Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Staff Contacts | Home RSS
 
 
 

The time has come

May 3, 2013

To the editor: I would like to formally submit an idea to the general public that has been bandied about for quite some time now, but has never come to fruition....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(18)

Lolita

May-06-13 10:10 AM

More money does not get the best, it just gets you a fancier label with better packaging.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Disgusted1

May-05-13 11:43 PM

I'm convinced the current council is a glowing example of the old adage, "You get what you pay for." I am not, however, convinced that the same adage would apply to merely making the council a full time job and increasing the salary.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

johngalt

May-05-13 2:57 PM

Absurd! How about we raise all city employee wages to $75k and take away the lifetime pensions & benefits? Put them in the shark infested ocean with the rest of us. At least we would know the actual cost of employment for every budget. If councilmen can’t concentrate on their job, cash won’t help. Besides, we’ve the prefect form of city gov’mt. Like all the other coastal communities. Overpaid, overrated, lifetime public managers that need only compared our deficiencies to neighboring communities to get a raise, raise taxes, hirer more consultants, hirer more employees , buy more equipment, and expand the size of local government!

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Shadowrider99

May-04-13 8:47 AM

And let's not forget about the $3 million a year in additional interest income that Gary and bill were always touting. Mathematically impossible dribble from amateurs

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

1sandy

May-04-13 7:55 AM

There is a percentage of residents who don't want to pay an average of 15 dollars a month to "SAVE" the Cape, do you really think these same taxpayers will ever agree to pay salaries like those that are being suggested to full time Council members? Bawhahahaha!

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

KirstenThompson

May-04-13 7:45 AM

I agree with a full time council and paying a competative salary so they can devote their time to council activities and we can draw qualified people who otherwise would not be able to serve. $75k seems high to me though.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

onlythetruth

May-04-13 6:04 AM

Switch......Is it also as clear to you why your heros insisted on using an $85,000 program from a company for the monitoring of the gas system that could not be implemented on the hardware that was available at the time? Only to find out it would have been an additional $250,000 to then buy the needed hardware to install the program? Whenever you want to compare lists about wasted monies you just let me know. Or do you want to discuss the $200,000 wasted on cronies who disguised themselves as consultants just to usurp city funds and line their pockets? Oh, how about another $200,000 for a UEP audit that produced NOTHING. Thirty seconds of writing, $735,000, shall I continue?

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

lightswitch

May-03-13 11:48 PM

In fact the budget the city is living with right now is what Szerlag presented to this council as a balanced budget in June of 2012 when he breezed into town put this piece of crap together and then breezed back to Troy, Michigan to finish their budget. In Troy that was easy because that budget contained a 35% reduction in staff from the year before that! Here the cry was keep everyone in the life boat! As far as cuts the city was telling everyone in 2008 the staff numbered 1,200. It still numbers 1,200. The police department took 3 years to reduce its overtime by 80%.

It couldn't be any more clear why the city is in the mess it is!!!!!!

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

lightswitch

May-03-13 11:41 PM

Is it more clear why the consultant Burton and Associates has toi come to the city with it's whizz bang spreadsheet software to tell the city manager what the*****to do? Is it more clear why the city has to spend $60,000 to use the software and why the city has to spend another $14,000 to make 10 presentations? Does it make it more clear this is not good business and why this SLEASE 6 council has to go? I saw under the FAB 5 things become more transparent, more efficient, more structured in it accounting practices, more financially sound after decades of slide it under the rug. The road issue did not happen in 4 years. It was left undone because of all the other issues this city had. The water/sewer project was finally stabilized under the FAB 5 I have the bills to prove it. King found the $6.5 million with money the city was recouping out of the short term high interest loans and the loans that this city took out under Stewart and Mason.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

lightswitch

May-03-13 11:26 PM

It was not Gary King that ran the city with 3 separate computer systems. Had to manually take information from one, then another, and then another to develop a budget.

That was the project of Terry Stewart Gary King's predecessor and was left to his Financial Director Mark Mason.

The whole premiss of consolidating was to reduce the manual gyrations and speed up the ability to form a budget.

Well after much input about getting rid of a company that sill holds the city hostage they STILL do not have a proper computer system. But Stewart sold the council on a $10 million system produced a company that has not hit a deadline on developing what it said it could. This has cost the city millions more than the first !0 million it was supposed to.

No one on this council has revisited the computer problems either!

For those that recently bought into the community is it becoming more clear why the city can not even make a budget or monitor what they are doing?

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

onlythetruth

May-03-13 9:31 PM

No 100K does not make you smart, personable...or competent. Gary King was a back room deal. Voting a candidate in will not be.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

linda53

May-03-13 8:47 PM

100k does not make you smart, personable, or competent...remember Gary King?

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

netransplant

May-03-13 12:48 PM

I agree with this. No more part time council!

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

grumpy19

May-03-13 11:27 AM

The entire form of city government would have to changed. It would have to go to a mayor type of government. No more city manager. A residency requirement should be instituted in this type of government. Say, full time resident for 1 year before a person can run for office. Also, all ties to any business within the city have to be cut. I would personally prefer the Cape to become a separate county from Lee. What we pay Lee could more than cover any and all expenses we have and would probably leave a large surplus.

0 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

lightswitch

May-03-13 10:11 AM

Sure full time for full time work, I'd go for that.

However I do not need or want a council made up of people who are running other businesses in any way, shape, or form and paying them full time when they are not.

I worked for a company that if worked a second job doing what my task was you did not work for them. In other words they wanted your full and undivided attention. Why? Because the job never stopped.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

1sandy

May-03-13 9:21 AM

@Chettt: You say, "Also delete those who moved here 5 years ago and decided they want to run things how they did it up North." I personally don't care when they moved "here" or if they want to do it like "up north," as long as it gets done. A good candidate should not be discouraged from running for office because they have been here a short time. Knowledge of the issues with solutions to some of our more complex problems are all I care about. Short timers, home grown, doesn't matter to me, let's hear them all out!

10 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Chettt

May-03-13 8:52 AM

I agree 100% with full time Council. It will open up to professional type people and hopefully leave out those who are doing it because they are bored and can't golf. Also delete those who moved here 5 years ago and decided they want to run things how they did it up North.

3 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Raydunavant

May-03-13 7:26 AM

This has been brought up, and defeated, by every Charter Review Commission that I am aware of.

One need only to look across the river at the County Commission to see that full time members can really do a lot of harm!

8 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 18 of 18 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web