your friends, and support our sponsors. Join us every Thursday morning from 8-9 am for our Sip N' Blogs held in local coffee shops...except for that one in Eastport we used to patronize...ahhhh choo!.
