[RP TownTalk] Follow-up Re: Change in Government

bob smith sfmc68 at verizon.net
Wed Mar 9 15:21:17 UTC 2016


Mister Mayor, Councilors,
Thank you for your response.  I will point out, I advised on 4 March
that I have a set of complex questions. I expect to drill into detail as
I receive information. As I said:
> On March 4th, 2015, I posted this (excerpted) to the town talk discussion:
>>> Alan,
>>> Thanks for all the detail thus far. Thanks to Marilyn and Audrey and
>>> others for asking such good questions.
>>>
>>> I have a slightly complex question (complex in phrasing properly) set to
>>> offer.
>>>
>>> What is the gain for the town in having town manager and what does the
>>> town (or what do the people of the town and the council as elected reps)
>>> loose in having a town manager?
>>>
>>> I obviously have more detailed questions, but this sort of top level can
>>> start the conversation.

This is an important subject to me, and I hope to the entire town.
I think we need transparency in thinking about this and planning for the
town's future.
Respectfully,
bob smith
ward 3



On 3/9/16 6:31 AM, Vernon Archer wrote:
> Bob,
> 
> As you have expanded your question/questions significantly I'm going to
> take some time to craft my reply.
> 
> Also, staff will post the timeline for consideration of the proposal so
> everyone will know it.
> 
> Vern
> 
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 4:25 PM, bob smith <sfmc68 at verizon.net
> <mailto:sfmc68 at verizon.net>> wrote:
> 
>     Mayor Archer, Council members, and those who are interested,
> 
>     Thank you Mayor, I have re-read the article you cited. Respectfully, in
>     my opinion, your response and article cite some what qualitative answers
>     that could be construed as answering to my first question but I do not
>     believe they do. This proposed change would fundamentally change the
>     elected governance model for Riverdale Park.
> 
>     While the article portrays a bit of forward thinking citing increased
>     workloads caused by the growth of Riverdale Park and the interaction
>     with service providers and other municipalities as a need for a CEO like
>     individual to handle this, have any other options been evaluated both
>     qualitatively and and quantitatively?
> 
>     In addition to the qualitative aspects cited in your article, there are
>     some unmentioned aspects that I believe need to be measured
>     quantitatively as best they can be before venturing down the path of
>     change. This proposal is more than a name change and new role for the
>     full time paid person who takes on the role.  What will that cost, in
>     real dollars, fully loaded benefits and so on?  The implications of the
>     wording in your article is increased staff, in addition to this new
>     role, is it not? I trust the council and mayor have researched the
>     projected cost over years for such a new position but I have not heard a
>     whisper of that data. Is there a set of projections? I am assuming this
>     will be an add to the budget.
> 
>     The entities of College Park and Greenbelt have been cited as examples
>     of this model of operation. Both of those entities are Cities in
>     Maryland.  Does this show a longer range plan to move Riverdale Park to
>     City status rather than a Town?
> 
>     I am trying to grasp the overall picture here, and assume most of the
>     rest of Riverdale would like to know what we would be getting into with
>     this change.
> 
>     Respectfully,
>     bob smith
>     ward 3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     On 3/8/16 3:31 PM, Vernon Archer wrote:
>     > Bob,
>     >
>     > While my mayor's report in the Town Crier was not specifically
>     written to answer the two questions you pose, it in effect does
>     answer them. If you haven't read it already you can access it at
>     http://riverdaleparkmd.info/Crier/Mar%202016%20Crier_jeb.pdf
>     >
>     > It gives my take on why I support the change generally-- though I
>     count myself among those who will ask for some changes prior to
>     passage. I didn't directly answer the "lose" question because I
>     don't really see how the town residents/voters lose in any tangible
>     way. I suppose the Office of the mayor loses executive authority,
>     but I can't see how anybody (other than me) cares about that.
>     >
>     > Vern
>     >
>     > Sent from my iPad
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > Sent from my iPad
>     >> On Mar 8, 2016, at 3:08 PM, bob smith <sfmc68 at verizon.net
>     <mailto:sfmc68 at verizon.net>> wrote:
>     >>
>     >> Mayor Archer, Council members,
>     >> I have read and studied the Proposed Charter changed introduced
>     at last
>     >> evenings session.
>     >>
>     >> On March 4th, 2015, I posted this (excerpted) to the town talk
>     discussion:
>     >> Alan,
>     >> Thanks for all the detail thus far. Thanks to Marilyn and Audrey and
>     >> others for asking such good questions.
>     >>
>     >> I have a slightly complex question (complex in phrasing properly)
>     set to
>     >> offer.
>     >>
>     >> What is the gain for the town in having town manager and what
>     does the
>     >> town (or what do the people of the town and the council as
>     elected reps)
>     >> loose in having a town manager?
>     >>
>     >> I obviously have more detailed questions, but this sort of top
>     level can
>     >> start the conversation.
>     >>
>     >> Thanks
>     >> bob smith
>     >> ward 3
>     >>
>     >> I have not yet seen a response. Perhaps there has been a response
>     that
>     >> was not delivered or it is hung up in the internet system somewhere.
>     >>
>     >> While I understand that there are other pressing matters that take
>     >> attention away from this conversation, I am concerned that the
>     clock is
>     >> ticking on this now that it has been introduced and those
>     questions have
>     >> not been answered.
>     >>
>     >> As I stated, I am interested in seeing these questions answered,
>     in open
>     >> dialogue, so that we can call engage in detailed discourse on the
>     impact
>     >> of this proposal should it be passed.  An informed citizenry is
>     >> essential for the future of Riverdale Park.
>     >>
>     >> Respectfully,
>     >> Bob Smith,
>     >> ward 3.
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>> On 3/8/16 11:39 AM, Vernon Archer wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>> Bob and all interested,
>     >>>
>     >>> I and everyone on the council share your concern that all voters and
>     >>> residents have an opportunity to be heard and participate in the
>     process
>     >>> of considering the change of government that was formally introduced
>     >>> last evening.  But I do want to point out that as a representative
>     >>> democracy we are controlled by state law and our charter in the
>     process
>     >>> of proposing, passing and if deemed necessary referendum.  You
>     cannot
>     >>> take to referendum a law that has not been passed.
>     >>>
>     >>> In Maryland the concept of a referendum is designed to give voters a
>     >>> mechanism to correct the legislative body--council--if sufficient
>     >>> numbers of voters feel the body either did not listen to the
>     voters or
>     >>> made some grave error. A referendum is the voters way to say a
>     firm "NO"
>     >>> to legislation, not a way to express an open opinion  YES or NO.
>     >>>
>     >>> I would like to point out that now that the legislation is proposed
>     >>> there will be a minimum of 2 meetings prior to the council
>     taking action
>     >>> on the proposal, March 28 work session and the April 4 legislative
>     >>> meeting.  There will not be action until the May 2 meeting that will
>     >>> also give an opportunity to discuss in the April 25 work session.
>     >>>
>     >>> Thus, please inform yourself about the proposal. Please work
>     with the
>     >>> council to improve the proposal if you have limited concerns,
>     but like
>     >>> the general thrust of the proposal, or let your representative
>     know if
>     >>> you oppose the idea outright.  I believe that the council is not
>     >>> interested in proposing anything so divisive and dividing in our
>     town
>     >>> that it will end up having a referendum where even a significant
>     >>> minority are dissatisfied with their action.  The goal is a
>     consensus
>     >>> where an overwhelming majority of residents are happy with the
>     outcome.
>     >>>
>     >>> Sincerely,
>     >>>
>     >>> Vern
>     >>>
>     >>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 8:19 AM, bob smith <sfmc68 at verizon.net
>     <mailto:sfmc68 at verizon.net>
>     >>> <mailto:sfmc68 at verizon.net <mailto:sfmc68 at verizon.net>>> wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>>   Recalling the changes in Riverdale Park over the last 28
>     years, from
>     >>>   name change to bond decisions, I believe it would be
>     disservice to the
>     >>>   Town and the citizens if a change in the form of the Town
>     government was
>     >>>   not decided by referendum.
>     >>>
>     >>>   I urge the citizens of Riverdale Park to consider this matter
>     on its
>     >>>   merits, thoroughly discuss it, and put the matter to a vote by
>     all of
>     >>>   the eligible voters. I urge the Town Council to consider this
>     approach
>     >>>   as means of ensuring voice of the people is heard and listened to.
>     >>>
>     >>>   Respectfully,
>     >>>   Bob Smith
>     >>>   Ward 3
>     >>>
>     >>>>   On 3/2/16 9:15 PM, Alan K. Thompson wrote:
>     >>>>   Will the Mayor and Council be the only ones who decide this
>     matter
>     >>>>   or will it go to referendum for a vote by the residents?
>     >>>>
>     >>>>
>     >>>> Unless the citizens want a referendum, it will be decided by the
>     >>>> Council. § 4-304 of the Local Government Code of Maryland (which
>     >>>   governs
>     >>>> amendments to municipal charters) allows referendum only at the
>     >>>   request
>     >>>> of the voters - the Council cannot initiate a binding referendum.
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>   Entire message, to ensure continuity
>     >>>   \
>     >>>
>     >>>   Hi Audrey,
>     >>>
>     >>>   Thank you for your interest in this.  I'm happy to answer your
>     questions
>     >>>   for the current draft, but things may change because of
>     feedback from
>     >>>   the citizens and the Council.  I'll answer your questions
>     after each one
>     >>>   below.
>     >>>
>     >>>   On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Audrey Bragg
>     <abragg7393 at aol.com <mailto:abragg7393 at aol.com>
>     >>>   <mailto:abragg7393 at aol.com <mailto:abragg7393 at aol.com>>> wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>>       Just reading the Town Crier and Mayor's report regarding
>     the change
>     >>>   in the town government.  A professional manager will be in
>     charge of the
>     >>>   town instead of the Mayor.  I would like to hear what other
>     residents
>     >>>   have to say about this and I do have questions.
>     >>>       Will the CEO be required to live in the town?  I think
>     this is very
>     >>>   important.
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>   This is not in the current draft.  Greenbelt requires this of
>     their City
>     >>>   Manager, but I don't think that either College Park or
>     Hyattsville (both
>     >>>   of which have forms of government closer to the
>     "Council-Manager" form
>     >>>   than we do) require this.  I can check into that and get back
>     to you if
>     >>>   you're interested.
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>       What are the education and experience requirements for the
>     position?
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>   Currently full membership in good standing in the
>     International City and
>     >>>   County Manager's Association, which is a professional
>     accreditation
>     >>>   organization for managers of local governments.  They have
>     stringent
>     >>>   requirements including educational requirements, and are
>     recognized
>     >>>   around the world.
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>       Why do we even need a Mayor if the CEO is in charge?  Why
>     not just
>     >>>   have a board?
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>   In a lot of ways the Mayor is just a member of the Council
>     under the
>     >>>   proposal, but he or she does have some additional
>     responsibilities, and
>     >>>   is elected to represent the whole Town and not just part of
>     it.  As I
>     >>>   said in my February Town Crier article about this change, in
>     Greenbelt
>     >>>   (the closest to a pure Council-Manager form of government near
>     us) the
>     >>>   Mayor is not directly elected.  The language from the current
>     draft
>     >>>   says: "The mayor shall be recognized as the head of the town
>     government
>     >>>   for all ceremonial purposes, by the court for serving civil
>     process, and
>     >>>   by the Governor for the purpose of military and emergency law."
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>       Will the Mayor and Council be the only ones who decide
>     this matter
>     >>>   or will it go to referendum for a vote by the residents?
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>   Unless the citizens want a referendum, it will be decided by the
>     >>>   Council. § 4-304 of the Local Government Code of Maryland
>     (which governs
>     >>>   amendments to municipal charters) allows referendum only at
>     the request
>     >>>   of the voters - the Council cannot initiate a binding referendum.
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>       Who will the CEO be responsible to?  Can the council hire
>     and fire?
>     >>>    Is the CEO elected or appointed by council?
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>   The Town Manager is hired and removed by the Town Council, and is
>     >>>   responsible to them and to the law; the exact language is
>     "serves at the
>     >>>   pleasure of the Council" and means that the Town Manager can
>     be removed
>     >>>   for any reason (or no reason, if the Council decides so).  The
>     current
>     >>>   charter change draft has a specific process for removal of the
>     Town
>     >>>   Manager.
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>       Do any of the other local towns do this and how does it
>     work for
>     >>>   them?
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>   College Park, Hyattsville, and Greenbelt all have City
>     Managers, though
>     >>>   the split in power between the Council, Mayor, and Town
>     Manager in all
>     >>>   three are different (and that split is still being adjusted in
>     my draft,
>     >>>   even before formally introducing it).  I would say that this
>     system
>     >>>   works well in all of those municipalities.
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>       I think this is a very serious and important matter and I
>     think the
>     >>>   residents need to be involved and notified when we can review any
>     >>>   legislation and ask questions and it should be well advertised
>     so people
>     >>>   are aware and know what's going on.
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>   I agree.  I wrote my long article on it in the February Town
>     Crier,
>     >>>   Mayor Archer wrote about it this month, and we can have up to
>     60 days
>     >>>   after introduction to discuss it before we have to pass it
>     reject it.
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>       I would really like to hear the opinions and ideas and
>     questions
>     >>>   from the residents.
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>   Me too!
>     >>>
>     >>>   Thanks again for writing, and I'd love to continue the discussion.
>     >>>
>     >>>   Best regards,
>     >>>
>     >>>   Alan
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>   _______________________________________________
>     >>>   TownTalk mailing list
>     >>>   To post to the list, send mail to TownTalk at riverdale-park.org
>     <mailto:TownTalk at riverdale-park.org>
>     >>>   <mailto:TownTalk at riverdale-park.org
>     <mailto:TownTalk at riverdale-park.org>>
>     >>>   TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org
>     <mailto:TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org>
>     >>>   <mailto:TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org
>     <mailto:TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org>> is for automated
>     >>>   subscription
>     >>>   processing only
>     >>>   http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/towntalk
>     >>>
>     >>>   For more information about Riverdale Park, visit
>     >>>   http://www.riverdaleparkmd.info
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>   _______________________________________________
>     >>>   TownTalk mailing list
>     >>>   To post to the list, send mail to TownTalk at riverdale-park.org
>     <mailto:TownTalk at riverdale-park.org>
>     >>>   <mailto:TownTalk at riverdale-park.org
>     <mailto:TownTalk at riverdale-park.org>>
>     >>>   TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org
>     <mailto:TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org>
>     >>>   <mailto:TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org
>     <mailto:TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org>> is for automated
>     >>>   subscription processing only
>     >>>   http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/towntalk
>     >>>
>     >>>   For more information about Riverdale Park, visit
>     >>>   http://www.riverdaleparkmd.info
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>> --
>     >>> Vernon Archer, Mayor
>     >>> Town of Riverdale Park, Maryland
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>> --
>     >>> Vernon Archer, Mayor
>     >>> Town of Riverdale Park, Maryland
>     >>
>     >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Vernon Archer, Mayor
> Town of Riverdale Park, Maryland



More information about the TownTalk mailing list