Yeah, a lot of mumbo-jumbo squishy attorney language, but am I the only one that thinks these changes (Item #40) are kind of far-reaching?
“Ah, Yeah, thanks for your volunteerism, and in 3 to 4 more months, we’ll cut the chains off.”
Yeah, a lot of mumbo-jumbo squishy attorney language, but am I the only one that thinks these changes (Item #40) are kind of far-reaching?
“Ah, Yeah, thanks for your volunteerism, and in 3 to 4 more months, we’ll cut the chains off.”
Comments are closed.
It’s like the fast talk and small print at the end of a Viagra commercial. Nobody pays attention but it gives the city attorney something so he seems important. I hope that, at the end of Huether, he takes his lawyer with him and there will finally be someone who represents the city and therefore the people.
Yes, the changes are far-reaching, and they are also considered best practice governance. People appointed to most such positions “serve at the pleasure of the mayor,” meaning that the mayor may request their resignation at any time. That’s very rare. However, it might be nice to verify that the staggered terms provision means that different mayors have the opportunity to appoint members of the same board or committee, so that a single mayor doesn’t appoint all concurrently serving members.
Michael, so if I understand you correctly, and please correct me if I am wrong, this is a way for mayor’s to avoid asking for someone to resign? Because of the perception? I agree with staggering the positions, but let’s face it, any mayor, not just our current one, will appoint who THEY want. Just look at the Kangaroo Kourt the ethics commission was.
Kinda sounds like we elect a mayor and he replaces everyone with ‘Programmable Stepford Types’. Isn’t that what exists now? This might be democracy for androids but humans need more.