"A CHANGE WOULD DO YOU GOOD" sheryl crow
Prophet, lo-fi pioneer
Did a little looking around at different city charters that have Mayor's
There's a lot more that goes into this than just saying let's switch.
How long a term, election to be held only on Presidential years. Qualifications? How long must he/she live in Painesville. What if he/she dies in office? What if they become unable to preform the Mayor's duties? Who's in charge? If that happened today we have an assistant city manager most cities turn the reins over to the council-president I not sure Mr. Hach would even want that job when you consider him having a business?
How do you get rid of him/her? What would the salary be?
What are his responsibilities and what are councils?
Should it be a political office?
As someone mentioned resident's have very little control on who becomes city manager claiming only the opportunity to vote for four people who decides this.
I guess would a Mayor be more receptive/ approachable to the residents? Well I've dealt with two CM and one seems a lot easier to communicate with then the other.
Many claim a City Manager is needed to oversee Painesville's different department? Yes, but these department heads are "professionals" and well paid for their knowledge. The Mayor will do exactly what a CM would do find the most qualified and live with the results.
I guess thinking it over me I haven't made up my mind one way or the other but let's face it should we try something new?
Painesville presently does seem to be moving forward. A resident mentioned buying a house here in 1975 for $39,000 last week a home down the street sold for $30,000. Well we seem to keep down inflation anyway? How much of this is due to poor leadership in the past or just a sign of the times?
Seems Painesville is the last destination for people without options.
Let's start a forum here city manager vs. mayor and see if there is support for this concept along with your ideas on moving Painesville one way or the other.
If there seems to be a desire to change let's form a committee to put it on the ballot.
So people are tired about hearing about e-mails, who'd a thought? Here all along I thought it was up there with how much someone sweats.
posted by terminator1 @ 8:02 AM
24 Comments
24 Comments:
I think a large advantage a city manager has over a mayor is that the CM doesn't have to deal with elections; too often, worrying about being re-elected influences decision-making, and not for the better. A hypothetical example of this is if the CM determined that either Painesville's income tax rate had to be raised, or else services had to be cut, in order to improve city finances. Would a mayor advocate either, knowing that he/she had to eventually face the voters? The flip side of that, of course, is if the CM made such a decision but couldn't justify it in the eyes of voters; there is no recourse for the voters to elect another CM. We are told that if voters don't like the CM, vote out of office the council member who either hired or supported him/her. That's only going to work if a majority of council is overturned; how often does that happen in Painesville?
I'm interested in reading the views of others on this issue; my stance right now is that the problem isn't so much with the CM as it is with council, which, for as long as I've lived here (since 1984) has consisted mainly of CM lap dogs and yes men/women. We need better, more qualified people in council, especially ones who aren't afraid to shake up the status quo and suggest new, bold ideas to improve our city.
As for what can be done to move Painesville forward...know any miracle workers, Term? In the meantime, I'd love for City Hall to get serious about improving the basic livability conditions. What I mean is, direct the police to start cracking down on even the most minor violations: speeding, playing loud music, littering, pedestrians walking in front of drivers who have green lights (the intersection of Rt. 20 and State is Ground Zero for this, it seems), parking cars in the front yard, and so on. I was at the post office one evening last week, and across from it is a house where loud music, multiple parked cars, and litter is constant. Does City Hall realize that if anyone who doesn't live in Painesville is in town and drives by places like this, there is no way they would ever suggest this as a place to live, much less visit unless necessary?
City manager is best.
A mayor is a politician.
A pox on your city.
An empire builder.
A populist, part of a political machine.
A city manager serves at the pleasure of your council. Recruit, support and elect good council people.
8:12 has got it right about starting to crack down on minor violations that make this city a negative place to live. Pedestrians just crossing main streets whenever and whereever they want. Litter is terrible, I live on a main street with a school bus stop in front of my house, for 15 years I have picked up trash in my yard, years ago I asked the city to put a trash can there, answer was no, I have given up, I no longer pick up the trash.
6:16 must be Tony Carson
9:49 Most dangerous street? Richmond and Nebraska St. area How no one has been killed in that area is beyond me. Clark, Pizza shop, Dollar General, KFC, Redi-Go people crossing Richmond everywhere!
One other troubling thing Turn Right on Red great idea but you would be surprised how manny don't even slow down or come to a stop before turning right. We could finance the next 'streetscape' just on the corner on Mentor Ave. and Chestnut St.
One of the best forms of city government was Conneaut. I'm not sure how it is handled now. They have like a city manager but they go up for review by the people after so many years. So, say council appoints someone then every 2-3 years residents provide information, feedback and or vote to keep him on or let him go. This way council does their job then the rest is up to the residents. I'm sure it isn't as simple as this but with a little checking this could work here. Of course you and others will find some type of flaw with this idea too.
5:24 Looking for flaws? Please don't misunderstand all I'm looking for is the best way city government can serve it's residents. I assure you I will look at their charter on line. Also Doug Lewis served as Conneaut City Manager.
what difference does that make? He is an assistant here. I guess either he wasn't renewed or he left to move elsewhere. Only he knows the facts.
12:18
6:16 here.
HA HA. Funny. W R O N G !
Just lived here for over 6 decades.
Watched other cities with mayors.
Go ahead, get a mayor, I don't care, I'm moving.
I'm not Judge Lawson either.
Saw her house sold. Where did she move to?
Did she ever find out who bum wrapped her lawn?
2:17 Only to ask how their system works.
3:11 To your NEW neighbors, best of luck to them!
There are so many great ways to stimulate small business and make communities work; there are volumes written on it. Go to cities that have made the turn around. I can think of one off the top of my head, Fort Collins, CO. They had an empty downtown in the 80's. The place is now booming. Our city gets things backwards. Instead of sinking a fortune into Streetscapes they should offer money to small business toward rent for one year. Then help small businesses make up a business plan. A downtown incubator. This is how Fort Collins got a leg up on vacant buildings in the downtown. As those little business grew they paid taxes, then the city put it in brick walkways etc and guess what? Nobody complained and the bricks were paid for.
This town is afraid of creative thinkers as they might deviate from the grand golden domes schemes. Maybe a resident think tank to tackle a few projects would have been nice. All the meetings of the past administration were just set up to appease residents into submission.
I look at who is in the administration and on council and not much has changed. Yes we have a new city manager but I don't see many new ideas coming out of city hall. It's really pathetic.
I believe council needs a decent raise to get a bit of new blood pumping otherwise it's just going to be the same old song and dance.
And that is why in November I won't be voting for the best person in my ward but whom I can tolerate for another 4 years.
2:17 is right about the money. Everyone thought in the past that council purposely kept the pay low to keep a lot of people out and themselves in. Even if they raise the pay, it doesn't happen right away; I believe there is a delay. The citizens should try to make sure the pay is raised so it's more likely that more will run.
1:01 Back to the analogy "you get what you pay for" What upsets me the most is how many here hold their noses when they go to vote for a council person?
I guess when the knock on your door ask them what exactly THEY have done for the city.
Ask about the refuse contract, Prairie States anything just ask.
Then again this may be the reason for so few caring what these seven do?
Does anyone REALLY believe that the quality of Council members is tied to the mount they are paid??
Do you really think more qualified people will take on the job if the pay was increased?
Why would anyone want to step into that role after so many Councils before them have let the City slide into where we are now?
BTW, at least two current members seem to view the position as one step on the ladder to somewhere else.
What they need to do is eliminate the common denometer problem within city hall; the city manager. He is the worst person ever. He can not get along with anyone, department people within the city and outside. He has caused issue with way too many people, has a horrific track record, the only staff that tolerate him are union people, his over-spending is out of control and council doesnt have the chutzpah to fire him because? Because they hired him so they wont release him. By the time his contract is up the damage will be beyond fixing.
What is the current pay of the city council, please?
1:15 $6,000 per year. Council-President $6,500.
4:57 Sound like a disgruntled Department Head? I can assure you I will be watching under the Golden Dome and will tell you where and when chips fall. I can't be picking favorites.
So the council pay is $500.00/month. Not too bad, I guess. Or is it? I guess if you're doing the job correctly and thoroughly, it could be a lot of time spent. How do we stack up to other cities around here?
Disgruntled department head? No, I am a concerned citizen with more than my share of problems as to whats been happening over the past 2 years. EVERYTHING was way better with Ms Mchon. This city is so unsettled now. FYI - More money doesn't make a better employee. council should earn what they make now, prove worthy of a raise. Not given a raise as a dangling carrot to do a better job. This isn't kindergarten where you get a star reward.
12:23 Sorry no where near the amount of waste compared to the former city manager.
Someone asked to compare salaries of surrounding councils waiting for responses Mentor $12,000 with a smaller budget then Painesville.
A higher income on council would entice a few more to run for the position. 12:23 would you do that position for $500 a month? Do you have any idea what a council person is supposed to do? Pay on the merit scale might work in business but for elected positions I don't think so. A raise in salary might entice a few new people to run. If council truly did the job they were hired for and researched what they were supposed to I bet city spending would be cut. A council seat should not be a stepping stone to something else unless you served one full term on council, not get elected and the next month run for a state position. That behavior make me question that council persons motives on behalf as a resident.
I have attended city council meetings in other municipalities where council is feared by contractors and the administration because they really do look after the best interest of the residents. It's the other way around here, especially during the last McMahon reign.
All I can tell you is some earn every penny and others well aren't even in our time zone. You decide.
This is 7:23, and I am also the one that asked how much our council made to begin with. $500.00/month is actually more than I thought they made, which is why I thought it needed to be raised all these years. It would be nice to make sure that the pay is high enough to attract good people, and to actually compensate for a job well done, if someone should be trying to do a good job. I can't imagine paying anyone currently on council more than $500.00 month, however...for doing what, exactly? And $500.00 is quite a bit of money, really. But if we are lagging way behind other places, maybe it could at least be raised a little. But I will say that I thought maybe it needed to be doubled, but now I know how much they make, I don't think so.
1:42 Our council gives and gets exactly what we/they deserve.
I guess nothing will ever change until we hold them accountable?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home