City manager proposal shot down... in 1961

In 1961, Bristol voters got a chance to vote on whether to switch to a city manager form of government, hailed as a way to make municipal government more efficient. They rejected it on a 3,789 to 3,073 tally.
The city's Democratic Party and the Greater Bristol Labor Council led the opposition to the change at the time. They said it would cost do much and that it wasn't necessary.
The more things change...  

  Copyright 2013 All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Manager versus mayor...

It's interesting that New London is considering a shift in its political system to make its mayor stronger instead of relying so much on a professional manager.
Sometimes it appears that what people really want is something different than what they have, in the hope that maybe somehow it will be better.

Update: According to the New London Day, city voters in New London voted by more than a 60-40 margin in 2007 to drop their city manager in favor of a strong mayor form of government.
It described teh new mayor position there as putting someone at the helm "who would set policy, possess a veto over a seven-member council and appoint and fire department heads.
"The mayor, who would appoint a chief of staff, would serve a four-year term, while council members would continue to serve two years."
Voters are getting another chance because turnout wasn't big enough last time to meet a mandatory threshold for change.

*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Chief operating officer idea could still survive

City councilors solidly rejected a proposal Friday to create a chief operating officer to oversee the administration of City Hall.
“We have a perfect form of checks and balances now,” said city Councilor Frank Nicastro, a former mayor who opposed the suggested charter change.
Though the vote isn’t the last word on the idea, it makes it much less likely that the fundamental shift in the city government blueprint recommended by the Charter Revision Commission will eventually win approval.
The council, on a 5-2 vote, recommended the charter panel drop the idea from its final report, which will likely be submitted in early June. But whether or not charter commissioners agree to drop the proposal, it is clear that the council won’t back it in the end.
However, there is another route to passage that even some opponents said they’re interested in.
The council also gunned down another charter panel recommendation that would shift the part-time treasurer from an elected to an appointed post. Only two councilors, Democrat Craig Minor and Republican Ken Cockayne, backed the change.
The two councilors who backed the chief operating position, Minor and Cockayne, said they would help gather signatures to force the city to put the recommended charter change on the ballot so voters could decide if they want it or not.
“Let’s let the people vote,” Cockayne said. Minor said the decision is “too big” for the council alone to make.
To pull that off, they’d have to collect signatures from 10 percent of the city’s approximately 31,000 voters within 45 days of the final council vote on the charter commission’s report, probably in late June and July.
City Councilor Cliff Block, who voted against the chief operating officer concept, said he’s interested to see if a groundswell of support for the idea really exists.
Mayor Art Ward, who also voted against the position, said he will support the petition process.
The council has the power to put the suggested change on the ballot even if its members don’t agree with the proposal. But there doesn’t appear to be support for doing so.
City Councilor Mike Rimcoski called the proposed chief operating officer “another layer of bureaucracy” that would cost taxpayers too much.
Nicastro said that the strong mayor form of government in Bristol has served the city well for nearly a century and there’s no reason to revise it. He said that arguments that department heads are out of control is “garbage.”
“People seem to be living in the past,” Cockayne said. “We have to be looking to the future.”
Ward said he doesn’t see a need for someone to manage the departments more directly than the mayor can.
“I don’t really believe the COO is going to be contribute anything positive,” Ward said.
Minor said he favors a city manager, but the new post is “a step in the right direction” toward bringing more professionalism to city government.
Minor changes that would double the registrars’ terms of office to four years and revise some wording in the charter section on the city clerk were supported by councilors. They are likely to appear on the November general election ballot.
I'll try to add some more details later about what each of the councilors said Friday so check back over the weekend if you're interested. I'll add them below this story.

Here's what Craig Minor had to say during the meeting:
I am in favor of the council-manager form of government. While the COO is not a true “town manager”, I believe it is a step in the right direction and is long overdue.
I listened carefully to the comments that were made in these chambers earlier this week. I have read my emails, listened to my phone messages, and read the blogs and newspaper articles and letters. Clearly this is an issue that people feel strongly about, and I think the people should be given the chance to vote on it in November.
A number of thoughts occurred to me as I was listening to Bristol citizens express their hopes, and their fears, about the COO, and I would like to share them with you.
1. People have asked, how much will the COO cost? That’s a fair question. I personally think that in the long run the COO will save us a lot more than he costs, but a better way to look at it is to think back to when desktop computers were just starting to become common in the workplace. Everyone wanted to know how much money would they save. Well, as it turned out, they probably didn’t save a penny. But they made it possible for us to provide much better service to our customers, and to do many things we never thought possible. They make us more productive. That’s what the COO provides.
2. Several times the other night I heard people say, “we don’t need another bureaucrat” as if the department heads are all the same and interchangeable. Were you referring to the Chief of Police and the Building Official? Or the Park Superintendent and the Public Works Director? These positions are all required by charter and the city could not function without them. Since the COO will help these departments function more efficiently, wouldn’t we want one now as we enter tough financial times?
3. A lot has been made of the council’s supposed inability to ever fire the COO. First of all, his contract would almost certainly contain a “buyout” provision in case the relationship between the COO and the Mayor and council completely breaks down. But this is an extremely pessimistic attitude. A city manager is someone who wants to do good, and if he finds he is not able to do good in Bristol, he will probably very much want to move on to a place where he is appreciated.
4. In a big corporation, the CEO at some point in his career has usually held one or more of the jobs that he now supervises. To the best of my knowledge no Bristol mayor has ever been a Finance Director, a Personnel Director, or a Public Works Director. I don't think any Bristol mayor has ever worked in any other town, so they’ve never had any first hand knowledge of best management practices used elsewhere. They have no way of knowing the right departmental goals and objectives, and they have no benchmarks to evaluate the performance of the department head. All they know is "the way we've always done it".
5. If we vote tonight to keep this proposal in the Final Report, we are sending a strong message that the Bristol City Council takes the business of governing seriously. This is the message that we want to send to companies and families who are thinking about relocating to Bristol, and especially to developers who are right now deciding whether or not to propose investing their time and money in the Depot Square parcel.
6. But more important than my opinion is the opinion of the people of Bristol. I think this issue to too big to leave up to the seven people sitting on the City Council.


*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Yarde says to try again to get city manager

Businessman Craig Yarde had this to say today:

I think since Minor, Cockayne, MaCauley, ane Ward have stated publicly that they support a town manager rather than a COO. They would have a majority to pass it on as a referendum next November. Personally I have always preferred a council/ manager form of government rather than the present proposed strong mayor COO council form proposed by the Charter Revision Committee. But I think the committee compromised in order to take a step in the right direction considering the last four Charter Revision Committee proposed some form of a town manager form of government and it always got knocked down by the town council. Last week when I called thirty business leaders and fellow Bristol taxpayers some said the COO didn't go far enough. Others said any change would be better. Yesterday, I called the ICMA which stands for the International City manager Association, which I'm a member of. They indicated they would not support this COO position and would not send anyone from Washington to support it. They only support a town manager council form of government. So the Council, Committee and mayor should get together and make the changes to a Town manager/council so all taxpayers can benefit.

*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Yarde weighs in on city management problems

Businessman Craig Yarde weighed in recently with a couple of interesting comments on another post. I want to make sure everyone sees them, so here they are:

First time to the Bristol Blog.
I wish everyone would use their real names rather than anonymous. I tried to post a comment a few days ago using my name Craig Yarde but it never went through. Maybe because I didn't know my URL, whatever that is. So I'll try anonymous and see if it makes it.
My main reason I like a city manager or COO is because I feel the last four Mayors who I know personally did not manage their twenty one direct reports. One Mayor told me he spent half his week hearing citizens complaints. We all know the ceremonial responsibilities and meetings the Mayor has to perform under the city charter. I would say a Mayor has a sixty hour plus week without ever managing his twenty one direct reports. Having running Yarde Metals for over 30 years, managing my direct reports was the hardest thing I had to do. It's a tough job to review everyone twice a year and have meetings with each one every few weeks to see how he/she is performing the goals and objectives
for each department. I had six associates reporting to me. I can't imagine what would happen if I had twenty one associates reporting to me and not meeting with them at all. Let me give you an example what happens when you don't manage your people. Under Mayor Stortz, it well documented in the Bristol Press about his issues with the BDA department head Jonathan Rosenthal.
There was also concerns about Jonathan's performance with the previous two administrations. Personally, I think he did a good job, but i was the customer not the boss. Well, Mayor Stortz bypassed the BDA and formed another committee to handle the mall project. Jonathan had already did the RFQ for the new mall project. Jonathan who makes about $100,000 per year job was in limbo for these two years as they bypassed him. The mayor asked me to be on this committee which I agreed until I found out he was bypassing the BDA. I respectfully told him I didn't agree with what he was doing and refused to be on the new mall committee. They have budgeted three hundred and fifty thousand dollars
for legal fees to set this committee up along with other expenses. Since the pass four mayors have not at all managed their twenty one direct reports their was nothing in Jonathans personnel file. No reviews, no verbal warnings, no written warnings, nothing at all. So there was no valid argument to dismiss him. Knowing the laws, I would guess it will cost the city anywhere from $500,000 to a million dollars to dismiss Jonathan Rosenthal. The main reason is he was managed so poorly. My question to fellow bloggers is what do you think the mayor should do at this
point to handle this individual. A very difficult situation. Can you see the legal difficulty by not managing you direct reports. There was a recent department head that sued the city for $250,000 dollars for the same reason. All I want is to protect the city and prevent our tax dollars from getting wasted for lack of management. We are talking some very serious money here that gets wasted. Your tax dollars.If know of any other areas were money has been squandered. Please email me at hirecoo@gmail.com Thank you.

And there's this one, too:
I did not include Leone in my remarks and by the way he is a strong supporter of the Charter Revision Committee to create a COO position. I know Artie has recently put some warnings in Jonathan's file but the horse is out of the barn. Because Frank, Couture and Bill has never given any reviews, no verbal and no written warnings and have given very little direction to department heads, the stage is already set. I have heard rumors of antisemitic remarks and one mayor grabbing Jonathan's ass but it's only hearsay at this stage. It will all come out in the wash when Bristol decides to do something with his employment. What we have here is lifetime employment in the city unless we decide to pay him to leave and that will be big bucks. I didn't say anything about public impute to the mall or nothing being accomplished. What I'm saying is we are not managing the people side of the city business which will get the city in big law suits in the future unless we let everyone have lifetime employment. Is that what we want?
Craig Yarde

*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Chief operating officer still moving forward

I'm sitting at a stunningly dull Charter Revision Commission meeting where members are talking about the particularities of a possible chief operating officer who would oversee city department heads.
The panel chairman, Tim Furey, is pushing the idea hard. He said that adding the position would provide more oversight, more continuity and more efficiency.
Let me give you a flavor for this thing....
"Is this person going to have a term?" asked Ann Baldwin, an assistant city attorney. If not, she said, the term is automatically two years.
Furey said the contract could lay out the term and rights to any severance.
"It sounds like it's the better way to go," said Al Marko, a committee member.
Furey said that in business, the length of service effects their severance pay.
But that whole idea is now sort of dropped.
"We need to set up a special meeting to look at a fleshed out section for this," Furey said.
A public hearing will follow in March, officials said.
The panel's supposed to report to the council by April 4 so time is tight.
For a hearing, Baldwin said, the charter commission has to have a draft report finished so that people can read it before the final hearing.
Furey wants to know how simple the recommendations can be.
There doesn't need to be an explanation for the recommendations, Baldwin said, though perhaps a cover letter to the mayor and council will explain the rationales for changes sought by the panel.
Furey wants to know if the panel can refine its report after a hearing. The answer is yes.
Baldwin said that before the hearing, the panel needs to vote on what to include in a draft report.
After the hearing, the committee has to meet again so that it could make revisions in its suggestions, Baldwin said.
Furey suggests a meeting on Tuesday, March 11 and a hearing on March 18. The final charter meeting would be on March 25.
So by March 11, "by hook or by crook," Furey said he'll have something together for his colleagues to refine.
Now Baldwin is pointing out that March 11 is a council session.
Furey said he wants to finalize the COO position and prepare a report at the March 11 hearing.
The council would accept the report at its April 8 meeting and schedule its own public hearing on the suggestions.
Furey said the proposals will be fleshed out in time for the March 11 charter sessions.
I have no idea if the council supports the idea of a chief operating officer. It will be interesting to hear how that works out.
Anybody have any thuughts on this whole concept?


*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

City manager-lite gets support

The city would gain a chief operating officer if a proposal approved by the Charter Revision Commission passes muster.
The position would be added to the structure of city government with the idea that whoever holds it would oversee most of the City Hall’s senior managers instead of having the mayor alone at the helm.
It isn’t clear exactly how the new structure would work on a practical basis.
“Someone’s got to be the overall manager,” said Tim Furey, chairman of the charter panel.
He said the chief operating officer would “coordinate management” and ensure policies developed by the mayor and City Council are implemented properly.
The proposal is something akin to a city manager-lite, leaving the full-time mayor in place but adding an administrative post that would take on the role of supervising the city’s department heads.
It’s not clear whether Mayor Art Ward or the council would approve the creation of a costly new position. If they do support it, voters would have the final say in November.
Before it can happen, though, a large number of issues still need to be resolved, including how to deal with charter provisions that give various municipal boards – including police and fire – oversight of some department heads.
Many department heads report to both appointed boards and the mayor now. The new plan would substitute the chief operating officer for the mayor.
Furey said the mayor would remain as a full-time policymaker, freed of the necessity of overseeing underlings day in and day out. “That’s too demanding,” he said.
Charter commissioners said they’d give the council the right to fire a chief operating manager on a two-thirds vote of members present at a legal meeting.
That would mean that as few as three councilors could dump the COO if the minimum of four were present to make it a legal session.
Among the complications that are uncertain is how the COO would fit in with the comptroller’s office that already reviews bills as well as the Board of Finance that controls city spending.
Furey said a new section would be added to the charter detailing the new position.
Members of the panel are mulling qualifications and the specific duties a COO would perform.
The charter panel meets next at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, Feb. 26 at City Hall, when it will take up the issue again.

*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

City manager of sorts gets initial backing

Reporter Jackie Majerus just filed this:

A city manager – or something close to it – may be in Bristol’s future.
The city’s charter revision commission is moving toward shifting some of the mayor’s duties to a professional business manager, while still leaving the City Council and a full-time mayor in place, according to Tim Furey, who chairs the panel.
Furey said the commission has asked Ann Baldwin, an attorney for the city, to begin looking at the city charter with the idea of adding a chief operating officer or city manager.
The plan is to try to figure out “how the organizational chart would look,” said Furey.
Commissioner Harley Graham said the city has to come into the “modern age” and leave the mindset of doing things the way they’ve always been done.
“We need some professionalism,” said Graham. “We may have to redefine what the mayor does.”
Furey said the commission has given up on the idea of a total conversion to a city manager form of government, but reached something of a consensus without taking a full vote.
Instead, he said, they want to add professionalism and continuity to a system dependent on frequent municipal elections.
“People wanted some management continuity that was semi-immune from the political process,” said Furey.
But Furey said it’s also important to have a mayor who is the public face of the community.
“I like the idea of keeping a mayor in place,” said Furey. “Someone’s gotta be the king, so to speak.”
Just what responsibilities an incoming business professional would take on, who he or she would answer to and how the city could discharge that person if it wasn’t working out have yet to be determined.
“The devil is in the details,” said Furey.
Commissioner Maria Pirro said a city manager should be required to live in Bristol – something others on the panel also agreed with. By getting involved in the community, she said, that individual would “become vested” in Bristol.
Dick Prindle, a member of the commission, spoke against the city manager idea, but said he liked the notion of the mayor having an assistant.
“A mayor has a lot to do,” said Prindle.
City Councilor Craig Minor said he supported an assistant for former Mayor Gerard Couture a few years ago, “thinking I was giving the mayor a chief of staff.”
But Minor said he was disappointed when that assistant, former state Rep. Kosta Diamantis, spent all his time working on what were at the time plans for the conversion of the downtown mall into a community recreation and retail complex.
The charter revision commission will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 22 at the Bristol Board of Education.
People can address many issues that night, Furey said, including the city manager idea, but he said he hopes the hearing will be focused on the question of whether Bristol should return to an appointed school board.
After that public hearing, there will be a series of meetings to work on the charter with regard to a city manager or chief operating officer, said Furey, and more opportunities for the public to weigh in on the issue.
Any recommendation made by the charter revision commission must be approved by city councilors before it goes on the ballot.
“The electorate in the end has to decide,” said Furey.

*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Charter hearing on manager to be held Jan. 14

Initial plans to hold a Charter Revision Commission meeting tonight about the city manager idea have been put off until next Monday.
The session is now slated for 7 p.m., Monday, Jan. 14 in the meeting room on the first floor of City Hall.
Don't go there tonight. There won't be anyone around.

*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

City manager idea remains on the table, appears to gain support

For resident Mike Petosa, there’s no reason to overturn City Hall by putting a professional city manager in charge instead of a mayor.
“The city is not broke, so you don’t have to fix it,” Petosa told the Charter Revision Commission Tuesday. “Our city is thriving.”
But Craig Yarde, a businessman, sees things quite differently.
“Our community’s organizational structure is kind of broke, if not completely broken,” Yarde told the seven-member that’s weighing whether to recommend one of the biggest changes since the charter’s adoption in 1911.
Members of the committee haven’t decided whether to plunge ahead wholeheartedly with the revision, but a majority expressed support for the idea on Tuesday. They scheduled a special session January 7 to make a decision about whether to proceed with the shakeup plan.
For city Councilor Frank Nicastro, who served as mayor for 10 years until he stepped down in 2003, moving ahead with the proposal would be a mistake.
“Don’t take something that’s worked so well for almost 100 years and throw it out the window,” Nicastro said.
“We have a great system. It isn’t failing. It hasn’t failed,” Nicastro said.
But Ken Johnson, a Republican who ran unsuccessfully for mayor this year and has already said he intends to try again in 2009, told the panel to seize the concept.
“Ignore the politicians,” Johnson told the committee. “It’s critically important that you put the earmuffs on and tune out all the politicians.”
He said the issue is so important that it deserves “a really objective, fact-based review” before the commission completes its report on recommended charter changes, which is due in April.
Supporters argue that putting a professional manager at the helm would improve the city government’s efficiency, provide far more oversight of department heads, allow for longer term planning, ensure continuity at the top and ensure expertise in municipal administration.
Detractors say that a manager only has to satisfy a majority of the City Council, not the entire community, and doesn’t have the lifelong commitment to Bristol that its mayors have typically shown.
“You’ve got to eat, sleep and drink the job,” said Nicastro, who hailed all 19 of Bristol’s mayors through the years for making honest efforts to improve the city. He pointed out that none of them were ever charged with any form of graft because they put Bristol’s needs first.
But committee members said they can see the need for more professional administration at City Hall, whether in the form of a manager or an expert who would work for the mayor to handle operations.
Gail Hartmann, one of the charter commissioners, said it would be irresponsible for the panel to drop the issue when it’s so clear that the city’s many professional supervisors need reviews and recognition for the jobs they do.
A manager would be able to provide constructive criticism, said Maria Pirro, who also serves on the commission.
“There is no real management in city government today,” said Dick Prindle, another commissioner.
Tim Furey, chairman of the charter panel, said he sees “a lot of little mini-fiefdoms” within city government that would act more efficiently if they were coordinated by someone with the training to oversee them.
“It’s worth exploring,” Furey said.
The charter commission’s recommendations are slated to reach the council in April. Councilors can accept them, reject them or ask the panel to revise them. Any proposals the council backs would go on the November general election ballot because voters get the last word on any changes to the charter.
The members of the charter panel Furey, Hartmann, Prindle, Al Marko, Pirro, Hal Kilby and Harley Graham.

*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Charter panel still pondering city manager concept

Despite a tight timetable and the necessity of rewriting the city charter from top to bottom to make it happen, a panel charged with recommending changes to the city government’s blueprint is still giving serious consideration to a proposal to create a city manager position to replace the mayor as Bristol’s top administrator.
“This is not a casual change,” said City Attorney Edward Krawiecki, Jr. “It would require a rewrite of the entire charter” before April.
The chairman of the Charter Revision Commission, Tim Furey, is pushing the seven-member panel to pursue the idea.
“The time is ripe for it,” he said.
But it remains unclear whether a majority of the commission is ready to plunge forward with a proposal that may prove too big to get done in time and that may not have the required backing of the City Council.
Supporters say a manager would bring greater efficiency, more continuity, better long-term planning and more experience to government oversight.
"With a manager, you're entitled to expect professionalism all the way through, year in and year out," said Southington Town Manager John Weichsel, who’s held his appointed post for 42 years.
With elected mayors at the helm, he said, voters could install “drunken Uncle Eddie” to run the city.
Members of the charter panel said the change is worth exploring, but some aren’t sure they can finish before the April deadline imposed by the City Council.
“I don’t think we’ve got the time to devote to this,” said Dick Prindle, a panel member who has served on earlier charter commissions.
Al Marko, another member of the commission, said that adding a city manager creates a need to deal with many other issues, from what to do with the mayor’s role to whether to keep the police and fire boards.
The manager “is the tip of the iceberg,” said Gail Hartmann, a former Board of Finance member who serves on the charter commission. The change envisioned is “just enormous,” she said.
Harley Graham said it would be “a huge change” and a daunting task.
But Krawiecki said his office is capable of pulling it off if the charter commission decides to pursue it in earnest “instantaneously.”
“This is not a casual change,” Krawiecki said. “If you’re ready to do it, you need to do it,” he told the panel recently.
“It’s certainly a task that can be accomplished,” said Maria Pirro, who serves on the panel.
In addition to the manager idea, the panel is considering a number of other revisions to the charter, including a return to an appointed Board of Education, whether to keep an elected city treasurer and the possible expansion of the size of the City Council.
The charter commission’s recommendations are slated to reach the council in April. Councilors can accept them, reject them or ask the panel to revise them. Any proposals the council backs would go on the November general election ballot because voters get the last word on any changes to the charter.

*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Shifting to city manager faces long odds

Though the city’s Charter Revision Commission is still moving forward with its exploration of the idea of shifting to a city manager form of government, the proposal faces long odds should it ever reach the City Council.
Ultimately, for the plan to reach the ballot in November for voters to consider, it will take support from at least four member of the council.
But, based on their comments during the campaign, four of the seven members – Mayor Art Ward and Councilors Frank Nicastro, Cliff Block and Mike Rimcoski – are unlikely to back a switch to a city manager style of governance.
Only two members, Councilors Ken Cockayne and Craig Minor, can be more or less counted on to back the plan. Councilor Kevin McCauley said he’s willing to consider it.
Nicastro, a former mayor, was the most outspoken in opposition.
Nicastro said that there is "no way in God's name" should Bristol make the change because a manager "has to play more politics than any mayor would have to play" due to his need to keep the council's backing."Let the mayor do his job. If he's not doing his job, replace him," Nicastro said.
The strongest supporter of a manager among the council was Cockayne, a freshman and one of two Republicans on the panel.
Cockayne said he’d like to see a city manager who could carry out the council’s policies in a bipartisan way.
He said that elected officials would “continue to develop policy that is responsive to citizens’ needs,” but a manager would bring apolitical professional to administration.
Minor said that he favors “the concept of a city manager."
Minor said the city essentially hires “an amateur CEO every two years” to run what amounts to a $165 million business. He said that no private company would ever do the same.
The other likely supporter is McCauley, in his second-term, who said he’s willing to consider the idea seriously.
Ward said that he is also willing to consider the change. But, he said, he doesn't see a reason to make it.
Ward said that the questions about hiring a city manager deserve study, but he’ll have to be convinced. Rimcoski expressed the same sentiment.
Switching to a city manager system isn’t needed, said Rimcoski and Block.
"It's adding another layer of government,” Block said.

*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Johnson happy charter panel considering his ideas

Just in, from Republican mayoral candidate Ken Johnson:

Ken Johnson, the Republican nominee for Mayor of the City of Bristol, today expressed his appreciation to the members of the Bristol Charter Revision Commission for agreeing to investigate a majority of his government reform proposals.
“I am committed to government reform as a key component of my campaign platform and I’ve honored that commitment by presenting my ideas to the Commission,” Johnson said, “I appreciate that the Charter Revision Commission will be further evaluating my proposals.”

Among Johnson’s platform planks that the Charter Revision Commission agreed to look into were:
• to move to a City Manager form of government,
• expand the number of Council members from 6 to 9 with minority representation,
• change the Mayor and Council terms from 2 years to 4 years,
• elect the City Council ‘at-large,’
• change from an elected to an appointed Board of Education.

Said Johnson, “At the end of the day, I want the people of Bristol to have the opportunity to vote on their form of government. In the meantime, I will continue to promote these changes and I’m hopeful that we’ll be able to move this agenda through Charter Revision and the City Council.”
“I believe it is time for Bristol to engage a City Manager to focus on the myriad day-to-day responsibilities of running the city.”
Craig Yarde, a leading proponent for a City Council/ Manager form of government added, “Ken’s position regarding changing our city government to a council-manager form is admirable. After all, if this Charter Revision is adopted, Ken will be out of a job.”
“I believe we’ll benefit further from an expanded council and four year terms,” Johnson continued, “so we can bring more ideas to the table and give elected officials the chance to see projects through from start to finish.”
“I’m not waiting for election day to act on my ideas,” Johnson concluded, “I prefer action to talk. Imagine what we can accomplish over the next two years by restoring civility to the government process.”



*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Lydem opposes city manager proposal

Press release from Democratic City Council candidate Bruce Lydem:

The continued debate over the town manager form of government continues. As a candidate for Bristol 2nd District I have stated and been consistent in my support for our current form of government.

We should not lose sight that the board of finance is a unique situation that we have. Members of that board, past and present, have been frugal with taxpayer funds. Secondly, all members of the board are volunteers and give generously of their time and expertise.

Many cities in the state of Connecticut of significant size have a strong mayor form of government. Bristol is of a significant size. The current structure helps us to govern our ever growing city and allows us to professionally manage its growth.

Democracy is vital to our society. Citizens should have a say, by voting, in or out, their elected leaders. Under a town manager system the citizen’s right to rid themselves of leadership they don’t approve of will be eliminated. This is not right! I believe that the people of Bristol should have the power to decide the fate of their city.

*******
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

No flip-flop for Ward on city manager issue

It's funny how two people hearing the same words can come to such different conclusions about them.
In The Hartford Courant today, a story about last night's Charter Revision Commission hearing started off this way:
Democratic mayoral candidate Art Ward on Tuesday night edged closer toward supporting the proposal for a city manager form of government, a change that prompted a Republican city council candidate to proclaim that Democrats might be embracing the GOP platform.
Ward appeared to oppose the city manager proposal as recently as early this month, when he told an audience at the Federal Hill Association-sponsored mayoral debate that he'd prefer to stay with the current mayor-council form of government.
But speaking Tuesday before the charter revision commission, Ward said, "I really don't have a fixed position per se on the town manager, but I think it's time we delve into [studying] it."
I heard that, too, of course, but I didn't see any change in what Ward said. He's been saying for months that he favors leaving the mayor-council system in place but he would also like to see the panel investigate whether to have a city manager, leaving the door open to making the change.
That struck me as pretty much what he said again last night.
But both the Courant's reporter and Ken Cockayne, a Republican council contender, detected a shift in Ward's stance.
Cockayne said he was glad that Ward was coming to embrace the GOP's agenda.
Ward said today that he almost answered Cockayne at the hearing but kept his mouth shut because the hearing "was not the forum for political grandstanding."
That's kind of funny, naturally, given that Republican mayoral hopeful Ken Johnson delivered a long speech about changes he'd like to see and Ward also piped in extensively.
Mayoral candidates grandstanding? Never. ;)
Anyway, Ward said today that he hasn't changed his stance on the manager issue. He said that the questions that have been raised deserve study, but he's still in favor of retaining the mayor-council form of government.
Personally, before I would have written that Ward had shifted ground, I would have asked him directly if that was the case. The words he said at the hearing were simply too vague to underpin the Courant's story.
The other point is that Ward, whom I've been listening to for 14 years, isn't always the most eloquent speaker. He can mangle sentences with the best of them. I suppose by now I can interpret the words pretty well, but when I'm not sure what Ward means, I ask him. Normally he can translate it all back into English.

*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

City manager tops agenda for charter commission

Instead of muddling through with a mayor at the helm, the city ought to revise its government blueprint to have a manager take care of administrative responsibilities, several residents told the Charter Revision Commission Tuesday.
Businessman Craig Yarde said that handling the duties required of mayors today is “beyond the capacity” of anyone.
With so many meetings to preside over, ceremonial functions to perform, hundreds of employees to lead and a $164 million budget to keep an eye on, supporters of changing to a managerial form of government say that mayors can’t possibly keep up.
Under the existing system, there is “much too much power and responsibility for even the best of men and women” serving in the city’s top job, said Republican mayoral hopeful Ken Johnson.
“We are not a small town anymore,” said resident Gary Wyrebek. “We need someone who knows what they’re doing” in charge, he added.
The seven-member commission also heard requests to amend the charter to allow for public votes on major projects, a larger City Council, longer terms for elected leaders, an appointed Board of Education and perhaps even spring elections.
Tim Furey, chairman of the panel, said it will weed through the many suggestions it’s received and figure which ones it wants to investigate in greater depth. The city manager proposal is virtually certain to make the first cut.
Art Ward, the Democratic mayoral contender, said he doesn’t have a solid position on the idea of adopting a managerial form of government in Bristol.
Saying that it is time to probe the possibility, Ward called for the commission “to sit there and actually address it” in the coming months.
The panel is slated to make its recommendations for charter changes to the council in April. If the council agrees with them, proposals will be placed on the November 2008 ballot for the public to approve or reject.
Both Johnson and Ward said they’d like to see a change to allow big ticket projects to go on the ballot in the future so that taxpayers can decide their fate.
The proposal to switch to a city manager would mean a drastic shakeup in the way Bristol has operated since it adopted the charter in 1911. It has always relied on a strong mayor form of government, though in the Great Depression the city added a Board of Finance that has the ultimate say on spending and bonding.
Johnson said that adding a manager would be an investment, not an expense, because whoever would be hired should easily find ways to make City Hall more efficient.
He said the manager would serve as “a firewall between our politics and the administration of government.”
Yarde said there is simply “not enough time” to mayors to manage effectively while handling all of their other duties.
“At the end of the day, this guy or gal needs to be a visionary,” Yarde said, but there’s little opportunity for a mayor to devote much attention to what the city could become because they’re buried in minutia.
Yarde said the city’s department heads are “crying out for leadership.”
With a manager in place, Yarde said, city councilors would be freed up to make policy decisions.
The way things are now, “nobody feels like they have a voice,” Yarde said.
But a manager “diffuses the power of special interests” and encourages “the free flow of information” to the public, political leaders and city staff, Yarde said.
“Our city is a business,” said Ken Cockayne, a Republican council hopeful, and needs an expert to manage it. Mayors don’t have the qualification in public administration that’s truly required for the job, he said.
The members of the charter panel Furey, Gail Hartmann, Dick Prindle, Al Marko, Maria Pirro, Hal Kilby and Harley Graham.

*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Johnson calls for manager, larger City Council

New press release from Republican mayoral hopeful Ken Johnson:

Ken Johnson the Republican nominee for Mayor of the City of Bristol, today unveiled his second reform plank in the area of government reform. Johnson is making a push to make government more accountable to the people of Bristol.
Johnson will formally ask the Charter Revision Commission to amend the charter to include a City Manager-Council form of government. Under these provisions the Mayor’s position will most likely be a ceremonial position and an experienced person would be hired to run the day-to-day activities of government.
“Bristol is a multi million dollar corporation and the time has come to select an individual who can manage this city as a business without any regard to a political agenda,” Johnson continued “It is only proper that the voters of Bristol have an opportunity to vote on their form a government, politicians can have their opinions, but the voters should have the final say.”
In addition, Johnson will ask the Charter Revision Commission to put an initiative on the ballot to expand the council to nine members. Currently, the council is represented by six voters from three different council districts. Johnson will ask the Charter panel to make the city council elected citywide or what is known as “At-Large.”
“I defy anyone one currently active in city government to pick any street in the city and ask those residents which council district that they belong in,” Johnson added “City Councilors represent Bristol and not just districts, with the addition of a city manager all Bristol electors should be able to elect their city council members.”
The Republican nominee will also propose that all Council terms will be for a four-year period. “It takes a good year to get the feel of your position, and than you are up for re-election. A four-year term will ensure that we will have more time to govern and less time politicking,” Johnson said.
Under this provision the City of Bristol would have guaranteed multi-party representation on the City Council. “This would also guarantee that Bristol would have a diversity of opinions and views on the city council, Johnson added “Increasing the City Council to nine members would also reduce the workload for members of the Council.” Johnson believes that some residents do not seek a seat on the city council because of the time commitment involved and the amount of time they spend away from their families.
“With so many items on their plates it a wonder that it takes forever to complete a project,” Johnson concluded “We need to strive to elect and recruit the best possible candidates for municipal office, and this proposal would do just that.”


*******
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Charter panel to start work next week

BRISTOL – A new charter revision panel that could spearhead an effort to create a city manager form of government for the city is set to begin work Thursday.
The panel is slated to pick officers, set a meeting schedule and receive recommendations from the City Council at its inaugural session.
The meeting, which does not include a period for public comment, is scheduled for 6 p.m. in the council chambers on the first floor of City Hall.
The new seven-member charter revision commission will consider a wide range of potential changes to the city government’s blueprint in the months ahead.
The members of the new panel, who were endorsed last month by councilors, are Gail Hartmann, Dick Prindle, Tim Furey, Al Marko, Maria Pirro, Hal Kilby and Harley Graham.
Charter panels often wind up recommending relatively mundane changes in the city charter, but they have the capacity to seek a sweeping overhaul.
With many politicians expressing support for switching from a strong mayor system to a city manager form of government, the issue offers the potential for upsetting the city’s blueprint that’s been in place for nearly 100 years.
Proposed changes supported by the charter commission go first to the council. If councilors back them, they head for the ballot for voters to have the final say. The charter cannot be revised except by citywide vote.
It is likely that in subsequent, regularly scheduled charter commission meetings, there will be time set aside for public comment. The panel usually holds at least a couple of public hearings as well.



*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

Stortz offers charter revision ideas

Mayor William Stortz issued this press release today:

Bristol, CT, June 12, 2007 – In a prepared release, Mayor William T. Stortz announced that one of the key issues of the Charter Revision Commission, will probably be the modification of the sections of the City Charter regarding the Mayor, the City Council.

“There has been significant discussion over the idea of a City Manager, and I’m sure that this will be one of the charges to the Charter Revision Commission,” said Stortz.

Stortz continued, “I support the concept of a City Manager for Bristol. I support it with the caveat that the job description be well thought out, that it be non-political, and that the appropriate oversight and accountability be included. Then, and only then, would it be good for Bristol.”

Stortz added, “I also support the idea of increasing the City Council to nine members, with multi party representation. This would reduce the workload and provide some checks and balances, as well as attract more people to the process. When I put forward the request to form a Commission, I did it with those thoughts in mind.”

“By giving the Commission until 2008 to report, and have the recommendations voted on in November 2008, adequate time is provided for thorough discussion and review, by the Commission and the public.

Also, by having this voted on in November 2008, and if the changes are approved, then the City will have time to plan, to interview, to implement, and possibly have the changeover take place near or at the end of the 2007 electee's term (in November 2009)”, said Stortz.

Stortz went on to say, “By having the vote taken during a non municipal election cycle, the issues can be decided on their merit and not influence, or be influenced by the elections and candidates.

Failure to act on this issue now, with a 2008 vote, pushes the item off at least one, maybe two years, and could also impact implementation. If the idea is right, the sooner it is done, the better – as long as it is done right.

Clearly, this is the purview of the Commission. They choose what issues to consider and pass on to the Council.”

Stortz said, “If the issue were to be put on the ballot as a simple yes or no, and it did pass, the Charter Revision Commission would still have to work out the details which are extensive, as the Mayor’s role permeates the Charter and Ordinance. In reality if that was done, the right of the people would be significantly reduced as the Charter revision and the Council has to submit something to be voted on, and flexibility is lost.”

Stortz concluded, “The schedule I submitted gives the Commission and the public adequate time to evaluate the concept, prepare the details, discuss the details, make changes as appropriate and that the public will vote on. If this issue were to be placed on this years ballot (November 2007), the process would have to be resolved and approved by the Council by no later than September giving the whole process including public hearing, only 8 to 10 weeks. My schedule allows for more than ample time for input and feedback, giving the public a true opportunity to participate, before the question, fully explored, discussed, and detailed, is voted on.”

Ward issues "Leadership" position paper

Democratic mayoral contender Art Ward recently issued the following statement as a "Leadership position paper" --

Never before has a Bristol Mayoral election been so much about leadership in both style and substance -- than that which is facing us in November.

Four years of military service, nearly forty years of community service, including, seven years of service as a member and chairperson of the Bristol Zoning Board of Appeals and almost fourteen years as an elected member of the Bristol City Council have afforded a multitude of opportunities to learn the various aspects of true leadership.

Over the past fourteen years, regardless of party affiliation, I have strived to be a responsible voice for the best interests of all of us - the people of the City of Bristol Connecticut. I have always believed that realistic, responsible decisions are made by listening to, digesting and addressing issues open mindedly. While responsible opposition is the obligation of elected officials if poor decisions will be the end result of items of consideration, so is it the obligation of those same individuals to support items of positive importance, regardless of party affiliation.

It is hard for me to comprehend how the public can be expected to believe that the supporters of bad decisions during this administration will now propose that they will be the panacea for correcting these same mistakes tomorrow. I have not sat back while less than beneficial decisions have been made nor will I refrain from responsible opposition in the future if the issues are not in the best interests of the community as a whole.

An effective city leader demonstrates a passion for the community which enables them to put the good of the people above everything else, working with others without the "all or nothing" or "my way or the highway" perspective on governmental management. An effective leader is never an island unto themselves.

The best leaders listen, they listen to those of differing opinions, they encourage the sharing of ideas and potential solutions, they are not afraid to hear different voices, differing view points. An effective leader may not always agree but they always respect others and look for good, alternative ideas which affords the flexibility to arrive at the best possible solutions.

A leader is not afraid to make decisions, to lead, to set a direction and a purpose - indecision breeds wasted time, listless effort and a lack of purpose.

One of the most important aspects of leadership is the ability to foster teamwork amongst everyone involved in the functioning of the process, to coordinate the talents, abilities and contributions of others in order that a mutual benefit is realized for everyone, not only for a chosen few.

It was once asked "should a leader be either loved or should a leader be feared? I say neither. Rather a democratically elected official should be respected but not feared or disliked by those around them and that respect is attained only by extolling those virtues which have already been expressed.

The willingness of this administration to micromanage, to single out department heads, employees and volunteers alike have had a profound, negative affect on the morale of those very people who are expected to provide positive results for our community.
A Mayor should be a leader of vast integrity and respect, not the tzar of managers. The office of mayor should be a vehicle of progress, not the haven to spew vindictiveness or to "even the score" with vendetta-like actions.,

As mayor, I will initiate the following positive agenda for improving city government for all;

1. I will continue to work in concert with the Board of Finance to establish fiscal responsibility that will protect the citizens of Bristol from "tax shock," Investment in our community will be geared toward establishing a viable downtown, a fully developed Southeast Industrial Park, the renewal of the Park Revitalization Program, quality schools, safe neighborhoods and programs which enhance the quality of life for all of Bristol's citizens.

2. In conjunction with our state legislative delegation I will immediately establish communications with the appropriate State of CT officials to initiate the process of securing any/all funding which will assist in the development of our downtown, incorporating our own professional development and planning staff into the process.

3. Address better means of communication between the Board of Education, the city, the parents, the school organizations and the general public through well-publicized neighborhood meetings in order to afford the public the opportunity to express their views on the spending of educational tax dollars.

4. I will convene a Charter Revision Commission to address the issues of the need for establishing guidelines for public referendums on major issues affecting this community.

5. I will request that this same Charter Revision Commission consider the potential for the implementation of the town Manager form of government if it is determined to be in the best interests of our community.

6.I will eliminate the existing morale decay which is so rampant throughout the system, expecting each and every one of our employees to perform their jobs to the best of their abilities but without the fears of retribution resulting from micromanagement.

7. I will establish panels of inter-departments working together to deliver the utmost of proficiency in city services. The Public Works, Planning, Engineering, Economic Development, Police and Fire departments may meet on a regular basis in order to better coordinate activities and/or Social Services, the Senior Center, Youth Services and Community Development might join forces to more effectively address mutual community goals.

8. All persons, volunteers, employees, staff and department heads, without exception, will be treated with the utmost of respect and courtesy in all facets of employment and (re)appointments, always being afforded timely notice and due consideration in the process.

9. Any and all information which is pertinent to the decision making procedures of our elected officials will be forwarded in a most timely fashion and not be held in abeyance for the purposes of political gain.

10. Quality education, a desirable downtown, a functioning Southeast Industrial Park, improved parks and neighborhoods and a reborn respect for that which is right will be the path that we will forge ahead on in order to move Bristol forward.