I've been away for a few days hence no blogging. But I'm back.
Well, the poll results were interesting. I never would have pegged Restructure City Govt. as the second most pressing issue facing the Council. To James Shanley's point, it's an issue the council can actually address directly, unlike the schools, but I would put senior center or Karp higher on the list.
I voted for schools. Shanley asked what details folks like me had in mind when we voted for schools since they aren't under the council's purview. Well, here's what I was thinking.
First, it'd be nice to find some money to address the pressing issues facing the schools. I recognize this is a mean feat at this time in the city. I also recognize the mayor is the one with access to the books.
So, if it isn't in the council's power to find a financial remedy, I'd ask that city councillors go as far as they can to encourage two things. First, civility between those seeking the override and those opposing it. I'm not casting aspersions upon either side in last year's election.
To do this I'd hope the council gets engaged earlier in the decision-making process facing the school committee, with the goal being that override request is anticipated or even expected long before the actual paperwork is filed.
I suspect the mechanisms are in place for this to happen.
Second, I was disappointed the early discussion about last year's override centered around the cost of the election.
I couldn't believe this. The schools--the single largest and most visible department in the city--faced a fiscal emergency, and the early debate centered upon the timing of their cry for help.
I know the City Council isn't a rubber stamp, but the voters had every right to a direct voice on this particular issue, yea or nay. And I still maintain that any progress and cooperation we're seeing on school issues today wouldn't exist if the council opted not to hold the election over a $17,000 price tag.
It was money well spent in my mind (and if I recall correctly the schools actually paid the bill.)
2 comments:
Tom,
I think one of the reasons that "restructure city government" received such a large share of the vote was because it covers such a broad category. I think some people took it to mean reorganize, as in 4-year mayor, city manager, etc - while some may have taken it to mean restructure as in reform. We have structural budget issues that need to be addressed irrespective of the form of government.
A restructuring of pensions and benefits with employees, regionalizing some functions like the trash proposal floating around,etc. Business-like attention to details and prioritization of every function.
Post a Comment