Of Democracy and City Managers

[XLFD]

Soros Appointed as Nation Manager- Washington (AP) August 25, 2010-    A joint session of the Senate and the House, both solidly controlled by Democrats, appointed George Soros to the newly created position of Nation Manager.  After passing the law making the N.M. the chief executive officer of the land replete with the Constitutional powers and duties of the President of the U.S., Soros became a favorite among the Selection Committee.  The bill, and Mr. Soros’ appointment, fell to a party line vote among Congressmen.  The appointee has pledged to work around the ‘politics as usual’ in Washington to adopt a “business plan” to get the nation back on track.  President Obama, who originally opposed the bill, welcomed N.M. Soros into the West Wing, remarking he is happy with his newly boosted approval ratings and that he can now devote his time for administrative and ceremonial tasks and for re-electing a Congress which has been much maligned. 

 

One can only hope that the above scenario never takes place, no matter which party is  in charge.  In America, the Constitution of the United States and its amendments clearly defines the office, powers, and duties of the President, and the Congress.  This separation of powers is essential to the checks and balances between the executive and legislative branch.  Both are held accountable for their actions by the other branch and  to the people, the ultimate source of political power, by the voting booth.

 

Likewise, state governments have their elected governors and state congresses patterned under the Constitutional system drawn up in their own state constitutions.  Many states even offer more accountability to the people, by allowing recall elections of governors and congressmen.  “State Managers” are unheard of.

 

When we drop down to local governments, a schism develops.  Most major cities have the same model based on the U.S. Constitution, in that an elected Mayor is the chief executive officer, and an elected city council serves as the local legislators.  It mirrors the other levels of government in almost all ways, and is fairly efficient as long as it is not corrupt.

 

Other cities and towns, like Ludington and Scottville, have adopted a Council/Manager form of government.  The city council appoints an outside “expert” at management in the hopes that the “City Manager” can operate without the political boundaries of the elected council and mayor, whose position becomes mostly ceremonial and legislatively-based.  To me it seems to fly in the face of democratic ideals, but how did “City Managers” come about?

 

Most sources trace the first city manager to Staunton, Virginia in 1908 .  The city manager, operating under the council-manager government form, was created in part to remove city government from the power of the political parties, and place management of the city into the hands of an outside expert who was usually a business manager or engineer, with the hope that the city manager would remain neutral to city politics.

 

With its emphasis on efficiency and expertise, the plan won an enthusiastic following among Progressive Era Americans. Proponents argued that cities, like business corporations, should be run by professional managers. Like corporate boards of directors, city councils should fix basic policy and hire the manager, but an expert needed to be in charge of the actual operation of the city.  The U.S. Chamber of Commerce joined the National Municipal League in the promotion of manager rule. Because of their backing and the plan's supposed resemblance to the operation of a business corporation, manager rule especially appealed to business interests, who in one city after another boosted the reform.

   
The reality of manager government, however, did not always conform to the plan's ideal. Many of the early managers were engineers with expertise in the planning and administration of public works, but others were local political figures.  According to proponents of the plan, the manager was supposed to administer, and the council was supposed to make policy. But this sharp distinction between administration and policymaking was unrealistic. Managers both formulated and implemented policies, and conflicts with council members resulted. Although the manager was expected to be above the political fray, this often proved impossible.

 
To those who can’t imagine having an unelected “expert” run their state or country, why should they imagine that one running their city or village would be any different?  In Ludington, the CM is appointed by the city council for renewable one year terms.  At any time a majority of the council can remove the CM from office.  The CM is thus indebted to only the city council to get and retain his job.  The legislative branch of the city can usurp as much political power they want, and subvert the CM into a lackey out to seek their collective approval.  The CM may also be able to spearhead a politically unpopular action without repercussions, if he has the implicit approval of a majority of the council, who may be the ones who wish to pursue that action in the first place.

 

On the other hand, a citizen cannot recall or vote out the City Manager.  The CM has no need to bend to the political whims of the electorate, or listen to any group other than the city council.  A City Manager should not exist in a true democracy, much like the unelected czars which have grown popular on the national scene should not.

 

The recent trend among bigger cities has been to go back to the standard mayor/council  governance after having had bad experiences with the council/manager form.  In San Diego, for example, this was tried as an experiment 5 years ago, and is set to be made permanent this year.  Council members DeMaio and Bruveld have recently gone on record as saying:  “The strong-mayor [governance] was meant to end the debate on who is in charge. In the past when there was a crisis, you couldn’t find anyone to take responsibility. But now, there’s accountability – it has been a resounding success.” and “The strong-mayor governance sets up the natural, healthy conflict with the mayor and council in an open space.”

 

As a citizen, I have been repeatedly stone-walled by the city manager’s office in an unfair, unprofessional manner, as have many other community minded citizens.  As citizens, we can create an initiative to rid ourselves of the blight of an uncaring, appointed city czar and vote on it at the next election.  Anybody interested in helping me put this on the ballot in Ludington the next election for a vote by the people through the initiative process? 

[AQUAMAN]

Well said X, I had no idea the people's vote could discontinue that appointed position. I say get rid of that overpaid ignoramous, those office girls are smarter than most think, and don't need a lacky in a fancy office to report to anyhow. I'll bite, let's hear how it works. Petition or amendment to the city charter for instance? One thing for sure, the city budget could use a savings of about $100K/yr. to start with. That savings alone would pay for the lifeguards to be reinstated and alot of sidewalk repairs sorely postponed too long already. And put another soul of poor repute on the unemployment line wondering where his next employer would be from, certainly not local imho.

[XLFD]

City management costs the city over $200,000 in salaries and fringes yearly (sometimes an extra $250,000 in legal settlements), and this could be cut substantially with a change. Once I receive clarification on a couple of points, I will pass it along. Lifeguards and sidewalk repairs/construction sound like excellent ideas for the money that would be freed up.

[Smile]

And they don't consider their health care, pension, sick days, vacations, personal days, weekends, or 24 paid holidays part of their paycheck, BOLOGNA! to them! At the tune of $120,000 extra!

 

[XLFD]

Back only a few years ago they reported the various salaries of the officials of the City yearly at the City Council meetings.  Back then, you are correct, they only put out their base pay.  City Manager Shay was reported to make around $84,000 back in 2008, but this didn't include nearly 20% more of that being put directly into a retirement account, bringing his actual wages over $100,000 for that year.  And like almost all members of the Ludington City Hall Club, he gets about 53% of his salary extra in benefit packages as of last year. 

No wonder they all got those raises for this year, while the rest of the City workers could only look on in envy.  And everyone in the private sector that are losing wages and having to pay higher local taxes and fees. 

[AQUAMAN]

You go first DIS, you do have the floor, while X is working, I'll listen when time permits. Thanks.

[XLFD]

The normal initiative process, Dis, where citizens go out and get signatures to effectuate laws. I do need some clarifications as it appears the local initiative process is more difficult than the states laws for cities our size. The state says we need a minimum of 5% of the electorate to get it considered for the ballot, the city charter has it at 10% from what I have read so far.

[XLFD]

Here is the "process" as delineated in Chapter 7 of the city code:

Section 7.5. Initiative and referendum procedure:
(a). General Authority. The registered voters of the city have the power to enact city ordinances, called the "initiative", and the power to nullify ordinances enacted by the city, called the "referendum". However, these powers do not extend to the budget or capital program or any ordinance relating to appropriation of money, levy of taxes or salaries of city officers or employees or to the adoption or amendment of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Ludington.
(b). Petitioner's Committee. Any five (5) qualified voters may commence initiative or referendum proceedings by filing with the City Clerk an affidavit stating they will constitute the Petitioner's Committee and be responsible for circulating the petition and filing it in proper form, stating their names and addresses, and specifying the address to which all notices of the committee are to be sent, and setting out in full the proposed initiative ordinance or citing the ordinance sought to be reconsidered.
Promptly after the affidavit of the Petitioner's Committee is filed, the City Clerk shall issue the appropriate petition blanks to the Petitioner's Committee.
(c). Petitions.
[1] Number of Signatures. Initiative and referendum petitions must be signed by registered voters of the city equal in number to at least ten (10) percent of the total number of registered voters registered to vote at the last General City Election. [2] Form and Content. All papers of a petition shall be uniform in size and style and shall be assembled as one instrument for filing. Each signature shall be executed in permanent ink or indelible pencil and shall be followed by the address of the person signing and the date of signing. Petitions shall contain or have attached thereto throughout their circulation the full text of the ordinance proposed or sought to be reconsidered. Etc.

[XLFD]

Yet here is the State Law on the initiative process which says that 5% of the electorate is needed in a Michigan city, among some other subtle differences.

MCL 117.25: (1) An initiatory petition authorized by this act shall be addressed to and filed with the city clerk. The petition shall state what body, organization, or person is primarily interested in and responsible for the circulation of the petition and the securing of the amendment. Each sheet of the petition shall be verified by the affidavit of the person who obtained the signatures to the petition. The petition shall be signed by at least 5% of the qualified and registered electors of the municipality. Each signer of the petition shall also write, immediately after his or her signature, the date of signing and his or her street address. A signature obtained more than 1 year before the filing of the petition with the city clerk shall not be counted. The petition is subject to the requirements of section 25a. Etc.

One may ask: why does Ludington require twice the minimum of signatures than what the state mandates? Why do they set other limits (such as filing a referendum within 45 days after a law is passed rather than 90 days as the state dictates) arbitrarily?

Let's see whether or how they get answered.

[AQUAMAN]

Don't you know by now X, Ludington has totally different standards and rules for law, legal proceedings, referendums, recalls, you name it, than any other city in the State. They have bent, contrived, squashed, and trampled any and all normal proceedings from the City Charter many decades ago, to legally achieve a means to an end, their warped way of ends, that prevent and distort the true ethical ways to govern a small town. I'm thankful that someone else finally knows too, and has documented evidence such as you have presented here. Now it's your turn, Disarm, make your plea for continuance of John Shay as City Mgr..

[AQUAMAN]

No Disarm, why seek to get both our blood pressures so high for no valid reason? I am simply trying to figure out which side of the debate you might be on. Actually, it's pretty darm hard to "fight" anyone in cyberspace, although friendly and sometimes aggressive debate can also come into play. I believe X is working on a template for elimination of the city mgr. position in Ludington. So, what exactly are you working towards, what's your MO in all this? Anyone can throw pies in the skies, X looks like he is working towards paydirt, and I happen to agree, along with hundreds, if not thousands of other Ludington citizens the past few years. Don't worry, your Manistee CM is not being jeopardized in this "caper".

[AQUAMAN]

Thanks Dis, sleep on it and see what you think tommorow. For or against CM Shay? For or against any CM for smallsville Lud.? Or if for that position, why can't a local person be hired, instead of another outlander?

[AQUAMAN]

Of note is that many other small towns have adopted a CM to their staff. I think it's expensive, and not essential to the city. By eliminating this one position, out of hundreds on the city payroll, is not going to change the city's method of government. In Lud's. case, it will probably improve it. But, it also means some council members and the mayor are going to have to take up some slack at times, i.e., get off their duffs and be useful and work at the duties they were voted in to do. Thanks, any further thoughts are welcome as usual.