Your Opinion of a Strong Mayor

[columbiasooner]

I haven't decided my stance on the issue but the more I learn the facts I'm leaning towards a strong mayor. At least that way I feel that I have some voice if they suck.

Check my posts from the past, I have said all along, this is about "Accountability to the Voters". The fact that a City Manager is and fired by a super majority of the City Council and that a City Manager has never been fired in the history of Dallas speaks volumes. Mayors can get voted out of office every 4 years.

[trolleygirl]

Why are they going to get interested in projects out of their districts? There is absolutely NOTHING that forces their hands. They don't abide by the charter anyway, from all I have heard, because the City Manager wouldn't do their jobs.

Let the Mayor be the "city manager" and you have the system on ballot. Now you have what is on ballet. This isn't Mayor Daley power we are talking about where he runs even the Illinois state governmnet and thus the reason for recent state laws. The Dallas mayor is still what they are but with the City manager job too.

They don't have to have their hands forced to be active in other parts of te city. Southern sector revitalization is the Number One Priority at City Hall, yet my council member- who represents South Dallas and Fair Park- expressed frustrations to me last night that it's mostly lip service. I think it's fear of being labeled a racist. At my neighborhood meeting last night, he scratched the surface talking about schools and just under that was an explosion of angst. It was made very clear to me last by the residents in my own community that we still have a long, long way to go to bridge that gap.

[trolleygirl]

Check my posts from the past, I have said all along, this is about "Accountability to the Voters". The fact that a City Manager is and fired by a super majority of the City Council and that a City Manager has never been fired in the history of Dallas speaks volumes. Mayors can get voted out of office every 4 years.

Well I think that you need a stable manager. You shouldn't have to feel the need to vote your manager out of office every four years. If that's the case then we've got bigger problems in this city.

[columbiasooner]

They don't have to have their hands forced to be active in other parts of te city. Southern sector revitalization is the Number One Priority at City Hall, yet my council member- who represents South Dallas and Fair Park- expressed frustrations to me last night that it's mostly lip service. I think it's fear of being labeled a racist. At my neighborhood meeting last night, he scratched the surface talking about schools and just under that was an explosion of angst. It was made very clear to me last by the residents in my own community that we still have a long, long way to go to bridge that gap.

Speak the word TG!!!! I agree 100%.

[columbiasooner]

Well I think that you need a stable manager. You shouldn't have to feel the need to vote your manager out of office every four years. If that's the case then we've got bigger problems in this city.

A stable manager = Bureaucrat

We need a city wide elected official that has more power than just a single vote.

[tamtagon]

I think the current charter is brilliant with the intent to distance the primary bureaucrat from the election process, attempting to free the position from dibilitating political power struggles. The charter fail, in my opinion, leaving the city manager generally unaccountable through council supervision. The mayor's progress report on the performance of the city manager should have more impact than the council's.

Ideally, the city manager will hold that position for a long time. This is the position which should see that council & mayor directives are implemented without a hitch. As soon as the council and/or mayor start micro-managing processes and attempt to word decision/regulations/proclimations to manipulate the implementation, the city manager position is reduced to a ridiculous political toy only able to respond to power struggles.

[columbiasooner]

The system is inherently flawed and needs to be changed.

[Mballar]

The system is inherently flawed and needs to be changed.

but not with the current ballot measure.

[St-T]

but not with the current ballot measure.

My biggest fear is that this will fail and NOTHING will change. I wish we had more options.

[Mballar]

My biggest fear is that this will fail and NOTHING will change. I wish we had more options.

^my sentiments exactly. Issues like this are rarely ever black and white. The problem is that we should have had this dialogue prior to the collection of any petition signatures. Then, some consensus could have been built citywide regarding what is important to all Dallas Voters. But now what we have is Blackwood's "all or nothing" proposal that, as you aptly point out, risks the opportunity for necessary changes to be made in the furure, if that proposal is rejected by the voters.

[tamtagon]

Great points TG. I know you are very active down at City Hall and commend you on a great job.

We are fortunate that trolleygirl shares her points of view; she's one current leader of neighborhood government I hope to see rise to prominence at Dallas City Hall. Thanks, and dont forget about us when you're a Metroplex bigshot (especially, dont forget about me).

But giving credit where it's due, we are also fortunate that R. Mbala shares his points of view. With an entirely different professional relationship to municipal government from trolleygirl, his perspective really adds some depth to these conversations. Thanks. I dont know if you can address this question, but I've wondered - without being certain to which political issues your career directs your efforts, how much does your work shape your personal opinion regarding the Strong Mayor topic?

columbiasooner - I certainly appreciate how well you're able draw out more detailed explinations from our known and acknowledged political activists. Frankly, I avoid the detail of the topic because I'm scared they would give me a headache if I tried to really understand what's going on. The back-and-forth covnversation here makes my head spin a little. All I can do is occasionally spout off opinions.

[St-T]

Does Laura Miller's Strong Mayor group have a website yet??

[trolleygirl]

^my sentiments exactly. Issues like this are rarely ever black and white. The problem is that we should have had this dialogue prior to the collection of any petition signatures. Then, some consensus could have been built citywide regarding what is important to all Dallas Voters. But now what we have is Blackwood's "all or nothing" proposal that, as you aptly point out, risks the opportunity for necessary changes to be made in the furure, if that proposal is rejected by the voters.

I said a long time ago that Laura Miller should help fight BathAnn's proposal and then come back later and negotiate her own version, like later in the Winter or even Juan 2006. That way, we'll have at least four new council members to term limits (districts 2,14,11, and 12) and pssobily one new council members if Dwaine Caraway defeats incumbent Thornton Reese. So four newbies, possibly five on the council in May. Certainly gives an fresh opportunity for Miller to build new consensus. Don Hill- at one point- was willing to have a frank discussion about the change. He pretty much leads the other black council members in terms of consnsus building. Where Laura Miller fails to get along with Chaney and Reese and Fantroy, Hill succeeds. Her strategy should ahev to work to defeat this one and even she herself admits that's it's not what she likes but it's "better than nothing". She cannot see beyond her own nose. She would gain trust from council members and it would give her opportunity to work on consensus with new council members and then she can negitiate a new deal with a new council, and one that possibly has gained afew bars of trust for her to come back with a nicer version of what's currently on the ballot.

Right now, she is presidning dangerously over a council whose veiws are totally out of step with hers. What happens if this thing passes in May? This proves to me that she cannot lead or buikd consensus- she doesn't even try. And I think she's making a terrible mistake.

[St-T]

Has there been any polling to see how the public is leaning?

[columbiasooner]

The public has had a say in the process, by way of the City Charter Commission and nothing was accomplished. I don't care what you say there is no way that the sitting minority members on the City Council would agree to any form of a "strong mayor" because of their apathy towards Laura Miller. Ms. Blackwood decided that she wasn't going to stand around and wait for someone else to do something. As I have said before. this is the weakest form of "strong mayor" out of all the top 10 cities.

The only data I have seen as far as polls is the DMN poll which said it was 2-1 in favor. Take that for what it is.

[St-T]

^Thanks, columbia... I'm really not surprised that it's 2-1 in favor. I think the general public is so sick, embarrassed and annoyed with the city council that they're willing to do anything.

[trolleygirl]

[QUOTE=columbiasooner]The public has had a say in the process, by way of the City Charter Commission and nothing was accomplished. I don't care what you say there is now way that the sitting minority members on the City Council would agree to any form of a "strong mayor" because of their apathy towards Laura Miller. QUOTE]

Well I'm not sure how many current council members that you've been talking to but I've got a relationship with most of them. And guess what? They all agree that some form of change is needed but aren't sure what exactly that change should be. Were you on the charter commission? I was asked to serve but declined, and there were only three specific questions being discussed during that time. A new charter replacing the city manager wasn't on the table back then.

Yeah the thing about democracy is that it's also painful at times.

And don't forget- THERE WILL BE A NEW COUNCIL IN MAY> AT LEAST FOUR- POSSIBLY FIVE- NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS IN MAY.

[columbiasooner]

Why wasn't it on the table? Because the City Council and the "mini council" commissions aren't too big into forward thinking. That's why it takes someone with some backbone to go out there and decide that something needs to be done. Accountability to the Voter is the key to turning this sucker around.

[js]

Voter Accountability
what does that mean?

hey hey it said Voter Accountability a minute ago. what gives all I wanted was an answer now you changed it to accountability to the voter which makes more sense.

[mikedsjr]

Sounds like to me someone promoting fascism.

[warlock55]

The system is inherently flawed and needs to be changed.

The system is used in half the cities in the U.S. and has worked successfully for almost a hundred years.

As for bureaucrats...well if I wasn't so tired from being sick with a cold I'd launch into a passionate defense of those "evil" bureaucrats, who day after day work for the public good and suffer low pay and constant abuse for it. But yeah, I'm too sick and tired...*falls asleep*





*wakes up*
...Oh yeah, I'm still waiting to hear why a majority council vote to remove the city manager isn't voter accountability, but it's ok for all other policy decisions in the city to be made the exact same way.

[columbiasooner]

The system is used in half the cities in the U.S. and has worked successfully for almost a hundred years.

As for bureaucrats...well if I wasn't so tired from being sick with a cold I'd launch into a passionate defense of those "evil" bureaucrats, who day after day work for the public good and suffer low pay and constant abuse for it. But yeah, I'm too sick and tired...*falls asleep*

*wakes up*
...Oh yeah, I'm still waiting to hear why a majority council vote to remove the city manager isn't voter accountability, but it's ok for all other policy decisions in the city to be made the exact same way.

Sorry you are sick.
Not half the cities the size of Dallas.
A city manager is removed by a super majority (11 out of 15 votes) of the city council. This has never happened. Policy decisions are made by a simple majority.

[warlock55]

Sorry you are sick. Not half the cities the size of Dallas. A city manager is removed by 11 out of 15 votes on the city council. This has never happened. Policy decisions are made by a simple majority.

So would you be satisfied with a simple majority being able to fire the city manager, since that's the baseline?

[columbiasooner]

So would you be satisfied with a simple majority being able to fire the city manager, since that's the baseline?

No, I want a citywide elected official running the city.

[Mballar]

No, I want a citywide elected official running the city.

Exactly. . .you want what you want. You don't appear to want to discuss any other alternatives to address your stated problem with "Accountability to the voters." It is obvious that you have a one-track mind when it comes to the discussion of "council-manager" vs. "council-mayor" systems of government. You feel that there is only one way to address the discussion (your way). . .and that's to support the Blackwood proposal. That's fine. However, don't make misleading and convoluted arguments that disrupt the rest of us who may actually want to discuss ALL of the possible options that may be available to us. Your point has been made, and we understand and respect your position.

[columbiasooner]

I answered his question directly and I have not made any misleading statements. Post 509 and 514 deal with the accountability to the voter.

[warlock55]

No, I want a citywide elected official running the city.

I understand that, but what I want to know is whether or not having a city manager appointed by a majority council vote would constitute sufficient voter accountability for you.

[St-T]

^I have my doubts because it's back to the city council.

[gc]

This thread reminds me of an 80's song by RATT --> "Round and Round"

[St-T]

^No joke... it's the same thing over and over....

[columbiasooner]

^I have my doubts because it's back to the city council.

I agree, this city has had enough watered-down solutions. It's time for a real change. And the good news is, WE get to decide.

[JBB]

It reminds me of a lot of debates in message forums I read about the Presidential election. Each size has no chance whatsoever of changing the other's mind, but they're hell bent on proving that they're right by repeating themselves over and over. I'm not saying that discussion should stop or that there aren't people out there who are undecided, but it hasn't gotten rather redundant.

[js]

I do not like to ask questions like the one I am going to ask but I am curious.

columbiasooner do you have any connection with anything that has to do with the strong mayor proposal? You have posted a total of 72 times all in only this thread. So to some extent you have more of an interest in this subject than any other person on this forum.

[trolleygirl]

Why wasn't it on the table? Because the City Council and the "mini council" commissions aren't too big into forward thinking. That's why it takes someone with some backbone to go out there and decide that something needs to be done. Accountability to the Voter is the key to turning this sucker around.

But that's the whole point of why I believe this system does work in a fair and democratic process. And yes sometimes it's painful and frustrating and long and tedious. To apponit members of each district to various commissions and special commissions is fair and democratic. To have frank diologue and to discuss matters of imprortance and to find resolution and consensus is fair and democratic.

Let me explain it this way: the Environmental Health Commission, a commission on which I serve, reccommended to the HEHS committee that restaurants install seperate ventilation systems for smokers and non-smokers. Well, the leader with the "backbone" rejected the fair and democratic process with which the commission found resolution and decided that the agenda should be about banning smoking in all restuarants. Period. And that was what was voted on by the council- smoking or no- not seperate ventilation systems, it wasn't on the agenda. Well, so what's the point in serving on a commission- or the council for that matter- if the process by which consensus occurs is simply thrown out the window by one individual with a so-called "backbone"?

[warlock55]

^I have my doubts because it's back to the city council.

The point I'm making is that the council currently decides all policy issues for the city by majority vote and nobody cites that as a failure of voter accountability.

I'm just trying to understand columbiasooner's position on voter accountability.

[columbiasooner]

I am just very interested in this topic. I have lived in Dallas for 10 years and I don't want Dallas to miss out on this opportunity. I am also an active poster on Oklahoma Sooner Boards even though I didn't go to school there. Some topics just get me riled up.

I read other threads but haven't posted as of yet.

[columbiasooner]

Well, the leader with the "backbone" rejected the fair and democratic process with which the commission found resolution and decided that the agenda should be about banning smoking in all restuarants. Period. And that was what was voted on by the council- smoking or no- not seperate ventilation systems, it wasn't on the agenda. Well, so what's the point in serving on a commission- or the council for that matter- if the process by which consensus occurs is simply thrown out the window by one individual with a so-called "backbone"?

I didn't imply I think Laura Miller has "backbone".

In this strong-mayor form of government the city council will continue to govern by setting policy and making laws and ordinances.

[columbiasooner]

The point I'm making is that the council currently decides all policy issues for the city by majority vote and nobody cites that as a failure of voter accountability.

I'm just trying to understand columbiasooner's position on voter accountability.

I believe that the City Council should stick with setting policy and governing and the voters should make the decision on who should lead and operate the city.

[js]

I believe that the City Council should stick with setting policy and governing and the voters should make the decision on who should lead and operate the city.

So who votes for our current council members and mayor if not dallas voters?

[columbiasooner]

So who votes for our current council members and mayor if not dallas voters?

The Dallas voters do not vote for the person who currently runs the city.

[js]

The Dallas voters do not vote for the person who currently runs the city.

It was my understanding that the city council & Mayor hire and fire the city manager. So the City Manager does not run the city the city council & Mayor do. Because the City Manager has to answer to the council & mayor.

So it is up to Dallas voters to elect or vote for who runs the city right.

http://www.dallascityhall.com/dallas...ibilities.html

[mikedsjr]

^No joke... it's the same thing over and over....

Its the same thing over and over and over.....
but its worded differently....
its the redundant thread of redundancy
the redundant thread of redundancccccyyyyyyy.

Its the same thread over and over and over...
Its the same thread over and over and over...
Its the same thread over and over and over...
Its the same thread over and over and over...
Its the same thread over and over and over...

[columbiasooner]

It was my understanding that the city council & Mayor hire and fire the city manager. So the City Manager does not run the city the city council & Mayor do. Because the City Manager has to answer to the council & mayor.

So it is up to Dallas voters to elect or vote for who runs the city right.

http://www.dallascityhall.com/dallas...ibilities.html

True, but a City Manager has never been fired in Dallas. The City Manager has to keep 5 people happy and she keeps her job.

[trolleygirl]

I didn't imply I think Laura Miller has "backbone".

In this strong-mayor form of government the city council will continue to govern by setting policy and making laws and ordinances.

I know that you didn't imply that, but think about how this system is currently working. I just gave you a real-life scenario of how it is that commissions are formed and how they discuss matters. Maybe the charter review commission didn't come out in favor of a strong mayor because it was not set forth to discuss all the minutea of the charter. It was devised by the mayor only months after she had been elected and was not very well thought-out when it was put together. But on the other hand, a standing commission reccomended a change and was subverted by the current mayor. This tells me that there is nothing wrong with the system as it is. The Mayor had the power to reject our commission's findings and put whatever on the agenda and she did and it was voted on. And that really did happen and it's not a "what if" and these things happen every day at City Hall.

Most citizens are not involved on that level so they do not understand just exactly how it all works. And when they go to voite in May, I believe that they will not be prepared to ask critical questions. Like you, all they see is "system not working, must have change, Mayor is for it" and vote only for those reasons.

Well, what's on the balllot isn't the idea of a change, it's not some sort of gradual discussion of change, it's the way the propsal is written now and I have some serious concerns about it (see post #628 for details). The people who will go and voite in favor of it without ever having fully understand it are likely the same people who don't go their neighborhood association meetings and don't get involved in budget or CDBG or town hall meetings and don't voice an opinion about anything at all other than to call their council person and complain that their trash didn't get picked up on time and this city sucks becuase there's trash and grafitti. And when it's over, those same people will go back to their homes and complain about the same things and never once look in the mirror to realize that the reason is because they are not willing to take a stand on something before it meakes it to a ballot.

One thing I can at least commend BathAnn for doing is for getting off her couch and doing something. Over a million people in this city can't even do that. And you want to know something else? If this ballot passes, people will call her to complain about potholes in the street, regardless. People are lazy and they want an easy fix for complex issues, everything from school finance to drugs to the homeless to mental health to prayers in the schools to abortion to the death penalty and so on, but they are unwilling to actually do anything but yell about the fact that stuff needs to be fixed.

We know this city has problems, but before we charge on with a measure such as this one, let's be rational. But since we're lazy and want the easy way, we won't be rational. And I will never forgiive BethAnn for not having the forsight to realize just what exactly she has done.

[JBB]

True, but a City Manager has never been fired in Dallas. The City Manager has to keep 5 people happy and she keeps her job.

And those 5 council members have to keep their constituents happy. Sounds like some level of accountability to me.

[trolleygirl]

And those 5 council members have to keep their constituents happy. Sounds like some level of accountability to me.

Actually it's eight. I don't know why he keeps insisting on 5. When the council votes on something, there has to be at least eight votes. If the council wanted to fire the city manager, there would have to be at least eight votes, not five.

[JBB]

Maybe he's saying 5 because that's the votes needed to spoil the majority needed?

[columbiasooner]

Actually it's eight. I don't know why he keeps insisting on 5. When the council votes on something, there has to be at least eight votes. If the council wanted to fire the city manager, there would have to be at least eight votes, not five.

The Charter specifically states that the city manager will be removed by a 2/3's vote. Chapter VI Section 1 of the Dallas City Charter.

[js]

so he would have to keep 6 people happy then

[JSteffen]

This has been a very heated issue. I think that this is going to be the only oportunity for change. I am going to take it, and I believe the rest of the city will as well. The curent system leaves everyone pointing fingers, and bickering. The new one will leave us with only one person to point the finger at, with a few people to oversee it. Everyone has a vision for Dallas, we need to follow one that is elected by the majority of voters.