Oddly, the Gargoyle Leader had a story about Home Rule today;
“This would be a more efficient government because you had one guy to answer to. That was the argument at the time,” said Bob Jamison, who has served on both the City Commission and City Council. “The mayor was the one that ran the show because he was the elected leader of the city.”
Problem is that under the current administration (or whatever you wanna call the clusterf**k) the department heads tell the mayor what to do and the mayor sidesteps the council.
“It was a new form of government and not as much power as the commission form. Not everyone knew how it operated,” she said.
That is the major problem with it, no checks and balances. Who is keeping the mayor accountable? Who is keeping the department heads accountable?
“Our new strong mayor form of government required the not-so-glorious but extremely important and complex task of reorganizing and synchronizing the former City Commission government of five kingdoms into a coordinated mayoral council,” Hanson said.
But this could have been accomplished under the old form of government. You don’t have to change the entire structure of city government to get a couple of departments to consolidate, you just change a couple of ordinances, have the council approve it, and it’s done.
But some residents, Jamison said, prefer the old system.
“I think both systems work,” he said. “No question about that.”
No, the old system worked better because citizens were better represented.
Problem is that under the current administration (or whatever you wanna call the clusterf**k) the department heads tell the mayor what to do and the mayor sidesteps the council.
OK l3wis, plaintiff guy, whoever. I’m just a guy who spent 30 years raising a family the best I could. Worked my ass off. Now I’ve retired early and am pondering THE question. Who the hell stole my country, (I think I’ve figured that one out…LOBBYISTS) my state,(the Rounds family) my city? (This one I’m still a little confused about)
Don’t any and all issues go thru the council, the mayor only figuring as a tiebreaker? That’s been my impression. Can you give me examples of the mayor being king like and doing whatever the hell he pleases by skirting the council?
No. The mayor has significant power when it comes to employees, contracts, etc. I have often said that the only thing the council votes on is beer licenses and monkey crappers.
Time to hire a professional local government manager (a.k.a. City Manager/Administrator) to facilitate everyday City operations. Make the Mayor a figurehead and use the $100,000 Chief of Staff salary to hire someone experienced in local government.
Home-Rule is oligarchy (rule by a few). The South Dakota Municipal League admits it. It becomes socialism when one (the mayor) realizes he has absolute power. It’s unconstitutional because citizens are not represented.
The mayor ignored the council regarding construction at the animal shelter. To this day, nobody knows what that has cost.
4 of 7 council members are bought through political donations and side income. It’s obvious via ‘usual bid process’ (city finance term). Home-Rule has been used to not pay ‘competitive bidders’. They’ll not bid. Bids go to ‘El Developer’ or ‘Councilor Shell Company’ at double and triple usual cost.
This mayor has been busy with Phillips to Nowhere, 10 ballfields in Iowa, and the swimming pool in a crack neighborhood. During good times, taxpayers paid for pet projects. Meanwhile, infrastructure collapses.
Councilors are undemocratic dysfunctional puppets. Citizen(s) versus city court cases are pending. Home-Rule is used for obstruction. Eventually, the state must act via constitutional violations premise. The city’s Home-Rule charter should be revoked and a declaratory judgment (a form of martial law) imposed.
The mayor has all the power and blame. Mumbling Munson is the worst mayor in Sioux Falls history. If Mt. Rushmore presidents were not carved in granite, they’d be looking around or over Sioux Falls toward democracy.
Just saying.
We don’t need a city administrator, we need an honest Mayor that has an interest in leading this city and working, and secondly we need a council that has the best interest of the citizens.
Hiring a professional local government manager separates the politics from the every day functionality of the city. It brings a level of experience and professionalism to the management of a City that a “bloke off the street Mayor” doesn’t have the ability to do. So many of the failures of the Munson era wouldn’t have happened with a professional manager in place. Great Cities like Austin TX, Phoenix AZ and San Jose, CA have had enormous success with managers at the helm. It’s short sighted and closed minded not to be open to the idea that this has the potential to work well in Sioux Falls.
l3wis please check out this ICMA orginazation website. http://icma.org/main/sc.asp These are trained professionals not politicians.
I agree, partially. With a city the size of SF, department head jobs are to do those things. Elected officials are important, especially on a municipal level for one reason; Fiscal restraint. Department heads can advise and recommend whatever, but it is the job of the council and mayor, to say, “can we do it cheaper, and what are our options?” I know you are a city admin, and in the city you work in (it’s size) it does make sense. But in SF we need elected officials to hold the purse. And I ain’t talking about the current council and mayor. They lost the purse 6-7 years ago. But trust me, I do agree with your concept. I still believe that there are some politicians out there that have our best interest at heart, and hopefully they will rise to the top.