The
Georgia Municipal Association and the Georgia Legislature drives the cost of
government higher and weakens voter control over decisions. Salaries
recommended by the Georgia Municipal Association are sky high.
City
& County Charters leave voters no say-so on critical issues. The Georgia Legislature uses the Charters to Muzzle
the Voters. Cobb taxpayers are stuck with Brave’s Stadium debt because they had
no opportunity to vote on this bond issue. Hall County had their property taxes
quadruple at Lake Lanier, because the County Council hired a firm from out of
town to assess the property.
City
Staff run the Dunwoody City Council. Council Reps defer to the “professionals”.
The Council-Manager structure is prone to this weakness. Staffs insistence on
keeping “Care Homes” and minimum 15,000 sf lot size in R-100 created problems
in Manget Way and Dunwoody Club Forest.
City
Staff careers are controlled by Municipal Consulting firms in collusion with
the Georgia Municipal Association and other State Municipal Associations.
Bringing temp staff on to the City payroll does not alter their loyalties.
City
Staff members don’t live in Dunwoody. They have been trained by ICLEI to
implement UN Agenda 21. They are biased toward the Agenda 21 concepts we find
wasteful and ridiculous.
The
Georgia Municipal Association publishes the Georgia Municipal Handbook for
Mayors and Councilmembers. It is a “cookie cutter” manual installed by ICLEI to
implement UN Agenda 21. The 3 forms of
municipal government used in Georgia are described as follows:
FORMS OF
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT In Georgia, most municipalities utilize one of three forms
of government: Mayor-Council (Strong Mayor) Form Mayor-Council (Weak Mayor)
Form Council-Manager Form
These
forms of government divide executive and policy-making roles and
responsibilities between the municipality’s elected officials - the mayor and
council – and appointive staff. While there are distinct differences between
these forms of government, there are many variations on structure and policy
roles depending on the provisions of the municipality’s charter and the
philosophy of the municipality.
Mayor-Council
Form (Strong Mayor) Under this form of government, the city council provides
the primary policy role, while the mayor provides the primary executive role.
This form provides for a distinguishable separation of powers between the
city’s executive branch (mayor) and its legislative branch (city council).
Thus, the separation of powers contained in the “strong” mayor form is similar
to those found in the national and state governments, with the office of mayor
being similar to the President of the United States or a governor of a state.
Likewise, the council acts as a legislative body similar to the Congress of the
United States or a state legislature. Under this form, the mayor serves as the
city’s chief executive officer and has full responsibility for the city’s daily
operations. As such, the
mayor
normally possesses the power to hire and fire
department
heads and other city staff, prepare and administer of the city’s budget, and
execute contracts. The mayor may also have the authority to appoint council
committees, veto legislation passed by the council, and appoint members to city
advisory boards. In some cities, particularly larger ones, the mayor may
appoint a professional administrator (chief administrative officer, city
administrator, etc.) to assist in carrying out the daily operations of the
city. The city council is responsible for enacting the city’s policies, through
the adoption of ordinances and/or resolutions. While the mayor may possess the
authority to veto actions of the city council, the council may possess
authority to override the mayor’s veto.
Mayor-
Council Form (Weak Mayor) Under this form of government, the mayor and city
council normally share the primary policy making role, while the mayor provides
the primary executive role. However, in many cities, the “weak” mayor’s role is
primarily ceremonial, with the “weak” mayor possessing few, if any, of the
executive powers provided to a “strong” mayor. For example, the mayor may not
have the authority to appoint council committees, develop the city’s budget, or
veto actions of the city council. Also, the mayor may have limited authority to
appoint department heads, subject to confirmation by the city council. However,
the mayor may not possess the authority to fire department heads. The primary
advantage of this form is that it keeps control of the government out of the
hands of any single person, so that a corrupt or incompetent individual could
do little harm to the city.
1 Council
– Manager Form Under this form of government, the city council provides the
primary policy-making role, and an appointed city manager provides the primary
executive role. It combines the strong political leadership of the elected
mayor and council with the strong managerial experience of an appointed local
government manager. The council-manager form of government was developed in the
early 1900s by reformers who envisioned a more business-like approach to
municipal government. Thus, the structure of a municipality operating under the
council-manager form of government is similar to the structure of a
corporation. To this end, the municipality’s citizens are treated as
shareholders that elect a city council to serve as their board of directors.
The city council establishes the city’s policies, while a professional city
manager, hired by the city council, is charged with implementing the council’s
policies. In this capacity, the city manager functions similarly to a
corporation’s chief executive officer, or CEO.2 Primary Features of the
Council-Manager Form of Government Generally, the council-manager form of
government deviates from the traditional separation of powers structure that
exists at the national, state, and local levels of government. Instead of
having an elected chief executive (president, governor, etc.), the
council-manager form of government gives formal governmental authority to an
elected city council. The city council then hires a professional city manager
to oversee all administrative and executive functions.
The city
manager serves at the pleasure of the city council. If a majority of the
council is displeased with the manager’s performance, the manager can be fired,
subject to applicable laws and ordinances, as well as the terms of the
manager’s employment agreement with the city council, if any. In summary, the
council-manager form of government combines the strong political leadership of
elected officials (mayor and council) with the strong managerial experience of
an appointed local government manager. Under this form of government,
responsiveness to citizens can be enhanced, as administrative accountability is
centralized in one individual, the city manager. Additionally, because
political power is concentrated in the entire city council rather than in one
elected official, the council-manager form may provide citizens with greater
opportunities to serve their community and to influence the future of their
community.
Responsibilities
of the City Council - The council is the city’s legislative and policy-making
body. Its members are the community’s decision-makers. As such, the city
council is responsible for enacting policies, approving the city’s annual
budget, setting the city’s tax rate, and focusing on such major projects and
issues as land use planning, capital financing, and strategic planning. The
council is also responsible for hiring the city manager, supervising the
manager, and evaluating the manager’s performance. By its very nature, the
council-manager form of government is designed to free the city’s governing
body from the administration of daily operations, allowing them to instead
devote attention to policy-making responsibilities.
Responsibilities
of the Mayor - In the purest sense of the council-manager form, the mayor is a
member of the city council, with the position of mayor usually being chosen
from among the council members on a rotation basis. Under this scenario, the
mayor presides at council meetings, signs official documents (ordinances,
resolutions, proclamations, etc.) and serves as the city’s official
spokesperson. In this sense, the mayor in a council-manager city is similar to
a corporation’s chairman of the board. In actual practice, however, numerous
cities, including many in Georgia, now elect the mayor citywide by the voters.
In these cities, the mayor may possess expanded powers, including the power to
veto legislation, appoint council committees, appoint citizen advisory boards,
and/or prepare an annual report (“State of the City”) to the council and the
community. However, the mayor normally does not possess any day-to-day
administrative responsibilities.
Responsibilities
of the City Manager - The city manager is hired by the city council to carry
out the policies established by the council and to oversee the city’s daily
operations. The manager should be hired solely on the basis of relevant
education and professional experience. Typically, the city manager is
responsible for implementing policies and programs adopted by the city council;
hiring and supervising the city’s department heads and administrative staff; developing
a proposed budget for the council’s consideration; administration of all city
contracts; and serving as the mayor and council’s chief advisor. The city
manager also serves as the mayor and council’s liaison to the city’s department
heads. While the reformers who created the council-manager form of government
originally sought to separate the politics of local government from its
administration, this separation is now mostly fiction. Today, most city
councils desire and expect their manager to make policy recommendations, with
such recommendations providing accurate and detailed information, possible
alternatives, and any long-term impacts. The city council can then adopt, modify,
or reject the manager’s recommendations. While city managers are typically
hired by the city council and serve at the council’s pleasure, most managers,
particularly those in medium and large cities, now operate under the terms of
an employment agreement. Such agreements normally outline the terms and
conditions of employment and separation, along with providing clear guidelines
for evaluating the manager’s performance.
The fact
that the Georgia Municipal Association writes the rules for all cities and
counties ought to tell you that our Codes have been imposed from the top down.
Not all
cities and counties went along with UN Agenda 21 abuse. Many of them refused to
overuse consultants. They made their Master Plans identical to their original
zoning. Counties in South Florida openly rebelled against the complexities of
Agenda 21 and voted to reject Regionalism..
Habersham County GA rebelled against the plan that ceded most of their
farmland to the federal government. They kept their old Codes and Plans.
Dunwoody
could have avoided excessive cost and abuse by rejecting the “cookie cutter”,
top-down approach. High density development is still part of the Dunwoody
Master Plan despite the fact that our roads and highways will not accommodate
the additional traffic. The rush for unsustainable overdevelopment in PCID
smells like a scam designed to spike costs.
Norb
Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment