Contract Controversy Continued

So far, there have been a lot of visits but few posts on this blog. Mostly it has led to good old fashioned talks at the post office. Many are clearly concerned about the contract and have called the Commissioners about the issue. The very flawed contract that was presented at the Commissioners' workshop is now getting plenty of scrutiny and will not be passed in that form. A wake up call was needed and heeded.

There seem to be two positions on the contract. It's either "outrageous -- fire him" or "leave him alone -- what do you know about running a town?". I don't agree with either of the above. Joe has done a good job and I am proud about what we have accomplished in planning for the growth and development that has arrived at our doorsteps. He also shares a preservation ethic and realizes what a gem Ridgely is. It's a breath of fresh air, for example, to work with someone who doesn't propose demolition or removal as the only solution for old buildings or old trees in town. Not moving here and proposing such a over reaching contract has been a mistake. However, it certainly doesn't eclipse the good he has done. This can be worked out.

As for the "leave him alone" folks. I'm sorry but I guess I'm just an old fashioned American who still really believes that "We the People" govern. Of course, most of us aren't policy wonks. We do know, however, what is best for our communities. We then elect Commissioners who hire people like town managers to get the job done. It's important that no contract reverse these roles.

On this blog it has been suggested that a Charter change is needed. The current Charter doesn't even address the role of a Town Manager. I'm afraid that the questions about the role of the Manager that have come up in the past will continue to come up until a Charter change resolves the issue.