Without opposition, city councilors decided last night to put the proposal to create a chief operating officer at City Hall on the Nov. 4 ballot.
Mayor Art Ward said the main sticking point was how the city would pay for the position if voters opt to create the new city manager-lite slot to oversee administration since there's nothing in the budget for it.
Ward said, though, that there's never going to be money in the budget ahead of time for a positio that won't exist unless voters support it.
He said that if the public backs the charter change to create the new job, then the city will have to dip into its reserves and come up with the cash.
Councilors could have chosen to hold the referendum any time until the general election in November 2009, but decided that it made the most sense to put the question to the voters during this year's presidential race.
Both supporters and opponents of the idea say they expect a tough campaign as each side tries to convince voters to agree with its stance.
The referendum is needed because supporters gathered more than 3,600 valid signatures to claim a spot on the ballot after the council rejected the Charter Revision Commission's proposal in June.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
39 comments:
Can't wait to vote NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
me too
Can't wait to vote YEEEEEEEEEESSSSSS!
that should be the margin of victory "nos" 2 to 1
8:38 poster,
Just like everyone said they would not get enough petitions signed. You union hold on Bristol is starting to fall apart! Not as strong as you once had it!
VOTE YES FOR COO, and give the city back to the people!
I really hope the Ken's and Craig put up some sort of website or send out a mailing to all the tax payers on what the cost of a COO is and the benefits it has for the city...I think a lot of the voters are going to be voting on an issue that they have not been educated on and that will result in a NO for the COO
$9:38, The big, bad boogie-union is NOT Bristol's problem. The COO won't be giving the city "back to the people." It will cost us a fortune and take away our right to vote for the candidate of our choice. This is just the losers bracket trying to buy their way into office because they can't get elected.
VOTE NO FOR COO and keep the city for the people!
9:52, You're kidding, right? The Kens and Craigs had enough trouble trying to understand and follow the procedure for filing a simple petition. Do you honestly think they have a clue about all the details and ramificatinos of hiring a COO?? We're not exactly talking about a bunch of rocket scientists here. More like a bunch of little kids playing with matches, only Bristol is the one who's going to get burned.
Vote NO to COO! (I know I am.)
Can't wait to vote no and keep our leaders accountable to we the people!!
10:57 & 1:06 (probably the same Union Hack) The city is in the death grip of the unions and has been for nearly 30 years. Unions get more and taxpayers get less...every city employee is somehow some way beholding to the unions.The so called "leaders" give the unions what they want and the unions keep electing the democrat spenders. It is a crime and the union leaders know it, the democrats know it and they play the game together because they can. We poor taxpayers get jammed again up the old keaster! Art Ward Frank Nicastro Kevin McCauley are the biggest offenders.
All you anti-COO folks: the BOE hires a highly qualified Superintendent to manage a system of employees and services even larger than the City - is that "undemocratic"? Does that "take away your right to vote"?
4:21 ~ Um...nope, not a "union hack" at all. Just someone who's smart enough to have figured out that the big, bad boogie-union stories are nothing more than that...scary bedtime stories told by some wannabe hacks who haven't got a clue what's wrong and even less of a clue how to fix it.
All you anti-COO folks: the BOE hires a highly qualified Superintendent to manage a system of employees and services even larger than the City - is that "undemocratic"? Does that "take away your right to vote"?
The Superintendent doesn't have responsibilities as broad and vague as the COO. The COO is touted as the new "manager" when the position is currently held by an elected mayor. And the Superintent requires more, much more qualifications to be superintendent than the COO.
10:57 & 1:06 (probably the same Union Hack) The city is in the death grip of the unions and has been for nearly 30 years. Unions get more and taxpayers get less...every city employee is somehow some way beholding to the unions.The so called "leaders" give the unions what they want and the unions keep electing the democrat spenders. It is a crime and the union leaders know it, the democrats know it and they play the game together because they can. We poor taxpayers get jammed again up the old keaster! Art Ward Frank Nicastro Kevin McCauley are the biggest offenders.
Those evil unions. They're so evil cause they're unions. They mess up our lives. They and their union ways. With their unions. Oh and they have unions inside unions which are even worse.
Putting union and a negative adjective in the same sentence doesn't tell people why you think they are bad or even what your point is.
Every time I read some anti union tirade I feel like I'm in a time warp.
ANONYMOUSWESTCONNSTUDENT said: "The Superintendent doesn't have responsibilities as broad and vague as the COO. And the Superintendent requires more, much more qualifications to be superintendent than the COO."
The COO's duties are not "vague" - you're starting to believe your own propaganda and not the facts.
Also, the proposed charter requires the COO to have a master's degree in public administration and experience in some other town as a COO or equivalent. True, this IS Bristol, and there is always the possibility of some unqualified but well-connected local yokel getting the job (I could give some examples but you know who I mean), but this will be too high-profile a position for them to get away with that.
"The COO's duties are not "vague" - you're starting to believe your own propaganda and not the facts."
Then please provide some more specifics. What are the exact areas of responsibility for the COO?
Also, the proposed charter requires the COO to have a master's degree in public administration and experience in some other town as a COO or equivalent. True, this IS Bristol, and there is always the possibility of some unqualified but well-connected local yokel getting the job (I could give some examples but you know who I mean), but this will be too high-profile a position for them to get away with that.
I can understand experience as a city manager in another town...BUT
1. How many city's in America the size of Bristol have city managers?
2. Since this is not a city manager but supposedly a less powerful (yet self described) COO what would be classified as "equivalent" experience?
3. And if this position is supposedly not as powerful as a city manager (many on this blog claimed it would mainly work with the internal bureaucracy of the city) how is that in any way, shape, or form "high profile?"
Like I said, the position is void for vagueness.
10:22 - Wanna bet?
Won't this overpaid COO mucky-muck still have to answer to the mayor? Seems like we already have enough chiefs running the show, enough checks and balances. I like the fact that if the mayor isn't doing a good job, I get to vote him out. He's beholden to ME. If enough people don't like what he's doing...he's gone. No lawyers. No termination fees. Nada! It's up to the voters. And if, as you say, "there is always the possibility of some unqualified but well-connected local yokel getting the job."... then hiring a COO is kinda pointless, isn't it?
Again a band-aid on a major wound.
And probably, more to come.
"I like the fact that if the mayor isn't doing a good job, I get to vote him out. He's beholden to ME. If enough people don't like what he's doing...he's gone."
The Mayor will be the COO's boss. If you don't think the Mayor is holding his feet to the fire (can you say "Jonathan Rosenthal"?) then hold him accountable in November. This sounds like a specious objection to the COO. Please come up with some GOOD reasons. You haven't so far.
The COO COO will either be Kloko or Zoppo, wait and see.
The Mayor will be the COO's boss. If you don't think the Mayor is holding his feet to the fire (can you say "Jonathan Rosenthal"?) then hold him accountable in November. This sounds like a specious objection to the COO. Please come up with some GOOD reasons. You haven't so far.
It's not a specious objection when the COO can only be removed by a vote of the council.
As long as the COO COO makes Ward look good, his position will be safe.
Without his boss (Ward) evaluating the COO COO, how will the Council fire him?
Can you say "expensive lawsuit"?
If Ellen had become Mayor~would Minor, Cockayne and Johnson still have wanted a COO?
no, they would have done as she told them to do.
10:50 nailed it - that's the real reason behind the whole COO thing. Let these boys play their games with someone else's money. Vote no COO.
If you review the record, I believe you'll find that Ellen supported hiring a city manager.
Zoppo only has half of the qualifications required by the new charter. She has the masters degree in city management, but not the years of full time experience as a COO or equivalent. Six years as a part-time city councilman is not sufficient.
Please do not equate a City Manager with the proposed COO COO.
There is a huge difference.
The position requires a bachelor's degree in a government/public administration or business related field.
An MPA is preferred but not required.
A business degree can serve as a substitute.
My bachelor's degree in political science would qualify me (although I do not have the four years of experience or the additional qualities that would give me preference to the search committee.)
Compare that to some other positions (taken from the city charter):
City Clerk - three years' experience in the Connecticut system of land records and administrative management. Appointee must become a state certified municipal clerk within the first four-year appointment.
Police Chief - written and oral examination to be provided and supervised by the director of personnel…no candidate for appointment shall be given the oral examination herein unless and until such candidate has obtained a minimum grade of seventy per cent on the written examination...
adequate knowledge of the organization and administration of a police department...
experience of at least ten years in the management and direction of police personnel in asupervisory capacity...
an appropriate four-year college or university degree...
examined by a physician in general practice in the City of Bristol designated by the director of personnel...
a complete background investigation conducted on the five candidates with the highest ratings prior to presentation of the recommended candidate to mayor and city council.
Director of personnel - a graduate of a four-year college or university with major or minor study in personnel administration and have two years' experience in personnel administration or shall have had six years' experience as a personnel administrator.
Corporation Counsel - a member in good standing of the Connecticut Bar.
These positions are an example of how their prerequisite for hiring is set to a higher standard to what is required of the COO. In fact the position closest to the COO’s requirement is the Director of Personnel. When you consider the Personnel Director would answer to the COO, and that these other positions would have far more qualifications on paper in how to run their department than what the COO might have, it is worth asking why this extra layer of bureaucracy should be added?
anon westconn kid et al:
Up until the election of Mayor Perez in Hartford, that city had a city manager. Mayor Mike Peters was not a "stromg mayor". He made approximately $35,000 per year albeit he received a pension from his days as a Hartford fireman.
Since Perez took office, Hartford has surpassed Bridgeport and New Haven as the murder capital of CT. Large financial companies like Cigna and ING have left the city for safer and less expensive areas. There are NO nice areas where middle class people want to live. The downtown is a ghost town after 5pm. The mayor has been indicted for fraud. What else can you say? Hartford needs its city manager back and Bristol needs one too.
Johnson in 2009.
And what is this "huge" difference, pray tell???
Johnson in 2009? Oh ya - let's see...an ethically challenged, temper tantrum throwing overgrown child will solve all of our problems? Uh...I think we can do better.
Since Perez took office, Hartford has surpassed Bridgeport and New Haven as the murder capital of CT. Large financial companies like Cigna and ING have left the city for safer and less expensive areas. There are NO nice areas where middle class people want to live. The downtown is a ghost town after 5pm. The mayor has been indicted for fraud. What else can you say? Hartford needs its city manager back and Bristol needs one too.
Ok lets run down the list
1. Hartford surpassing Bridgeport and New Haven as the murder capital.
Of course when there are no jobs and the state is doing badly in a recession that wouldn't increase violent crime at all? Nor would failing schools, lack of urban investment, or bad decisions about the local economy. Right?
Mayor Mike was mayor at a time when the country, and CT were doing exceptionally well economically.
2. Companies leaving...this is usually the part where Republicans chime in about CT having too many taxes.
3. Lack of nice areas for middle class people to live.
When investment coming into hartford is for high rise office space and apartment for young people in their twenties and thirties of course the nice areas for middle class people to raise a family are not there. Of course when Hartford, back before Perez, got in bed with John Rowland for a massive convention center that was different.
4. The downtown is a ghost town after 5pm.
Most of downtown Hartford are businesses holding "bankers hours" meaning they close up at 5pm. And you are obviously not including the bars, clubs, resturants, hockey games, basketball games, Barack Obama rally's, etc.
5. The mayor has been indicted for fraud.
And he sold his office to the highest bidder, he used his franking privlidges, against state law, for his reelection campaign, and purged the democractic town committee of opponents. If the people who opposed Mayor Perez ran one candidate for office instead of four, he wouldn't be mayor right now.
5. What else can I say?
How about what do any of these items have to do with a COO or city manager? How could any of the above issues been solved or for that matter caused by this one position? And how do you logically and rationally draw a connection to the COO when none of these issues would fall under the COO's job description?
I would like to say this about your Johnson in 2009 comment. Perhaps if the Republicans in Bristol ran better candidates and better campaigns they wouldn't be so eager to create and support a position that avoids them the burden of actually being competent enough to stand for election.
The COO is not a superhero who can solve all your gripes. Even if he wears a cape. He is just a layer of bureaucracy who doesn't actually have to be held accountable to you.
British MP Tony Benn has a great quote:
"Ask the powerful five questions.
What power have you got?
Where did you get it from?
In whose interests do you exercise it?
To whom are you accountable?
And how can we get rid of you?
Only Democracy gives us that right. That is why no one with power likes democracy. And that is why every generation must struggle to win it and keep it. Including you and me, here and now."
One last thing before I forget.
Is it not worth finding out WHY Hartford got rid of their weak mayor system before judging it to be a success to Bristol?
To those advocating Ken Johnson:
I suggest that you find out why he is no longer employed by CL&P.
If you are told he got "laid off", ask how many got laid off and if he was the only one at that time.
Wescon:
You are right. In 2005 the republicans ran a good candidate and won ALL 9 districts.
Too bad they pushed him out.
8:48
you mean Mocabee pushed him out.
Mr. Know-it-all anonomouswestconnstudent. Why don't you research all the Town Managers who answer to no one not even you? Afraid to see the results?
Goooo Mocababy (the loser)
Post a Comment