|
| |
April 27, 2001
1. Over the last two months, a group of residents
of the City came together to discuss the interest and wisdom of providing for a
local government where the Chief Executive Officer of the City is one who is
directly elected by the people (Mayor) as opposed to one hired by the City
Commission (Manager), and whether there should be a ward system to better
represent various constituencies.
2. After an initial meeting, it was arranged to consult
with the political science department of Bowling Green State University
to learn more about the two types of Municipal Government and the effectiveness
of each.
3. On January 20th, 2001 Dr.
Rob Alexander, Ph.D. appeared before the group and made a presentation
lasting almost two hours. The following points were established by Dr.
Alexander:
 |
Presently there are
more City Manager forms of government than Mayor forms of government across
the country; however, the clear trend over the
last decade and even since the late 1980s has been a movement
toward more Mayor forms of government. |
|
City Manager forms
of government's strength is administrative expertise and tends to be more
prominent in smaller cities where the manager bay have to war many
administrative hats, i.e. economic development, human relations director,
services director, etc.; however, in larger cities
where there are separate heads of department and where there is more of a
diverse population, the Mayor form of government seems to be the preferred method.
The strength of the Mayor form of government is that it is more
responsive to the citizens of the community and is better able to build
consensus. It was also pointed out that in the Mayor form of government a
chief administrative assistant, i.e.. safety services directory, vice-mayor,
could be appointed to handle administrative matters. |
4. After much discussion and given the size of
the City of Sandusky, the fact that each department has
its own administrative head who possesses the administrative expertise for that
department, and that the City's residents are very diverse in racial, ethnic and
socio-economic terms, the consensus was to pursue a suitable Mayor form of
government of the City of Sandusky.
5. The group then reviewed different types of
Mayor forms of government (the ORC and Norwalk City Charter)
6. The group also took into consideration the
need for providing a smooth transition from the
present form of government to a Mayor form of government. For example, the
following points were considered:
|
the present number
of City Commissioners |
|
when is the next
election for four Commissioners |
|
who should
establish the four wards |
|
when does the
present City Manager intend upon retiring |
|
providing for no
disruption in City services and maintaining expertise in the heads of the
departments (it is anticipated that there will be very little change, if
any, in the employment status of most of the City's employees and heads of
departments) |
|
how to maximize
accountability in the Mayor and yet provide for proper checks and balances |
|
how to provide the
City Council members with pay increases commensurate with their duties and
yet accountable to the electorate |
7. The group at all times conducted itself in a
very positive manner. This is not and has never been a referendum on any member
of the City Commission or Administration. It is the group's position that all
members of the City Commission and the Administration have been of great service
to the City and its residents. However, the group believes that the citizens of
the City should have a right to directly elect the person who will be the CEO of
the City;; the person who runs the day to day operations of the City of
Sandusky. Further, whether the Mayor system is the most effective and responsive
form of government is not necessarily the issue; but rather, who is better to
decide this question than the citizens of the City of Sandusky at the election
booth on November 6, 2001.
  
| |
|
2001
