Yesterday, the Council wrestled with ways to cut another $3.5 million from its budget, directing staff to reduce labor costs by $1 million, sell $1 million in surplus property and cut another $1.5 million from expenses using a Council-developed set of priorities. But, according to the Review, Council acknowledged that cuts alone cannot stabilize our foundering City. Among other ideas, they talked about the possibility of moving the island’s municipal court to City Hall, out-sourcing police services to Kitsap County and minimizing long-range planning.
Over the past several years, City Hall has been wracked with conflict and rancorous dissent. Council members have vehemently disagreed with the administration and with each other. The public has shown up to Council meetings in larger and angrier numbers. Trust in City Hall has been shredded. As citizens have grown frustrated with their government, displays of temper and disrespect have sometimes substituted for true participation in the democratic process. In my 15 years on the island, this is a low point in civic life.
Whatever mistakes our City government made–and I believe there have been many–the recession has made the blame game all but irrelevant. We can’t make the kind of budget cuts we’re facing without severe and lasting results, and no one is trying to put a happy face on it. Our City government, its vendors, the agencies it works with, and the people it serves, will have to make fundamental, painful changes, whether they want to or not. That includes all of us. Our government can’t and won’t give the us service and funding we want, whether for roads and bike lanes, our favorite charity, or processing our land use permits.
But there is an opportunity here. Writers like Joseph Schumpeter, the 19th century economist, and more recently, Max Page, professor of architecture, have written extensively about “creative destruction,” a process by which societies are transformed through innovation, historical changes, social conditions and personalities.
Although change is disruptive and chaotic, it presents an opportunity to sweep out the obsolete, the tired, the inefficient and entrenched ways of doing business that are all but impossible to alter without a radical push. This recession is doing a thorough housecleaning in the global economy–the dying newspaper business, fatally wounded by innovations on the Internet, is just one painful example of creative destruction.
So it could be with our City.
Real estate strategist and City Hall critic Rod Stevens sent around an email yesterday, in which he cited a book by John McKnight, Building Communities from the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding and Mobilizing a Community’s Assets. McKnight argued that instead of finding a community’s problems and then looking for solutions–an endless, ultimately fruitless process–cities might try “recognizing people’s capacities, skills and assets, where they are already ‘invested’ and committed, and to build on all this.”
Rod writes: “At heart, this approach recognizes the ‘giftedness’ of the individual, that everyone has something to offer the community, and that they work together through associations such as schools, churches, arts groups and so forth. The key to this effort lies in including everyone, and making everyone together responsible for the success of the place…
“We have a number of organizations that make our downtown strong, but I have rarely heard mention of how we can build on the contributions of the Madrona School, of how new directions for the Bainbridge Performing Arts could make our downtown stronger, of how helping the Congregational Church grow would help everyone, or of how individual merchants who are defying the march of the chain stores may hold the key to future retailing. A positive approach would be to explicitly recognize and talk with these people and organizations, to understand what opportunities they want to realize, how these opportunities weave together, and what obstacles we need to remove to help them succeed. Instead we occupy our public meeting with talk about the insides of sewer lines.”
Rod concludes that City leadership efforts should focus on people–not so much what they need as what they can and hope to give—rather than on the old, and perhaps obsolete, obsession with land use planning.
Larry Koss, another of City Hall’s persistent critics, has often told a story about a senior member of the City’s planning department who dismissed his idea that a community cannot be “sustainable,” no matter how many green buildings it has if, in its planning, it does not take into account the impact on the human beings who live there. “That’s not the responsibility of the City,” responded the staffer.
Maybe it is now. Maybe it’s time to take some of these people-centered notions out of the fringes and into the mainstream. And I don’t mean giving City dollars to support the various civic and social projects (although in flusher times, that might be a natural outgrowth of community abundance).
After the City’s purge is over, we have a community to rebuild. This time, maybe we don’t want to sit back and hope our government is doing the job we want. Maybe we want to contribute our own ideas, expertise and effort.
I recently went to a pea patch organizational meeting. The room was filled to capacity with people who love to grow things. As they discussed the possibilities of establishing community gardens around the island, not only in their own neighborhoods but at the island’s low income apartment complexes, their creativity and excitement was contagious. No one will be paid for their efforts, and there won’t be any government handouts. But everyone was happy for the chance to do what they love and contribute to their community at the same time.
I don’t know how a citizen-driven City would play out in the real world. But I think our municipal meltdown presents an amazing opportunity (and I’m not talking about the change of government, although that could be part of the renewal).
The only real destruction of Bainbridge Island would be to try hold onto the old, failed ways of running our town.
Any ideas?
(Read all of Rod’s email here: revitalization)
Althea: Your insight is mind boggling when considering the view I have almost on a daily basis of how our government serves the public. Your public commentary gives me a breath of political/operational fresh air.
Level of Service is always on the lips of those that walk the halls of the red roofed building on Madison ave. However, the way we manage that LOS does not seem to deliver the product. I would offer, as painful as it would seem, a glance at another city that made those changes in a very efficient manner. If interested, take a look at the city of Kenmore and how they have rearranged the seating at the municipal table. It is a manager/council form of government.
Many thanks again for your demonstrating how we can all contribute as an active part of our community. Respectfully, Bill
http://www.cityofkenmore.com/
Althea, there are so many kinds of seed in your latest post that I suspect you have already started a pea-patch, on Chuck E’s permaculture model.
I heartily agree that the blame game, if it was ever necessary or useful, has been made irrelevant by the recessionary seas around our little island. And I agree that ideas from Rod Stevens and Larry Koss can contribute mightily to a reorientation of progressive efforts here on Bainbridge, away from city hall and toward the different facets of our community life, where so much is already happening, with or (mostly) without help from CoBI. (If you don’t mind my belaboring the obvious: Just as the map is not the territory, CoBI is not the City of Bainbridge Island.)
I also participated in the excitement of that “pea patch organizational meeting.” I’d like to urge all readers of Althea’s reference to follow the link to Cathy Nickum’s summary of the event on the “Sound Food” website. As the summary makes clear, the forum on community gardens was not an isolated event, but one in the series of monthly First Monday gatherings organized by “Sustainable Bainbridge.”
In case you didn’t know, if you live on Bainbridge you are already a member of Sustainable Bainbridge, a no-dues non-profit dedicated to finding out “how a citizen-driven City would play out in the real world” (if I may appropriate Althea’s words). In other words: We already have in our midst what so many, focused perhaps too intently on City Hall, have been looking for.
Visit the Sustainable Bainbridge and Sound Food websites, subscribe to the monthly e-News, come to the next First Monday, don’t miss Matinees That Matter . . . And get involved!
Althea-
I don’t think there would be too much disagreement in the statement you made that the recession has caused allot of the issues and problems. But me for one is not making the finger pointing irrelevant. The situation would have been allot better if the Mayor and the four Council people would have opened their ears to a pleading public, who by the way isn’t stupid as these five would believe. Experts who live on the Island and have been active at City Hall have been trying to tell these 5 individuals what is going down in the U.S. and Washington State to NO avail. Go back thru the records and you will see that this group of non listeners, the worst being Peter’s and the Mayor, kept saying to the public that they were crying wolf. Do you remember?
These five do not deserve to be let off the hook and they should be taken to task. Look at the wreckage they have left our City in. Yes we need to move ahead but these five should be asked for their resignation and we should find replacements who are open to listening to the brain trust on our Island, especially since none of these five even come close to such nomenclature!
Do I feel strongly about this- You bet!
I was disappointed in the meeting. It all appeared to be so random in the thinking and a “rush to a decision” type of atmosphere. It was not the “back to basics” meeting with thoughtful decisions that I was hoping for. It reminded me of a gang of mechanics trying to figure out where to get more oil to pour into a leaky engine instead of repairing the gasket and get a properly running automobile. From what I saw it would not have mattered or made a difference if we had a city manager at the meeting instead of a mayor.
Jon Quitslund — you offered a generally thoughtful comment much as you always do. However, do you really believe this statement you said: “I heartily agree that the blame game, if it was ever necessary or useful, has been made irrelevant by the recessionary seas around our little island.” Yes, there are most unusual economic forces underway but the fact remains millions of dollars were spend by COBI/Mayor/Council/staff on either pet projects, sacred cows or plain waste. Just as a rising tide rises all boats, a sinking tide exposes all boats to bad navigation and folly. Our ship of state is sitting hard aground.
We have such a long list of failures of COBI that were hidden by a heavy flow of extra money coming into COBI. Now that that flow is off — and may it stay off — all the little pet projects and sacred special interests are running for cover with the Council asking for protection.
Why don’t we try a creative limited government where individuals can support the arts organization of their choice without having COBI giving hundreds of thousands of tax dollars from citizens to a government appointed arts czar (BIHAC). I am sure all the artists can survive on the open market with money coming directly from the citizens rather than from excess taxes.
If we don’t remember the names of those who got us in this mess they will be back running for higher office or re-election. Our current fiasco is not simply the result of a the devil-made-me-do-it excuse of recessionary times hitting Our lil’isle. Nice try to let our electeds/staff off the hook.
Give credit where credit is due and give criticism or worse where that is appropriate. This is not child’s play here where frank evaluation will damage the child. This is our island, our government and our tax money.
Althea’s mention of Schumpeter and Page reminds me of Meg Wheatley, author of Leadership and the New Science, Finding Our Way, Turning to One Another, et al and a renown facilitator of organizational and community change processes. Meg talks about the often chaotic process by which life organizes itself. One excerpt titled, “The Power of Chaos”, can found at http://www.well.com/user/bbear/wheatley.html.
I’ve often wished some folk like Schumpeter, Page and Wheatley partnered with our local expertise had been an early part of Winslow Tomorrow to help guide us in that visioning process. Yet alas, maybe like the war in Iraq, a bank/mortgage/housing crash, Madoff, and AIG, we needed our experience in order to experience enough chaotic “pain” to begin to re-organize ourselves?
Which brings me to one of our latest local items of chaos and creative destruction … I.e., executive “bonuses.” Do AIG bonuses echo COBI bonuses, I wonder?
I can’t escape thinking how the current controversy and outrage over bonuses given to AIG executives – indeed, those responsible for creating that mess – reflects a similar dynamic and need for correction we have here on BI!
In light of what is being displayed now at a global level re AIG, I hope BI steps up now to “do the right thing.” From comments made on Nightline on 3/18/09, it appears some of the AIG have already returned or pledged to return their bonuses. Who’ll be the first at city hall to step up and return theirs, I wonder?
We are here at this present state of crisis for several reasons. Frequenters of the local blogs and CC meetings know that the primary reason is not the current economy. The primary reason is the breakdown between Council and Mayor and the current split on Council that has resulted. But there is an even more fundamental reason for the existence of those divisions and breakdowns: The Strong Mayor form of government.
The Mayor and the Council have been fighting over access to information and options for years. The Four and The Three have been fighting over information and options for over a year. Why? Because The Four believe anything that comes out of the administration, and The Three don’t believe a word from the administration.
How does this relate to form of government? Because under this Strong Mayor system the Mayor/Administration have no accountability to the Council. When Council asks for information or options, the administration is free to explore and present the options it prefers and to limit Council’s access to information in order to achieve some desired result.
Council cannot remove the Mayor and Council cannot direct staff. Council has no staff at all, and pursuant to the RCW’s (as interpreted by MRSC) any staff provided to Council would be hired by and accountable to the Mayor.
Meanwhile, the Mayor is accountable to the voters only once every four years.
Council similarly has no control over whether its adopted policy is ever executed in the manner intended or even at all. In this way, the administration has the ability to create de facto policy behind closed doors.
Under a Council-Manager form of government, the Council hires an experienced professional manager to run City Hall, to provide complete and accurate information and to execute its policy. Should the manager fail to perform these functions, the Council may fire the manager. Thus the manager, an apolitical public servant, has an inherent incentive to perform these functions that are necessary to good policy making and the running of an efficient and effective government.
Now the citizens can focus their attention solely on the decisions made in public meetings by seven individuals elected to staggered terms that allow the voters to completely alter the make-up of the body every two years.
The question must be asked would these seven people be so decisively divided, would the spending decisions of the last three years be repeated, would factions of the community be at each others throats, if the politics were taken out of City Hall? In my opinion, the answer is a decided “no”.
While the recession does present many opportunities for change and reform, the city is missing a key ingredient – leadership.
Last year the mayor and her new city administrator should have developed a comprehensive strategy to deal with the accelerating economic crisis. They alone have the resources to put such a plan together. Instead they have punted all of the city’s financial problems to the city council. To make matters worse, they continue to provide the council with unrealistic revenue projections, inaccurate information and few alternatives.
The solutions to the city’s financial problems will not come from city council budget workshops, no matter how many hours they meet. The city council works best when it is presented with options to choose from. Without options the Council will founder without any clear direction as the crisis worsens.
The city is decaying. It is stale, moldy and stagnant. The economic downturn is simply accelerating the city’s demise.
Radical change is necessary. We need an infusion of new energy and fresh ideas.
If the city’s management team does not have the ability to bring creative solutions to the city council, then it is time to bring in a new management team.
We must continue to hold our elected leaders accountable. The recession is no excuse for poor management and a lack of leadership.
Hi, I’m utterly new on this beautiful, peaceful island, just back in a state I lived in for almost a decade, decades ago. There’s nothing I can add regarding the governing people here, of course. I just felt the need to say that it saddens me that, once again, politics – which I have a passion for, since I spent two years volunteering for Obama, especially – is dividing people with frustration. It’s sad that in place that is so soothing, and where so many people have been welcoming and friendly, and where it feels so safe, a meeting that I hope to attend someday got so rancorous.
I know that here, as in so many places I’ve been around this great country and few places I’ve been abroad, the children of people who have lived here for generations cannot afford to live here any longer. I know that here, also, the perfect storm of righteous hopes and unbridled greed took its toll, on the people, on the environment.
Still, this island is a treasure. My hope is people will let go of their bitterness and be motivated in a positive way by their righteous anger – at actions by some that have made the lives of many sadder and harder – to count their blessings and try still harder, without rancor.
I trust you all know that it’s been much worse for many more people in most of the country. You cherish this place, rightfully. I’m glad so many hope so much that your intervention will preserve an oasis in the desert, a shelter from the storm, a truly incredible place to grow old in, to raise children in.
Just, please, don’t dismiss the “mere” chance that a positive, can-do attitude will make a difference. Combined with actions with others, it most definitely does make a difference. Damage can be mostly repaired, with time. There are always alternatives.
Everything changes, there’s no stopping that. Seeing the development all over this state after decades away was astonishing, and frightening to me, at first. I came back because of how I remembered it.
You who have always stayed might feel like parents who don’t notice the way their kids sprouted, matured, because necessity makes you focus on rectifying their dangerous bad influences. But though I’m a grandma now, with Washington I’m like the long-gone aunt who comes back and wants to cry with joy seeing the beautiful people those maturing, albeit sometimes troubling youth have become.
The people here are still very, very fine, and you’ve accomplished already what few others have in this country: You still have a flourishing oasis because people still care and work hard to make it so. Please don’t stop. Keep the determination, lose the rage. Rage is energizing, but it’s short-lived – ultimately it saps endurance. You, and this incomparable state are memorable for your beauty and endurance, your generosity, good-humored hard work, and very visible accomplishments.
Responding to James Olsen: My comment on blaming was in the spirit of Althea’s post, in which I found a welcome shift of emphasis. I see that in this thread, you aren’t alone in resisting that shift. As a believer in good government, I can’t just shrug my shoulders and walk on by when I think the government is dysfunctional, or specific people are irresponsible, betraying the public trust, etc. But when there’s already a chorus of fault-finding voices and I don’t like the sound of it, why should I join in?
Kirsten,
Good. Let’s start debating the form of government (FOG).
You will not be able to fix the problems at city hall by simply changing the form of government. There is nothing inherently wrong with a Mayor-Council government. In fact, four out of five cities in Washington do perfectly well with an elected Mayor. It’s not about the form of government. It’s about the people we elect into office. It’s about the managers and staff who run the city. Changing the FOG will not change a single player at city hall.
Are you satisfied with the work of our current city administrator? I hope so because if the FOG changes then he will automatically become the new city manager. It’s in his contract. His contract is for an indefinite term and it has a golden parachute. Therefore, if the council wanted to replace him it will cost the city $250,000 to buy out his contract. The city does not have that kind of money so he has the city over a barrel.
Who is running the city right now? By law, it is the city administrator. While he reports to the mayor, he is responsible for the daily administration of city affairs. He presents proposals to the city council. He supervises all the department directors. He will do the same job if the FOG changes. In that case he would report to the Council but they won’t be able to afford to remove him even if they were not satisfied with his performance.
Under a Council-Manager form of government the city council is prohibited from directing staff or interfering with the city manager’s administrative duties. The city manager has complete freedom to select all department directors and, unlike the mayor’s appointments, no council confirmation is needed. The city manager has an indefinite term so he cannot be replaced every four years. The voters will have absolutely no say in who runs the city.
A Council-Manager form of government is less transparent. The city manager and his staff are not subject to the open public meetings act. Most decisions can and will be made behind closed doors. Unlike the mayor who is accountable to the voters, the city manager has no incentive to respond to the community. Since the city manager is not accountable to the voters he has less of an incentive to involve the public in policy development and implementation. His primary allegiance will be to his own staff and management team. He will work to protect their interests first.
City managers are not “apolitical.” They will work to protect their turf. They want money and staff to do the things that they want to do. They will work the council to get what they want. Do a google search and take a look at how many council-manager cities have had big political battles involving the city manager (start with Shoreline, Tacoma, Puyallup, and Mukilteo).
It is true that Council elections are every two years versus every four years for the Mayor. But each councilmember is elected for four years just like the Mayor. Also many council candidates run unopposed so the council elections are often mere formalities and the voters are left with no choice. In the last three elections 5 councilmembers were elected without any opposition. Three councilmembers that make up the current council majority ran unopposed (Peters, Snow, Franz). Why would you want to take away the voters ability to choose the CEO of the city and give that decision to just 7 people?
Many people are upset with our current Mayor. However, let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water by changing the form of government. Rather than eliminate the position of Mayor, let’s just elect a competent mayor.
Notebook host, what is your evidence for this statement you made, not the second part because that is unquestionably your opinion, but the first part. Notebook said: “As citizens have grown frustrated with their government, displays of temper and disrespect have sometimes substituted for true participation in the democratic process. In my 15 years on the island, this is a low point in civic life.”
What are the instances? Are you speaking about the paltry 1-minute, 2-minute- or 3-minute public comments? Are you talking about the public forums where hundreds of citizens gathered? How is questioning of our current mess or current leaders ever not “true participation in the democratic process.? Frankly, insurrection, terrorism or illegal force or threat is not in the democratic spirit.
Citizens are unhappy and sick and tired of being ignored but your piece about creative destruction takes more than a few liberties with citizen behavior and the tone and direction.
Give us the examples of this behavior. Perhaps you were witness to something others have not seen. Perhaps you were not witness but the words started flowing.
In looking at Mr. Knobloch’s City of Kenmore model I see where his thinking is. It looks from their web postings that they are successful in farming out a large portion of their city services to contractors. Kenmore is one of several cities in our state that are in a perfect position to take this approach & get results. I also noted the city manager FOG. There are differences though between our two cities that makes some contracting of services difficult or not as cost effective as you might think. For instance, Kenmore is in a great location, situated in a heavily populated metropolitan area with lots of neighboring resources. Kenmore can tap into many resources local to them and probably can pick & choose where to get the best bang for the buck. Shopping around if you will.
Bainbridge is not so lucky in that regard. We are somewhat isolated and we will be paying resources to come to us. In fact, we probably would have to use the express lane for shopping as we would have fewer items! Kenmore contracts a lot of public works out to neighboring cities. Who could we do that with, Poulsbo? Poulsbo has less PW resources than we do. The county? Their assets are even further away from us.
Kenmore uses the King County Sheriff for police services. King County is the largest agency (except for the state patrol) in Washington with over 1,000 employees. King County has helicopters, several boats, bomb disposal units, SWAT, Drug units, K9, and on & on. King County built a business on contract cities and are up to at least 12 cities. This has added significantly to their ranks & capital. Who do we have to choose from? Suquamish, Poulsbo & Kitsap County are the closest. We already have more resources than Poulsbo & Suquamish. Kitsap County has a grand total of 123 deputies & 31 support staff. Other than a desk, evidence lockers and some computers in Kingston, the nearest sheriff facility is Silverdale. Then you are looking at Pt. Orchard again. I encourage you to look at the Kitsap sheriff’s web site for more info. Some contracting could be done where we are, for instance the computer or IT work I think could be done that way. In any event there are contracts with current unions that would preclude any contracting out of services for at least another two years. You are looking to at least 2011 before you could even start going down that path.
What is being done now to take corrective action in the present where we are all living? Some decisions need to be made now, to begin steering the financial course of the city in the right direction.
When your bowl is filled with worms, 1) turn bowl upside down, empty worms; 2) clean bowl carefully with water and soap; 3) repair cracks, smooth chips with emory paper; 4) fill bowl with good food.
When your bowl has no worms and is clean, maybe it’s not useful. Go to the local plotter and get another bowl.
You can’t just buy a bowl. It’s about you and the bowl. That’s what the town plotter will tell you. They say he guarantees your own reflection in all his artifacts.
This present storm could be the best thing that could have happened to the city. It makes the city come to grips with what the real baseline is for a city budget. The housing/real estate boom’s xtra revenues, was just that-xtra. Sadly the city spent it
all and saved none, and assumed that was the new reality. Not
unlike countless families on the island did. The city now understanding and monitoring a cash basis finally makes them realize the new reality. It has been a long time coming, but it has arrived.
I am always amazed at towns, small cities that have so much less money than Bainbridge does, and how they do so much more to make it a real community. If the community organizations are trully valuable to the community, they will survive; with or without the city’s monies to them, if we are the real community we say we are.
It is not a question as to whether the new economic reality is here or not as it is here, it is a question of what the community grassroots is all about or not.
Taking the time and energy looking back is fine but it takes away from time and energy looking forward.
The next year will tell what this community is made of regardless of the financial plight of the city, or a city at all.
If you believe in it make it happen on your street and your interests be them recreational, ecological, or whatever.
Maybe just maybe this is a great opportunity to become a better community.
The citizens of this City should be ashamed of themselves, me included. We have been sucker punched over and over again by the Mayor and the four Council members and have done nil about it. The people of this Island should be reacting with indignation to what the Mayor and the four Council people have done to this Island.
By not listening to the many experts who have weighted in and made suggestions, the City is now in a world of hurt. The prognosis for the economy was clearly out there, many stood up and expressed at Council meeting their professional opinions but to no avail, the Mayor and the Four knew better.
The recession has only made things worse, but it was not the recession that lead us into the problems, it was overspending by the Mayor and the four Councilors. They of course knew better than the many professionals on the Island, one Councilman who even wanted the citizens to step out of the picture and let him make the decisions. WOW, Mr. Peters is the Mayor’s Lieutenant and has influenced three others to the point where they don’t think, or maybe aren’t capable.
This Community should be reacting to the Mayor and the fours decisions and voting records as the people of the U.S. are reacting to the AIG bonus issue. Instead, with the exception of three special and capable Council people and a few others people are letting themselves be run over.
Hopefully May 19 will be the end of the Mayor! The real question is why did it take 6/7 years to find a way to take the power away from a person who has no leadership qualities or abilities, has proven she can’t manage, and lastly obviously hasn’t the financial skills to manage a simple checkbook.
This is about as civil as I can be at this moment. I don’t like watching inept people make poor decisions over and over again. My pockets are empty, having paid my property and Federal taxes and to see them wasted hurts.
We should be asking for 5 resignations, from the five who have made these many horrible decisions!
I like Chuck’s letter.
In the spirit of “creative destruction” and the comments made by Chuck re how we relate in “community”, I’ve again a sense that what is being played out here on BI reflects the larger invitations we have at the level of state, nation and Earth as whole. Amidst all the breakdowns, chaos and challenges, there appears an enduring “invitation” that seems to have everything to do with “how” we will re-order ourselves in a way that serves Life as a whole.
In an effort to speak to the underlying “shift” that we seem to be seeking here, I would like to share one of the most potent statements of this invitation I’ve found written by Dr. Dieter Duhm in “Toward a New Culture” …
“The insanity of our civilization is quickly approaching its peak. Armed to the teeth and controlled by badly-mistaken cliques of power and money, we continue to launch an attack on life on Earth that can no longer be stopped by ordinary means. The evolution of mankind has reached such a monumental impasse that its dimensions rival those of science fiction. The internal patterns of destruction in modern society afflict our hearts, our minds, and our reason. There cannot be any doubt that we are at the end of an era — and possibly at the beginning of a new one.
The compelling political, economic, ecological, social, technological, psychological, medical, scientific, and spiritual questions of our time need different answers than those available within the framework of our established ways of living and thinking. And these answers will only come when people begin to develop a fundamentally new relationship to themselves, to their fellow human beings, to all living beings, and to the entire planet. This ‘new relationship’ means entirely new behavior — a new way of life that leads to a new understanding and a new openness. And at the heart of any attempt to create a viable ecological culture must lie a liberated, unsentimental, and active love affair with all living things.”
However we go about mending and creating here, I hope and pray that we may do it from this space.
After attending and then reflecting on last Wednesday’s financial meeting, I’m simply disappointed.
This was perhaps the single best opportunity since the city was created to establish community vision and priorities, and begin the process of remolding the city government to live within a reasonable financial means and focusing on the basic responsibilities of a municipal government.
What I sense we got from that meeting was some temporary, band-aid solutions. Temporary city vacancies, reduced operating hours, maybe some program funding reductions (or maybe not), maybe fewer committees or maybe not. The city administration was asked to cut $1 million more, and that might result in long term city staffing reductions, but they might also just be temporary holes to be filled when the economy turns.
The city can get through this with a cut-and-paste approach to city finances, but I saw very little accomplished to change much of anything for the long term. That kind of leadership didn’t emerge.
Some cut-and-paste is required to bring quick results … so that isn’t all wasted effort. But the fundamentals need to be addressed, and that just didn’t happen.
I am very committed to the phrase “give credit where credit is due.” Despite our differences, Bob Dashiell’s above comments are very accurate. I tried, with difficulty to hold the line with a baseline revenue compromise of 16 million. I feel strongly that it should be much lower for the long term vision Bob mentioned.
As the public record shows, at the end of the meeting, my colleague made a motion to raise it to 17 million as a sustainable baseline. This is nothing more than putting a band aide on a financial hemorrhage. Now the city is going to borrow 7 million from a bank till the decision is made when to go for a bond.
I wonder if the restrictions on how the money is to be used, as required by law with a bond, are going to be spelled out or is it going to be a line of credit for whatever?
Respectfully, Bill
Wow!Why doesn’t that guy who asked for examples of bad temper and disrepect push ‘mail sent’ on his own computer?Unbelievable!
Whoops,’…disrespect…’
Shlocked and Awed: are you the press secretary, the Gibbs, of the Notebook answering for examples of the breakdown in the democratic process? If so, the answer is flimsy but then again what do we expect from Schlock and Awe.
I rest my case.
Robert,
Your comments are right on. You put your finger on the problem – lack of leadership.
The city council is a legislative body. It does not provide leadership.
The mayor and her city administrator are in charge of running the city. They have all of the resources. Their role is to provide leadership and direction for the city. They are supposed to provide good options and ideas for the city council to choose from.
Unfortunately the mayor and her administration have been unable to provide a strategy for dealing with the financial crisis or a plan for restructuring city government. Do not expect these kinds of plans to emerge from a city council workshop.
Dear Mr. Scales-
We on the Island have been stating for some time the ineptness of the Mayor, characterized by no leadership skills, and/or abilities, no management skills and/or abilities, and no financial skills and/or abilities. So talking about this all this time in a civil way has gotten us NO WHERE. Tell us what we can do about this post haste please. Standing by and watching her drive this Community into the ground is historically what we have done to date.
I guarantee that if the new Eyman iniatitive makes the ballot it will pass simply because of its reducing property taxes as well as limiting the growth of Gov’t. going forward. This will no doubt further impact BI and the poor condition of the finances on the Island due to Mayors inabilities.
We need to find an action now and not months from now! Then when we take care of replacing the Mayor we need to rid ourselves of the over spenders on the Council.
The good news in what has been happening is that city staffing is (FINALLY) being reduced. Because of unions, bumping rights, and maintaining required skills, that isn’t an easy assignment for the city administrator. Staffing should have been ratcheted down ever since the benchmarking study results were known. Didn’t happen, so now it’s the double bladed axe approach.
I sense not enough is being done to permanently reduce staffing … lots of temporary reductions and cut back in hours. That will help the immediate situation, but before the 2010 budget is splashed with holy water, the Council needs a longer term restructure picture that sizes the city to a reasonable level. And to get there, the Council has to decide what it is going to do and what it is going to reduce or drop … not for just this year, but for the foreseeable future.
That’s where I don’t see the leadership emerging … and I understand pressures. Those up for reelection (or considering a higher office) will be very reluctant to cut any programs. A small, temporary reduction is probably the best they will put on the table. Barry Peters has been the surprise to date … his proposed community service contract cuts are by far the boldest move at cost reductions. Bill Knobloch doesn’t want to reduce any of them … Debbie Vancil is advocating a temporary 10% reduction. The rest of the Council has been pretty quiet.
The City Council has a fundamental choice to make. If it want’s to provide good basic services (like keep the roads in good repair and the streets clean) AND provide the Community Services at the level that some have come to expect, then a substantial new source of revenue has to be found. City staffing cuts are not going to provide enough financial cushion to do everything … like build reserves.
Or, the Council can go back to a more basic government, doing the things municipalities are required to do. With the City’s high pay scale, even doing the basics is going to be a financial challenge.
I sense the Council is going to realize they have only gotten about half way to their cost reduction target, although it’s a target they keep nudging closer so it’s easier to hit.
Something has to give … and maybe greater leadership will emerge.
A day late and a dollar short describes Peter’s actions. He is best known as the last of the big spenders and you Robert although just reporting his latest actions haven’t acknowledged his past bad spending habits. Who do you think, along with the Mayor lead the charge to the obscene spending on WW.
We should be stopping this WW action, even if funded by bonds as the interest to be paid and the time spent by City Hall could be used to support the priority projects identified over and over again by the citizen tax payers.
We are not going to know how many people we should have until:
1) we define our priorities.
2) there is both accounting and accountability.
Barry Peters and the majority members ask for activity, not results. We have to start asking for specific results.
Objectives are SMART
Specific
Measurable
Achievable
Realistic
Timely
Apples are EVIL
Envious
Vain
Illiterate
Likable
Mr. Scales states “Who is running the city right now? By law, it is the city administrator.” I can find no reference to a City Administrator in the Revised Code of Washington. Therefore, I can only assume he means City law. I do see that the Municipal Code 2.09 states “There is created the office of city administrator, which shall be filled by appointment of the mayor, subject to the confirmation of the city council, to serve at the pleasure of the mayor.” And further states that the City Administrators authority, powers and duties are “Under the direction and authority of the mayor.”
What direction and authority the Mayor gives the City Administrator is unclear, but I would find it troubling if the City Administrator is “running the city.” The Mayor was elected and is responsible. Even if the Mayor has given the City Administrator carte blanch, the Mayor remains responsible. That is the advantage to the Mayor/Council form of government.
Mr. Scales, by announcing his candidacy for Mayor, has a two-front battle. First, he must campaign for the Mayor/Council form of government. Second, he must show that he is different (and hopefully better) than the current Mayor.
Vote against a change in the form of government because the City Administrator is bad. Vote for him for Mayor because he is good. And don’t judge him based on the City Council actions while he was on the Council, because Council doesn’t provide leadership.
Understanding Mr. Scales’ perspective helps one to understand his logic and claims. All that said, I hope he continues his campaign and that others enter the race.
Dear Concerned Citizen BI,
Having a city administrator is optional for Mayor-Council cities. The reason that cities hire a city administrator is to run the day to day operations of the city. This is because most mayors do not have the professional expertise to run a municipal government.
The duties of an administrator are very similar to a city manager. The big difference is that the administrator reports to the mayor and the manager reports to the council. If the mayor was actually running Bainbridge Island then there would be no need for our city administrator who makes more than twice as much as the mayor ($145,000 a year). All of the department directors report to the City Administrator.
The mayor is of course ultimately in charge of the city administration. The mayor can and should provide leadership, guidance and direction. But when it comes down to the day to day nuts and bolts of running a city, that is not the mayor’s job when you have a city administrator.
I agree that the mayor is ultimately accountable for the actions of her city administrator and staff. But that is not the same as saying that the mayor is directly responsible for the day to day operations of the city. The mayor is not even full time (30 hours per week officially).
I agree that the advantage of a Mayor-Council form of government is that the voters can replace the Mayor if they do not like the way the city is run. The new mayor can hire a management team of his or her choosing and set the course of the city in a new direction. Mayor’s can do that a lot easier than city councils can under a council-manager government. The only thing a council can do is hire and fire the city manager. The Council is prohibited by state law from interfering in management and hiring decisions.
I announced my candidacy for mayor early in order to give the voters more choices. One of the arguments against the Mayor-Council form of government is that no one ever runs who is qualified for the job. I am well qualified for the job and I will be running for mayor. You can check out my qualifications at http://www.scalesformayor.com
A political action committee has formed to advocate for the council-manager form of government (Vote Council Manager 09). They will be presenting arguments to persuade voters to change to council-manager government. There are also arguments to be made in favor of keeping the Mayor-Council form of government. I do not expect that this political committee will be presenting that side of the story. So yes, I will be speaking out about the merits of our current form of government. I want to make sure that the voters have all of the facts so they can make a well informed decision (see my blog at http://www.bainbridgefog.wordpress.com).
I will have no problem demonstrating that I will be a different mayor from our current mayor. It will be up to the voters to decide if I will be a better mayor.
I’m not saying that you should vote against a change in the form of government because the city administrator is bad. The city administrator or city manager can be changed in either form of government. My argument is that we have the best chance for positive change if we elect a strong, experienced and professional leader to the mayor’s office. We won’t see much change in a council-manager form of government even if three new reform candidates are elected. That’s because the council’s authority to influence management and personnel decisions is limited. The mayor on the other hand, does have executive authority and can implement change rapidly if he chooses to do so.
I have never said that people should not evaluate my service on the city council. I have a public voting record and I’m sure that people will be able to find both decisions they like and decisions they oppose. My record on the council should certainly be taken into consideration when you decide who to vote for for mayor. However, being a city council member is very different from being mayor. I’m not running for the council again. I believe that I can make a much more productive contribution to city government as mayor. I have learned what doesn’t work at city hall and I have a plan to fix it (again see my website). If the voters like my plan and they want me to try it out then they will put me into office. If they don’t like me or my ideas then I expect they will elect someone else.
I hope that people will understand where I am coming from and what I hope to accomplish as mayor. I am putting out my thoughts and ideas every chance I get. I am providing a detailed plan of what I intend to do as mayor. I’ll tell you what I like and don’t like about our government and what I will do about it.
I don’t have any hidden agendas. I’m running because our government is failing and no one is stepping up to do anything about it. I threw my hat in the ring and I hope others will as well. We need to have a good discussion and a spirited debate about what is happening on our island. We need to break out of old habits and ways of thinking.
So I will try to discuss and debate the form of government vote whenever I get a chance. If there is a mayoral position remaining after May 19, then I will try to debate my opponents as often as possible.
Democracy only works when people are willing to roll up their sleeves, take a chance and put themselves out there. We need more people who want to be part of the solution. We need more candidates for mayor and the city council. I ran unopposed for the city council six years ago. Three members of the current city council also ran unopposed. Elections don’t mean anything if the voters don’t have a choice.
Hopefully other candidates for mayor and the city council will step forward soon. The voters deserve to see what type of people may form the next government before they are asked to decide what type of government we should have.
Will anyone else step forward?
Here’s a beauty!
Mayor Kordonoy is quoted on the Sun’s Blog as saying that the reason the requests for information is so high on Bainbridge from the City Hall vs. other sities in the area is ” We have lost the confidence of the people.” If accurately stated she should have said I have lost the confidence of the people. Love to know who the we is that she was referring to.
Now that she has come to realize, whether it be we or I ,that the people of this Island have zero confidence in her management, leadership, and financial skills possibly she would now give consideration to resigning? The Mayor is and has been an absolute disaster and has cost we taxpayers a ton of moneys.
How do we toss her out?
Dear Rick,
While the mayor is willing to publicly acknowledge that she has lost the confidence of the people, she is not willing to do anything to regain their confidence. The mayor and her administration moving full steam ahead and not looking back. Over the last 7 years she has hired a management team that has completely failed to produce results. And she rewards their ineffectiveness with year end bonuses ala AIG.
The city administration is a wasteful and inept system that has already collapsed, but the mayor and the council are continuing to keep it on life support through loans, grants and bonds. The ratepayers and taxpayers will be paying the price for many years to come.
If you want to change things you have two options. On May 19 you could vote to change the form of government to a Council-Manager. If this vote passes then the mayor would become a member of the city council for the remainder of her term (December 2009). She would form a 5 vote majority with her current allies on the council. This majority will select the city manager. But in the contract she negotiated with Mark Dombrowski, she guaranteed that the city manager position would go to him for at least six months. If the council wants to hire a different manager they would need to pay Mark over $200,000 for his golden parachute.
In my opinion this is the worst possible time to change the form of government and it will not result in any meaningful change at city hall. It will add yet one more crisis for the city to deal with. As bad as the mayor is, at least she represents some continuity and stability. If the mayor becomes a councilmember who is going to take charge of the city? There will be a mad scramble on the council for control of the administration.
If the form of government does not change then the easiest way to bring in a new mayor is to elect one in November. I decided to run for mayor to give the voters a clear choice. There are very few things that the mayor and I would agree on. Our city government needs to be completely rebuilt from the ground up. A new management team needs to be put into place. Strong and effective leadership is needed in the mayor’s office.
Feel free to contact me if you want to discuss more: scalesformayor@gmail.com.
Mr. Scales,
Thank you for taking the time to respond. I think most people on the Island would agree with your comments regarding City Hall. A disaster not waiting to happen but rather already happened is there for a majot clean-up. It is not just the Management team that needs to be replaced but many of the stooges also.
You failed to address what options are immediately available, if any, to boot the Mayor out of office. She is inept, has no management, leadership, or fiscal skills and is a big mistake as a Mayor.
The next question, please explain why all the people on the Island haven’t raised more cane about the job she is doing, rather not doing, and just standing by and watching these continued stupid decisions and happenings take place?
And lastly, one good reason to change the form of Gov’t. would be in my mind to eliminate from ever happening again the election of such a mistake. At least with a Council-Manager form there would be seven people overseeing their hire.
Again thanks
7 people did oversee the city mngr hire…they all voted yas!
Dear Rick,
I don’t think there is anything you could do to deal with the mayor or change things at city hall that would be faster than voting her out of office in November. A recall petition would take a lot of time and probably would not get on the ballot until after november.
Of course the Mayor could resign at any time, but there is not much chance of that happening. The worse things get at city hall, the more entrenched the mayor and her managers become.
I’m sorry I don’t have any quick fixes to offer you. Democracy takes some time to work. However, you must remember that the voters reelected Darlene in 2005 and she got over 60%. Many of the same problems we have today existed during her first term. The voters didn’t seem to notice. The difference was that she was able to cover up many of those issues because the city had lots of money rolling in.
I believe the best option is to elect the best mayor we can find in November and also bring in 3 new well qualified councilmembers who all agree on the reforms that need to be made.
Bob
[...] Creative destruction (bainbridgenotes.wordpress.com) // About This Post Posted by Dennis Howlett on May 26th, 2009 and filed under Tax and Ethics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response via following comment form or trackback to this entry from your site [...]