Charter Changes What's Your Opinion

Pac- you requested feedback- here goes--
1. Agree
2 Agree
3. What happens when we finally get someone on Council that thinks correctly and is producing positive results and they must leave after 8 years? Even with the best candidates and to the degree this town is screwed up, it will take more than 8 years to fix this mess.
4. Is there any proof that living in the city makes for a better city manager? Don't know. Does it really matter whether Gilleland lives here or not considering her job performance? Is a city manager more effective living in the town they manage?
5. The way I read this is that the police or fire chief can be selected from non police or fire personnel. They don't have to come from a police/fire background to run these two departments. Is that correct? If so, should we select a person who has no idea/background on how a police/fire department runs?- One who is purely administrative? Just asking.
6. NO-NO and NO- need to know what these clowns are doing. Once a month would only encourage their secrecy. If anything, we need more frequent info on these untrustworthy people.
7. Internal city matter although wouldn't hurt for Council to know. Just FYI- Although- how do we control and police the internal hiring practices of city management as to the nepotism/good old boy club hiring?
8. Council creating boards and commissions as needed? Don't we have this now? Method of appointment is too controlling. They will appoint their buddies only and leave the common folk off.
9. Eliminate placing a title on proposed legislation in the paper? OK- Sure- whatever. Still doesn't change the content of the information about the legislation.
10. The public has a right to know about city worker(officer) recalls and the rebuttal of the worker(officer) being recalled. Public needs to hear both sides of recall story.
11. Who cares?

Is this the best they could come up with? With all the time, discussions, "friendly" disagreements between Nenni, Slagle and others, THIS is all there is? Where's the serious stuff? This is surface fluff.

Pacman wrote: I 5)  Permitting the city’s police and fire chiefs to be selected from outside the divisions of police and fire.   Good Change.  This would probably stop the promote to Chief and retire we have seen in the Police Dept.  3 Chiefs in the last 5 years is to many.  Of course Becker took the City Managers job, but still.

How?

Pacman wrote: Let me rephrase if the City puts the Job out to the Public as it should to hire the best candidate we should be able to attract candidates that will be of a high caliber and also hopefully not looking to just retire in a year ir 2.  If the City continues on as it has for the last 5 years their are about 3-4 current employees that will be promoted for a 2-3 year stint and then retire.

Puts the job out to the public?  So, I could apply to be police chief or fire chief?  Cool! 

In all seriousness, I do wonder if the charter review committee's "recommendations" mean that - as VietVet suggests - someone outside law enforcement or fire safety could apply for the position. 
 
To respond to your post, Pacman, I don't see how hiring outside of the fire or police departments in Middletown eliminates a chief retiring after 2-3 years.  Also, I don't know that a police or fire chief retiring after 2-3 years is necessarily a bad thing just as I don't know that a police or fire chief being around for 10 yeras is necessarily a good thing. 

OK Marianne let me rephrase for you once again the LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY OUTSIDE OF MIDDLETOWNS OWN LITTLE WORLD.

Pacman wrote: OK Marianne let me rephrase for you once again the LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY OUTSIDE OF MIDDLETOWNS OWN LITTLE WORLD.

Pacman, you still haven't answered my question, but that's ok; there's no requirement on this board to support claims made, so forgive me for being interested in your rationale for how opening up the search for fire and police chiefs would eliminate a chief coming in from the outside and staying for 2-3 years.  As I said before, I'm not sure it's a bad thing for a police or fire chief to serve for only 2-3 years just as I'm not sure it's a good thing for a police or fire chief to serve for 10.

OK--we have a pattern of municipal employees being promoted just before their retirement.

Marianne my rationale is that having continuity in upper management is better than shoveling a new person thru every 2-3 years.  Also drawing from the Law Enforcement Community at large gives you a wider selection of candidates to chose from, rather than 1 or 2.  Now I don't care if the best candidate comes from within or not, but don't limit yourself and stop the revolving door of 1-3 years and retiring at a higher rate of pay.  Increase the choice of Candidates that may be younger in age and more incline to stay longer.  I can hear it coming from Marianne now......

Pacman wrote: Marianne my rationale is that having continuity in upper management is better than shoveling a new person thru every 2-3 years.  Also drawing from the Law Enforcement Community at large gives you a wider selection of candidates to chose from, rather than 1 or 2.  Now I don't care if the best candidate comes from within or not, but don't limit yourself and stop the revolving door of 1-3 years and retiring at a higher rate of pay.  Increase the choice of Candidates that may be younger in age and more incline to stay longer.  I can hear it coming from Marianne now......   Any person you hire is free to leave that job at anytime, but to continue the revolving door of hiring and retiring Chiefs as seems to be the current practice is costing the city (taxpayers) to much.   Like the title says what is your "opinion" you may not like mine or agree with it and that is fine.

Pacman, I'm having trouble understanding your rationale for supporting searching outside the respective departments for chiefs if you want "continuity in upper management," which is what you state.  If anything, hiring an outside chief guarantees you don't have continuity in upper management.  

Now, admittedly I know very little about the structure of the fire and police departments, but my understanding is that in the case of the police department we have a chief and two deputy chiefs, who are majors.  We also have lieutenants; I believe there are three, but I may be mistaken.   Perhaps I'm not understanding what you mean by "upper management," but those individuals are to me "upper management." 

Our current police chief has been serving this community for a number of years; the same goes for our two deputy chiefs.  I would imagine that this is true for the lieutenants as well.  So, if one of the deputy chiefs becomes the next chief or one of the lieutenants eventually becomes the chief, then he or she will have been involved in the "upper management" of the organization.   Isn't that continuity?

If you want continuity, you promote from within from candidates who have served their respective departments and understand the workings of the organization.

If you are worried about a police or fire chief only serving for 2-3 years and then retiring, I don't understand how opening up the search to outside candidates addresses that.  You need to come up with another solution it seems to me.

As for the suggestion that you'll get a "better" pool of candidates by opening the search to outside candidates, maybe you will and maybe you won't.   I don't think that it's a given that you'll have a "better" (and perhaps someone can define what better means here) group of candidates who will "better" serve this community.  

Ashkicker--I wouldn't call using the police chief history a bad example at all.

I have visited your site on rare occasion and find it very entertaining.  I won’t hide behind quasi cool monikers and semi anonymous banter. I served as one of the members of this year’s Charter Committee. While I do not speak for the group or any other individual from the committee I can however speak for myself. I was at every meeting and heard every debate regarding the Charter and the recommendations put forth to the Council. Here are a few opinions and explanations.

Reducing the size of council

Is it true representation of a four ward system with a seven member council? A logical explanation is no. True representation would be one Councilman from each ward and an at large Mayor. There was a great deal of interesting discussion regarding the subject and sorry to say that it wasn’t any of your aforementioned culprits, just good old fashioned and passionate debate. There were a variety of informed reasons to consider the amendment least of which was saving the taxpayers $10,000, but a consideration none the less.

 

Eliminating the ward system

ATTENTION, ATTENTION. It is time to begin circling the wagons!!!! Is it about wards or is it about representation? The 2010 census is going to show that we have more than likely lost a double digit percentage of residents. We have more than one thousand empty homes in the city and an additional thousand in the process of liquidation and not currently listed. More than 50% of our housing stock was built more than 60 years ago. I did the statistical research. It’s not a time to think of ourselves as wards but a time to begin thinking of ourselves as citizens of the same small town. There are brilliant minds from throughout our city. Lets pick our best five and call’m the A-Team. We’re going to need them in the desperate times that are rapidly approaching. It honestly shouldn’t make a difference where you live. Not to mention the fact that there may even be the possibility that we can achieve better representation in Columbus. VOTE!

 

Term Limits

Knock it out of the park in two terms and then step up the ladder to allow room for new ideas and fresh visionaries. 

Residency requirement

We actually voted for Residency/Domicile within 12 months of accepting the job. Last week’s Supreme Court ruling changed all of that.  I would like to think that our City Manager, employees, Chief of Police and Fire all lived within, and invested in, our community. I was surprised to find that it is not the case. The law says that it doesn’t have to be. Why clutter the Charter with language that is obsolete? Council can reconvene a Charter at any time to reconsider the amendment if it is repealed or can simply convene to act on the legislation itself.

 

Permitting outside hiring of Police and Fire Chief

I voted no for this amendment. We’re not the Wild West, yet! Why wouldn’t we groom our own? All cities are unique and raising these men and women within our community allows them a better understanding of both citizens and criminals. I lost the vote but that my friend is true democracy at work. You don’t always get what you wish for and in this case I didn’t. Conspiracy, corruption? Why not move somewhere that these tricks of the trade could actually do you some good. Good old boys club? Possibly.

 

One Council Meeting required

All Councilmen are bound by Sunshine Laws regarding private meetings. If private closed door meetings were the case and any of you have the proof, please present it to the proper authorities and do us all a favor. Les Landen said he WILL prosecute. The actual issue itself was one of practicality. They honestly don’t need two meetings a month. They can choose to have as many public meetings as they want but are now only required to have one.

 

Advice and consent of City Council

Is the CEO of Middletown, the corporation, the City Manager or not? We are a City Manager-based form of government. Council can then hold that person responsible for their actions. The City Manager deserves the ultimate say.

 

Repeal Charter Board Designation

All boards exist, will exist, and will continue to be designated by Council. The Committee felt that it was old and irrelevant language. Clean it up and move it out.

 

Eliminating newspaper requirement

The fact of the matter is that there are a variety of mediums to consider nowadays. The majority didn’t believe that the paper reached as many people as the water bill, email, online publication and tangible copies available at both the City Building and the Public Library. An ultimate savings of $14,000 for the taxpayer as well.

 

Please consider the following;

 

1.] We didn’t agree on everything. It is a mere impossibility when you have that much knowledge and experience in one room.

2.] There was insightful and enlightening debate on a myriad of issues.

3.] I voted my conscience as well as provided an informed opinion about issues and I was appointed to do so.

4.] All of the issues that we have recommended are to go to the voters on a ballot for all of you to vote on.

5.] Council has the final say and most of these recommendations will never see the light of day. It’s pretty much guaranteed in my opinion.

 

Mass conspiracy? Hysteria? I think not! I’m honored to have been asked to serve with this passionate group of fellow citizens.

 

It is indeed time for a change. Maybe these recommendations will trigger a sea change mentality about the way that things have been done in the past. We are living in a new era of accountability on a socio and economic scale that is sure to set a proverbial benchmark in history. Bureaucracy is dead in an environment where there is no money. The war is over and greed won! Now it’s time to begin cleaning up this mess and the task could be a lot easier with the help of a few friends and neighbors.

 

By the people, for the people and of the people.

 

Sincerely,

Robert Hoffman

thanx for the breakdown and quasi cool banter Mr.Hoffman.

hey rh--glad to see that you are listening lol