I'm not even going to mention the parts I disagree with (oh, OK "the last city manager's buyout clause was a bit excessive": ya think?). That the Killeen Daily Advertiser grew up enough to print today's editorial is an event I've long wished for. I congratulate the editorial staff whole-heartedly.
The last three paragraphs of the piece (it's 1/5 of the page) are the heart of the argument. I think it's fair use to extract them here:
....Why didn't the city solicit opinions on promoting Morrison before moving ahead with the vote?
If public input is so important, why didn't the city solicit opinions on promoting Morrison before moving ahead with the the vote?
Indeed, if the council thinks enough of Killeen's residents to seek their input on the terms and conditions of an important city contract, shouldn't it also give them a say on who is offered that contract in the first place?I've wondered the same thing. Yesterday morning, Ralph Cossey, one of the candidates in last month's city council election, posted much the same sentiment.
Here's advice for Jared Foster and the other members of the ad-hoc committee for the City Manager contract: Go slow. Not only should you collect input from citizens, you should circulate it and make it the subject of public discussion. Your job is not only to choose a competent city manager, but to convince the people in this town that you know what you are doing. The faster you go, and with the less public discussion, the harder it will be to carry the second point.
You are right. So far it appears that the city manager is driving the cart rather than the city council. That was one of the big questions in the recall public hearing. Not all items need to be rushed, especially the contract for the city manager. This decision should be made after the budget is presented to them and approved. It will demonstrate to the council if the city staff is willing to negotiate the line items in public.
ReplyDelete