Friday, September 28, 2007
New Website For Our Hometown
Look at this labor of love. The new website for Ridgely is up. Many thanks to Webmaster Arlene Hege and also Nancy Gearhart for all the work they are doing bringing Ridgley to the world. Go to: http://www.ridgelymd.org/
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Citizen Blogs
Blogs are filling a gap in reporting because the mainstream media (msm) is either too politically correct or too subservient to corporate commercial interests. What passes for news is often frivolous and misses the main points concerning serious issues. Recently, in our area the msm focused on the non-issue of a "leak" of the Town Manager Contract talks at a Commissioner's open and public workshop. I suppose this was because of its human interest factor. However, the more critical issue of our town electorate effectively losing their political rights was completely ignored.
Our problem here in Ridgely isn't unique. All over the country small towns are running into problems with the town manager form of government. The national trend toward concentration of power in one (often absentee) Town Manager's hands mirrors our own. Increasingly, it is local blogs that are bringing to light these problems. This blog certainly has and will continue to play its part in trying to keep our residents in control of their town.
Somehow those of us in similar situations need to come together and share information. This is, of course, where blogs and other technologies come in. Information can be bundled together by "tags" and put all of us with similar concerns in touch with each other. Hopefully, others from around the country faced with similar challenges preserving local democracy will start blogging with us. Together we will be able to take on a problem undermining our freedom in hundreds of towns across America.
Our problem here in Ridgely isn't unique. All over the country small towns are running into problems with the town manager form of government. The national trend toward concentration of power in one (often absentee) Town Manager's hands mirrors our own. Increasingly, it is local blogs that are bringing to light these problems. This blog certainly has and will continue to play its part in trying to keep our residents in control of their town.
Somehow those of us in similar situations need to come together and share information. This is, of course, where blogs and other technologies come in. Information can be bundled together by "tags" and put all of us with similar concerns in touch with each other. Hopefully, others from around the country faced with similar challenges preserving local democracy will start blogging with us. Together we will be able to take on a problem undermining our freedom in hundreds of towns across America.
Friday, September 21, 2007
The Public's Right To Know
The contract problem has a new twist. A majority of the Commissioners now agree that the negotiations pertaining to the Town Manager's contract should be carried on during executive session. This means that we the public can't attend. Had this happened in the first place many of you in town would not even know something was wrong. Why the change all of a sudden?
Executive sessions are the place to discuss personnel problems and litigation before the town. This contract is not the kind of personnel matter that executive sessions are usually used for. Usually they're for accusations of wrongdoing or questions about job performance (which haven't been on the table). This, however, is about a contract that could RADICALLY CHANGE how our town is governed. It shouldn't be viewed like union/employer contract negotiations. It's a discussion that should be public considering this particular contract's potential impact on our way of life.
It's not even clear that the public would have a decent amount of time to review what is drawn up in an executive session before any public vote. AT MINIMUM THE PUBLIC SHOULD HAVE AN ENTIRE MONTH TO REVIEW WHAT IS TO BE VOTED ON. There is no way in the heat of the moment at a town meeting that any proposed contract can be properly reviewed and compared with the contract that came before.
Contact your Commissioners and let them know how you feel. Such an important issue needs to be kept in a public forum all steps of the way.
Executive sessions are the place to discuss personnel problems and litigation before the town. This contract is not the kind of personnel matter that executive sessions are usually used for. Usually they're for accusations of wrongdoing or questions about job performance (which haven't been on the table). This, however, is about a contract that could RADICALLY CHANGE how our town is governed. It shouldn't be viewed like union/employer contract negotiations. It's a discussion that should be public considering this particular contract's potential impact on our way of life.
It's not even clear that the public would have a decent amount of time to review what is drawn up in an executive session before any public vote. AT MINIMUM THE PUBLIC SHOULD HAVE AN ENTIRE MONTH TO REVIEW WHAT IS TO BE VOTED ON. There is no way in the heat of the moment at a town meeting that any proposed contract can be properly reviewed and compared with the contract that came before.
Contact your Commissioners and let them know how you feel. Such an important issue needs to be kept in a public forum all steps of the way.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Newspapers, Blogs, Leaks And The Real Story
"Eyeonridgely" is right with the comment below (Contract Controversy Continued - 9/14 post) that the stories in the papers miss the main point. First, this isn't about a "leak" because there wasn't one. This blog brought to light what had been previously presented at the Commissioners' public workshop. This isn't called "leaking" but publicity. Publicity has, in this case, stopped what was about to quietly be passed. We are not out of the woods yet but heading in a better direction.
The main issue that the paper missed is that the proposed contract turns the town Charter on its head by putting the unelected and non-resident Town Manager in a stronger position than our elected and resident Commissioners. They are currently his boss and that arrangement should not change. The issues of the car and residency are important and clearly have widespread support. However, in terms of potential damage to the town, ignoring the Charter and the ordinance which created the position of Town Manager would inflict far more damage on Ridgely.
The main issue that the paper missed is that the proposed contract turns the town Charter on its head by putting the unelected and non-resident Town Manager in a stronger position than our elected and resident Commissioners. They are currently his boss and that arrangement should not change. The issues of the car and residency are important and clearly have widespread support. However, in terms of potential damage to the town, ignoring the Charter and the ordinance which created the position of Town Manager would inflict far more damage on Ridgely.
Friday, September 14, 2007
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.
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.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
The Ridgely Town Manager's Role Defined
With the talks about the proposed contract going on, it's important to understand the role of the Commissioners and the Town Manager. Whatever contract is finally considered it must be in accordance with Ridgely law. I've pasted our town law on this below.
ARTICLE I
Manager
[Adopted 2-2-1998 by Ordinance No. 152]
37-1. Position created
The Commissioners of Ridgely hereby create the position of Town Manager and shall appoint an individual with a sincere interest in municipal government administration, who shall serve at the pleasure of the Commissioners.
37-2. Powers and duties
The Town Manager shall have such duties as shall be assigned to him or her by the Commissioners by resolution.
37-3. Compensation
The Town Manager shall be compensated for the performance of his or her duties in an amount to be fixed by the Commissioners by resolution.
ARTICLE I
Manager
[Adopted 2-2-1998 by Ordinance No. 152]
37-1. Position created
The Commissioners of Ridgely hereby create the position of Town Manager and shall appoint an individual with a sincere interest in municipal government administration, who shall serve at the pleasure of the Commissioners.
37-2. Powers and duties
The Town Manager shall have such duties as shall be assigned to him or her by the Commissioners by resolution.
37-3. Compensation
The Town Manager shall be compensated for the performance of his or her duties in an amount to be fixed by the Commissioners by resolution.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Have Your Say About Your Town
Stop a very bad idea from becoming law in our town. Have your say on this blog about the proposed town manager's contract. (First, let me explain. This blog started as my work related blog on new web based 2.0 technologies. That program is now done and for the time being this blog will become a forum for the people of Ridgely.) See the blog entry below titled "Save Our Small Town Democracy". Any view is welcome but avoid profanity, personal attacks or anonymous blogging. In order to "blog", click on "comments" and then sign up with your email. Invent a password and then "blog" away. People need to talk about where our community is going.
Save Our Small Town Democracy
Increasingly the average citizen has less and less to say about the fate of their local community. Forces of economic globalization, political correctness and the growth of federal and state bureaucracies, take away more and more of the decision making ability from local citizens and their elected representatives. This trend is bad enough but becomes maddening if the citizens themselves seem more than happy to give up what little remains of their capacity for self government.
Here in Ridgely the commissioners are considering a proposed contract for the town manager that will cede much of their authority as our elected representatives to the unelected and non-resident town manager. It's a 5 year contract that makes it impossible for the commissioners to remove the town manager without buying out what remains of his contract. Such a buyout could bankrupt Ridgely. In the event the commissioners and town manager don't agree over policy, all the commissioners could do is refuse to fund whatever it is they don't want. Gridlock could be the order of business until the contract expires and a new town manager can be brought in to do their biding.
Let me say that I like our town manager and have worked with him in my position as chairman of our planning and zoning commission. I have no evidence that he is about to acquire the New London, Connecticut disease and start eminent domain proceedings against middle class housing blocks in order to redevelop those blocks into tax revenue rich upscale mansions. However, nice guy or not, no one in American government at any level deserves unchecked power. Our system of government is not built on blind trust. It's built on checks and balances to power. America has prospered throughout its history because of the institutional bulwarks that prevent too much power from being concentrated into too few hands. We are a government of "laws and not men". The proposed contract doesn't allow our elected commissioners to either "check" or "balance" the town manager and virtually puts our town government in the hands of one man.
Ironically, the whole contract issue has come up because the town manager has not relocated to Ridgely as he agreed to and is required by his current contract. The provision requiring Ridgely residency was meant to make the town manager a stakeholder in the community for which he is making so many decisions. Yet, the proposed contract is actually rewarding the town manager for not living up to his current contract.
At this point the contract is only a proposal. There has been no vote. The Commissioners haven't had more than a public discussion of some of it. I know they have questions too. Contact them and make a point of attending their meetings. They need to know that you don't agree with what has been proposed. What has been proposed should never see the light of day or be allowed to be enacted. The next meeting is Monday, September 10th, 7:00 at Town Hall.
Here in Ridgely the commissioners are considering a proposed contract for the town manager that will cede much of their authority as our elected representatives to the unelected and non-resident town manager. It's a 5 year contract that makes it impossible for the commissioners to remove the town manager without buying out what remains of his contract. Such a buyout could bankrupt Ridgely. In the event the commissioners and town manager don't agree over policy, all the commissioners could do is refuse to fund whatever it is they don't want. Gridlock could be the order of business until the contract expires and a new town manager can be brought in to do their biding.
Let me say that I like our town manager and have worked with him in my position as chairman of our planning and zoning commission. I have no evidence that he is about to acquire the New London, Connecticut disease and start eminent domain proceedings against middle class housing blocks in order to redevelop those blocks into tax revenue rich upscale mansions. However, nice guy or not, no one in American government at any level deserves unchecked power. Our system of government is not built on blind trust. It's built on checks and balances to power. America has prospered throughout its history because of the institutional bulwarks that prevent too much power from being concentrated into too few hands. We are a government of "laws and not men". The proposed contract doesn't allow our elected commissioners to either "check" or "balance" the town manager and virtually puts our town government in the hands of one man.
Ironically, the whole contract issue has come up because the town manager has not relocated to Ridgely as he agreed to and is required by his current contract. The provision requiring Ridgely residency was meant to make the town manager a stakeholder in the community for which he is making so many decisions. Yet, the proposed contract is actually rewarding the town manager for not living up to his current contract.
At this point the contract is only a proposal. There has been no vote. The Commissioners haven't had more than a public discussion of some of it. I know they have questions too. Contact them and make a point of attending their meetings. They need to know that you don't agree with what has been proposed. What has been proposed should never see the light of day or be allowed to be enacted. The next meeting is Monday, September 10th, 7:00 at Town Hall.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
