Just What is "The People's Bussiness"?

I just caught up on a few days of Bernie O’Hare’s Lehigh Valley Ramblings blog, and what I read gave me the motivation to type this post.

Bernie’s post titled Norco Council Does Its Best to Discourage Citizen Volunteers was all about an issue we are in the midst of here at the city level. Apparently, there was some debate surrounding the approval of people for County authorities, boards, and commissions (ABCs). According to Bernie’s report, two Councilpersons (Charles Dertinger and Diane Neiper) expressed concerns over having to confirm candidates in the manner that they were asked. At the County Council, members are given resumes and the candidates seeking approval are present on induction night.

NOTE: Bernie also mentioned the Council's poor treatment of the appointees. He pointed out that the appointees remained standing as the Council members debated their issues with no apparent regard to the appointees presence or condition. I agree whole-heartedly with Bernie's assessment that poor treatment like that is very discouraging to anyone seeking to voluteer their civic services. (added 02/26/08)

Interestingly, Bernie and I (both huge proponents of open government) do not seem to agree on the level of vetting necessary for (re)appointments to ABCs. O’Hare takes the stand that, “It’s hard enough to get volunteers” and that the posts are “thankless”. Those reasons just happen to be the exact rebuttals we (Bad Apple and me) get any time we advocate for in-person interviews and confirmations of ABC candidates. Last week Councilwoman Elinor Warner was quoted in the Express-Times saying that she does not want to see the process become a “Supreme Court confirmation”.

I disagree with all of those statements. Saying that it is difficult to find candidates for ABCs should not be allowed to end the argument. That rhetoric should not reduce us to the lowest common denominator—accepting whatever names are presented by the administration. First, the solution does not accurately address the problem; it by-passes the problem. A true solution would be geared towards increasing the willingness to participate and increasing the candidate pool. It stands to reason that if we are not getting competition for positions, then we may not be getting the best potential. We need to explore some different approaches to fix this inequity. It is our position that the number one reason for the City’s low level of interest is communication. The methods used to recruit people for ABC positions are underwhelming and lack imagination. We DO NOT and HAVE NOT issued press releases; We DO NOT and HAVE NOT posted vacancies on the web; We DO NOT and HAVE NOT listed vacancies in the Bugler; and most importantly we DO NOT and HAVE NOT publicized what our ABCs do or need.

Labeling civic service (not to be confused with hired civil service) as “thankless” is, in itself, discouraging; and communicates a message that is in direct opposition with the promotion of ABC service.

At best, the reasons are crutches. At the very worst, the reasons serve as gatekeepers; the basis to maintain certain levels of status quo. We have seen over and over again the damage that a King’s reign over appointments can result in. Last year former Senator John Edwards said he wanted to propose what he called "Brownie's Law" requiring that “qualified people, not political hacks, lead key federal agencies” (http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN2721144820070828). We can look a lot closer than New Orleans for examples of appointment discretion gone astray due to the lack of controls that protect the people (“the people being the citizenry not the appointees). Recently we’ve been in the midst of issues with the Easton Housing Authority (junket abuse, HOPE VI housing ratios, and attendance) and the Easton Parking Authority (Riverwalk debt) that center on the qualifications, conduct, and judgment of members. The Mayor himself sites the Zoning Board’s tendency to make decisions that are not in-line with the City’s strategic plans when he discusses the need for ABC improvements.

In October 2007, Mayoral Candidate Panto was asked, “how can we better ensure that the nominated appointees [to ABCs] are qualified and representative of the needs of taxpaying residents?” He answered, “…we will advertise openings by all means possible to recruit as many applicants as possible. We will interview each candidate to review their commitment to the position and the skill set they bring to the appointment. When a decision is made the individual’s name will be submitted to City Council for their approval.”

Then Council Candidate El Warner’s answer to the very same question sums up our viewpoint well. She answered, “…council needs to ensure that openings on the ABCs are somehow advertised – on the city website, in the Bugler, etc. – so that all interested residents have a chance to come forward. Rather than just passing a name onto council for approval, the mayor should be asked to also pass along a list of qualifications, and a letter of interest from the candidate. If necessary, council should also meet with the candidate for a discussion. Strengthening this process should not “scare” away interested citizens, but instead help strengthen the membership of these ABCs.”

And as a Council Candidate Roger Ruggles also states in his response that, “council needs to interview each candidate and identify their expectation of the individual being nominated for that position.” (http://eastonundressed.blogspot.com/2007/10/candidate-question-8-authorities-boards.html)

The first part of that question addresses the importance of the twenty plus ABCs, and it points out the fact that they are “sanctioned city government subdivisions”. The million dollar Parking Authority tab, the two HOPE VI denials (with board conduct sited in the denial correspondence), and the large number of converted single-family homes are definitive proof of how important ABC positions are. We can ill afford to further offend every other Eastonian by trying to avoid offending a person asking to be responsible for our City’s well being. We have the right assess anyone who believes that they are deserving of such public trust.

How can we be assured that every citizen is given proper consideration if we are only presented with the successful applicants? There needs to be a method in place that shows the public exactly how many interested parties apply and proves that each applicant is given the same due diligence. The process of voting for the names presented at Council actually brings appointees closer to being like members of the Supreme Court, because the practice makes it easy for people to be reapproved (with the tiniest of scrutiny) for life.

Some people have expressed concerns over how “open” municipal government should truly be. There are concerns that “opening” means taking control away from the elected officials. It doesn’t. Informing the people and allowing the people comment does not take away the electorate’s responsibility to decide. The politicians will still have to decide; responsibly or otherwise.

Thanks for the text box Bernie!!!

Candidate Question #4 Strategic Planning

Question #4 Strategic Planning

In recent years we have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on consultants resulting in a sizable stack of reports and critiques, while not resulting in any type of strategic plan. Propose a method to develop a strategic plan in more economical, more comprehensive, less fractured, and less consultant dependent way.

Simply put, operating without a strategic master plan in turbulent times commits our city to reactive rather than proactive leadership. Our team has a strategic plan developed with the collaboration of residents, business leaders, civic, religious and community groups over the last six months. This plan will be a start for our administration. It will be a working document that all departments refer to on a daily basis. The plan is flexible to meet the changing needs of our community. We will discuss the plan at each and every quarterly Town Meeting with a written report on the status of each goal and initiative.

We do not need consultants during these difficult times. We need a solid plan based on public input identifying the basics that we need to concentrate on in the next four years. It is time to get our own house in order.

There will be times when a technical consultant may be needed for specific tasks relating to an issue that requires an expertise in certain areas for a specific task. However, it is my sincere belief that a Blue Ribbon Task Force comprised of local and area individuals with a vested interest in our community could have produced the $100,000 Early Intervention Plan that the city commissioned three years ago.

We will take a bottoms-up approach to local government. Local government cannot be a spectator sport; we need residents that have a vested interest in our future helping to shape that future. They are waiting for their invitation into their City Hall.

I would answer this question but if I did I would have to charge you a consultant fee for the advice that I would provide you. Just kidding!

I believe that the new Comprehensive Plan is one of the very first things that are required of the new administration and council. Without a plan we do not know our direction, goals, or objectives as a city. But since the plan is for the city it should be created by the residents of the city. In the same way that we have neighborhood economic development committees we need to assemble regional committees of the city to develop a comprehensive plan. I believe that the new comprehensive plan needs to be developed within 6 months of next year. Citizen input to this plan is critical to develop a consensus on the future direction of the city and to gain citizen cooperation to implement the plan. The plan needs to establish goals and objectives and also develop mechanisms that allow the city government to measure the success of each goal or objective. Reports of the success of the Comprehensive Plan should be made each year by the mayor. The plan should also be updated each year (this should be a minor update) and have a major update every five years.

The first and foremost idea we need to look at is this: We need to know that before we pay one dime for a consultant, for any project, that we have the funds to follow through with whatever they recommend. If we don't have the funds, then there is no need to hire a consultant, and waste even more money on something that will not be followed-up on. The second idea is to have a citizen's advisory committee come up with ideas. Once we have that committee's ideas, if we still feel the need to hire a consultant, then we put in the contract that the consultant must come up with at least 10 -15 ideas not proposed by the committee, and the consultant must also propose ways to get funding for these ideas from other sources, other than the city government. If they do not fulfill these requirements, then they don't get paid. The third idea is to look back at all of the formerly proposed ideas by other consultants in the past. Before we hire a new consultant to go over what a former consultant had said to us 5 -10 years ago, let's make sure that we have already attempted all of the former consultants’ ideas and options.

The WRT study funded over two years ago did provide a strategic plan. Now that plan needs to be followed. This comes under the province of the GEDP, and both council and the mayor need to make sure that the GEDP does its job. Beyond that, I look at the recent zoning rewrite, done by a committee of citizens along with city hall staff, as a model of how strategic planning can be done without simply hiring consultants.