SHOULD THE CITY CHARTER BE AMENDED TO DEFINE WHEN A STREET OR BUILDING OR PARK CAN BE NAMED AFTER A PERSON?
I took the following from the Sanchez/Montoya blog.
Rogelio Guevara said...
We have a bad habit in Brownsville of naming schools, roads, streets and buildings after people who are still living. This practice just begs for disaster. What are you going to do when that person gets caught with their fingers in the cookie jar and goes to jail? Do we have a Joey Lopez Blvd yet?Nothing should be named after anyone until.....
A) They have been dead for at least 5 years or
B) They donated the property for the building or
C) They died in heroic service to the city or country.
P.S. Nothing should ever be named after anyone who gained their fame while they were on the government cake walk.Maybe this is an issue the Charter Review Committee should look at
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Monday, August 25, 2008
SHOULD WE REPLACE A PAID CITY MANAGER WITH A FULL TIME PAID MAYOR?
On Wednesday I will deal with amending the City Charter to define when a person qualifies to have a building or street named after themselves.
Today’s post is a simple issue. Should we amend the City Charter to change our form of government from a city manager to a mayor who manages the city. And if so, would you support paying the mayor a wage as a full time mayor who manages the city instead of a city manager? Currently, unlike County Judge Cascos, the mayor manages nothing. The question effectively is, would you support eliminating the position of city manager in exchange for a full time paid mayor?
On Wednesday I will deal with amending the City Charter to define when a person qualifies to have a building or street named after themselves.
Today’s post is a simple issue. Should we amend the City Charter to change our form of government from a city manager to a mayor who manages the city. And if so, would you support paying the mayor a wage as a full time mayor who manages the city instead of a city manager? Currently, unlike County Judge Cascos, the mayor manages nothing. The question effectively is, would you support eliminating the position of city manager in exchange for a full time paid mayor?
Sunday, August 24, 2008
SHOULD THE CITY COMMISSION AND MAYOR BE PAID FOR THEIR SERVICE?
Volunteerism is an important part of our society. I for example, until this semester, have averaged 20-25 hours per week tutoring UTB/TSC students who have learning challenges. I have never been paid a penny, and do not expect to be paid a penny. Given the number of meals I have prepared for my students, I have actually loss money on the deal. I am not complaining, I am just speaking to the nature of volunteerism. Brownsville has thousands of volunteers who go unrecognized every day, as they should, because a true volunteer asks for nothing in return for their service.
Basically I do not trust people who volunteer and then complain or expect recognition. You either believe in your service or you do not. This post is about compensation for the city commissioners. This issue is not new. I can tell you that after it passed in Dallas, nothing, and I mean nothing changed, unless things getting worse counts as change. It is a myth that if you pay the city commission you will get a better grade of commissioners running for office. If you keep it as a volunteer position the good will still run. Can anyone think of when giving money to a politician made them more honest or competent?
I originally wanted to do some type balanced piece on this issue. I could not find anything on the internet which promotes the benefits of paying city commissioners. I then decided I had already posted my position on this issue in several pieces so it would surprise no one to learn I am opposed to compensating city commissioners, beyond health insurance.
An argument I heard in Dallas over and over again is, if you pay the city council-members, poor people will consider running for office. They may consider running for office, but they will not get elected. It takes an existing political machine to get elected, or someone with enough money to build a new political machine to get elected. The idea that the guy on food stamps will be able to get elected is an insult to our intelligence.
I grew up in a community which has a volunteer fire department. All over the US volunteer fire departments continue to operate. So why should we pay the city commissioners? How do our city leaders promote volunteerism, which reduces the tax burden on the people, when the city leaders are whining that they should be paid for what has traditionally been a volunteer position?
I could think of no worse time for a city commission to be pushing for pay. I understand the tax increases the people are facing are negligetable, but the average voter does not. They read in the paper their taxes are going up, and to them the world is coming to an end. In terms of taxes, they are facing a tax increase from appraisals, the city, and the county. Any city commissioner caught arguing for compensation will certainly be hanging themselves out to dry come the next election cycle they are up for reelection.
To be fair on this issue, I will post any argument which supports pay for the city commissioners. If people are worried about associating their name with the argument post it as anonymous. On the comments, for those of you who do not know, you can post a comment and then tell me not to post it. A lot of people communicate with me in this format. If you ask me to reject your comment because you are just communicating with me privately, I have no problem pressing the reject button.
Volunteerism is an important part of our society. I for example, until this semester, have averaged 20-25 hours per week tutoring UTB/TSC students who have learning challenges. I have never been paid a penny, and do not expect to be paid a penny. Given the number of meals I have prepared for my students, I have actually loss money on the deal. I am not complaining, I am just speaking to the nature of volunteerism. Brownsville has thousands of volunteers who go unrecognized every day, as they should, because a true volunteer asks for nothing in return for their service.
Basically I do not trust people who volunteer and then complain or expect recognition. You either believe in your service or you do not. This post is about compensation for the city commissioners. This issue is not new. I can tell you that after it passed in Dallas, nothing, and I mean nothing changed, unless things getting worse counts as change. It is a myth that if you pay the city commission you will get a better grade of commissioners running for office. If you keep it as a volunteer position the good will still run. Can anyone think of when giving money to a politician made them more honest or competent?
I originally wanted to do some type balanced piece on this issue. I could not find anything on the internet which promotes the benefits of paying city commissioners. I then decided I had already posted my position on this issue in several pieces so it would surprise no one to learn I am opposed to compensating city commissioners, beyond health insurance.
An argument I heard in Dallas over and over again is, if you pay the city council-members, poor people will consider running for office. They may consider running for office, but they will not get elected. It takes an existing political machine to get elected, or someone with enough money to build a new political machine to get elected. The idea that the guy on food stamps will be able to get elected is an insult to our intelligence.
I grew up in a community which has a volunteer fire department. All over the US volunteer fire departments continue to operate. So why should we pay the city commissioners? How do our city leaders promote volunteerism, which reduces the tax burden on the people, when the city leaders are whining that they should be paid for what has traditionally been a volunteer position?
I could think of no worse time for a city commission to be pushing for pay. I understand the tax increases the people are facing are negligetable, but the average voter does not. They read in the paper their taxes are going up, and to them the world is coming to an end. In terms of taxes, they are facing a tax increase from appraisals, the city, and the county. Any city commissioner caught arguing for compensation will certainly be hanging themselves out to dry come the next election cycle they are up for reelection.
To be fair on this issue, I will post any argument which supports pay for the city commissioners. If people are worried about associating their name with the argument post it as anonymous. On the comments, for those of you who do not know, you can post a comment and then tell me not to post it. A lot of people communicate with me in this format. If you ask me to reject your comment because you are just communicating with me privately, I have no problem pressing the reject button.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
SHOULD THE BROWNSVILLE CITY CHARTER INCLUDE A PROVISION FOR REFERENDUMS?
Kurgan came up with the idea of changing the City Charter to allow for public referendums. He did not have to do any of the research. He had the idea, and I went out and found what I believe to be neutral material which explains the purpose of a referendum and the impact a referendum can have on the community. Everything which follows may be a bit drab. It is from an academic article which appeared in the UK. I pulled out specific information which I believe will help the reader to form an independent opinion.
I do need a topic for Monday. As you can see, all Kurgan had to do was state a general idea. I did all of the work. So do not feel like your idea does not matter because you cannot write. Just give me a general idea and I may write it for you based on your ideas.
People I know a lot of people read Thursday’s post. The IRS is not going to come steal your home if you vote in the polls. There is no Big Brother watching how you vote.
"In the Western literature, words such as "referendum", "plebiscite" and "initiative" carry similar meaning, referring to actions which people vote for or against motions which concern the public."
"Research findings reveal that in democratic societies, there are generally two ways for people to take part in policy decision-making and to give their governments legitimacy. The first way is direct democracy such as referendums; the second one is indirect representative democracy such as regular parliamentary meetings and presidential elections. The Team asserts that both direct and representative democracies are useful systems in materializing equal political rights of people and they are not mutually exclusive in nature. Besides, both direct and representative democracies can become a standing and reciprocally complementary political setting in the present political systems. And the outcome of either referendum or popularly elected government is to objectively reflect people's wills".
"Experiences show that during the course of democratization, both reformist power and conservative power value the use of referendums. On one hand, reformists hope to make use of referendum to win public support for introducing reforms. On the other hand, conservatives believe referendum can reflect majority view on seeking stability, which is advantageous to maintain the status quo or neutralize the demand from reformists"
"Pros and Cons of Referendums
Pros: (1) Referendums can embody the common notion of "People rule", and people's wills become the final arbitration of any serious and publicly concerned debates. (2) Referendums allow every voter to express their views directly and clearly. They can contemplate the concerning motion and take part in policy making actively and responsibly. (3) When compared with usual public opinion polls, referendums put more emphasis on the importance of rigorous thinking and reflection. (4) Referendums complement but they do not replace representative democracy. As a standing mechanism but no frequently activated, they can help to remind governments and parliaments of the centrality of their people. (5) In a political environment lacking in legitimacy, political leaders and even the civic society may use referendums to gain legitimacy for their political system or policy objectives. (6) Referendums are in fact part of a healthy political process; both political leaders and people can use referendums to resolve misunderstandings and conflicts.
Cons: (1) In order to reach certain goals, political leaders and civic organizations can use different means to distort and manipulate public opinions. If the content, time arrangement and even the results' interpretation of referendums are not properly handled, the outcome of referendums will only reflect the will of the initiator but not the people's true will. (2) It is difficult for the government, interest groups or media to remain neutral at the interface of affirmative and negative sides of the motions. They may mislead the direction of debates and in turn deteriorate the democratic nature of referendums. (3) The degrees of public interests and participations in different social issues are different. Therefore, in the course of the referendums, people's ability to participate in discussions and handle relevant information is often being questioned. (4) The majority choice and preference are not always the best decision. In addition, referendums turn complicated political issues to a zero-sum game which is not good for cooperative allocation of interests. (5) The results of referendums are unpredictable and uncontrollable. A genuinely fair and open referendum brings risks to both the affirmative and negative sides of the concerned motion. (6) Referendums can weaken the representative government and directly elected political bodies, and in turn lower the quality of policies. Even worse, referendums may boost populism and bring the risk of "popular tyranny" "
http://hkupop.hku.hk/english/columns/columns72.html
I am adding a variable to item 6 of the cons. In our form of government the courts are free to hold unconstitutional any referendum which violates constitutional guarantees. In fact as of late the courts have been accused of being too aggressive in holding referendums unconstitutional. Although, some will say the courts have allowed to stand referendums which certain groups believe violate their constitutional rights. So this check on the process is only as good as our judiciary.
Kurgan came up with the idea of changing the City Charter to allow for public referendums. He did not have to do any of the research. He had the idea, and I went out and found what I believe to be neutral material which explains the purpose of a referendum and the impact a referendum can have on the community. Everything which follows may be a bit drab. It is from an academic article which appeared in the UK. I pulled out specific information which I believe will help the reader to form an independent opinion.
I do need a topic for Monday. As you can see, all Kurgan had to do was state a general idea. I did all of the work. So do not feel like your idea does not matter because you cannot write. Just give me a general idea and I may write it for you based on your ideas.
People I know a lot of people read Thursday’s post. The IRS is not going to come steal your home if you vote in the polls. There is no Big Brother watching how you vote.
"In the Western literature, words such as "referendum", "plebiscite" and "initiative" carry similar meaning, referring to actions which people vote for or against motions which concern the public."
"Research findings reveal that in democratic societies, there are generally two ways for people to take part in policy decision-making and to give their governments legitimacy. The first way is direct democracy such as referendums; the second one is indirect representative democracy such as regular parliamentary meetings and presidential elections. The Team asserts that both direct and representative democracies are useful systems in materializing equal political rights of people and they are not mutually exclusive in nature. Besides, both direct and representative democracies can become a standing and reciprocally complementary political setting in the present political systems. And the outcome of either referendum or popularly elected government is to objectively reflect people's wills".
"Experiences show that during the course of democratization, both reformist power and conservative power value the use of referendums. On one hand, reformists hope to make use of referendum to win public support for introducing reforms. On the other hand, conservatives believe referendum can reflect majority view on seeking stability, which is advantageous to maintain the status quo or neutralize the demand from reformists"
"Pros and Cons of Referendums
Pros: (1) Referendums can embody the common notion of "People rule", and people's wills become the final arbitration of any serious and publicly concerned debates. (2) Referendums allow every voter to express their views directly and clearly. They can contemplate the concerning motion and take part in policy making actively and responsibly. (3) When compared with usual public opinion polls, referendums put more emphasis on the importance of rigorous thinking and reflection. (4) Referendums complement but they do not replace representative democracy. As a standing mechanism but no frequently activated, they can help to remind governments and parliaments of the centrality of their people. (5) In a political environment lacking in legitimacy, political leaders and even the civic society may use referendums to gain legitimacy for their political system or policy objectives. (6) Referendums are in fact part of a healthy political process; both political leaders and people can use referendums to resolve misunderstandings and conflicts.
Cons: (1) In order to reach certain goals, political leaders and civic organizations can use different means to distort and manipulate public opinions. If the content, time arrangement and even the results' interpretation of referendums are not properly handled, the outcome of referendums will only reflect the will of the initiator but not the people's true will. (2) It is difficult for the government, interest groups or media to remain neutral at the interface of affirmative and negative sides of the motions. They may mislead the direction of debates and in turn deteriorate the democratic nature of referendums. (3) The degrees of public interests and participations in different social issues are different. Therefore, in the course of the referendums, people's ability to participate in discussions and handle relevant information is often being questioned. (4) The majority choice and preference are not always the best decision. In addition, referendums turn complicated political issues to a zero-sum game which is not good for cooperative allocation of interests. (5) The results of referendums are unpredictable and uncontrollable. A genuinely fair and open referendum brings risks to both the affirmative and negative sides of the concerned motion. (6) Referendums can weaken the representative government and directly elected political bodies, and in turn lower the quality of policies. Even worse, referendums may boost populism and bring the risk of "popular tyranny" "
http://hkupop.hku.hk/english/columns/columns72.html
I am adding a variable to item 6 of the cons. In our form of government the courts are free to hold unconstitutional any referendum which violates constitutional guarantees. In fact as of late the courts have been accused of being too aggressive in holding referendums unconstitutional. Although, some will say the courts have allowed to stand referendums which certain groups believe violate their constitutional rights. So this check on the process is only as good as our judiciary.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR EMPLOYMENT OF ALL DIRECTORS AND THE CITY MANAGER
In my view it is time to move on beyond all the controversy related to the start-up of the Charter Review Committee. I have created this blog special because I want a non-political place for discussion related to Charter Review. If you read the Rules of Engagement you will see this will not be like the Brownsville Voice. I want to encourage everyone to put their ideas on the table. This can become a link between the citizenry of Brownsville, which includes the Commissioners and Mayor, and the Charter Review Committee.
If you want to make an argument for why we should pay the City Commissioners, just submit it as a comment. I will copy it and then post it as a separate post so people can argue for or against it. This goes for every issue under the sun.
It might be helpful if people e-mail me with their ideas and then I can e-mail them back with a date when their idea will appear. I will also keep the readers updated as to when new ideas will be posted. bobbywc@sbcglobal.net
I will start with the area I care about most - Education.
I do believe we can have a more efficiently managed city if the education of the candidate mattered during the hiring process of the City Manager, Assistant City Managers, and Directors. In most cities the City Manager has a Masters in Public Administration. I would also support the requirement that the Director over Personnel have a Masters in Personnel Management or Administration. As to the Directors I would support the idea that they have a Masters in their field or a professional license in their field.
I believe my proposals are non-partisan and would promote a more efficiently run City of Brownsville. They would also promote the notion to our children that education matters. They would also promote the programs being offered at UTB.
The responses should be simple statements as to why you agree or not agree. I know there are a lot of comments ready to go as to why the Commission will never support these changes. I do believe if the people become proactive in this matter and push the ideas of the citizenry, the citizens can change things. I do believe some members of the City Commission support mandated educational requirements. They just need the people to get behind the idea.
In my view it is time to move on beyond all the controversy related to the start-up of the Charter Review Committee. I have created this blog special because I want a non-political place for discussion related to Charter Review. If you read the Rules of Engagement you will see this will not be like the Brownsville Voice. I want to encourage everyone to put their ideas on the table. This can become a link between the citizenry of Brownsville, which includes the Commissioners and Mayor, and the Charter Review Committee.
If you want to make an argument for why we should pay the City Commissioners, just submit it as a comment. I will copy it and then post it as a separate post so people can argue for or against it. This goes for every issue under the sun.
It might be helpful if people e-mail me with their ideas and then I can e-mail them back with a date when their idea will appear. I will also keep the readers updated as to when new ideas will be posted. bobbywc@sbcglobal.net
I will start with the area I care about most - Education.
I do believe we can have a more efficiently managed city if the education of the candidate mattered during the hiring process of the City Manager, Assistant City Managers, and Directors. In most cities the City Manager has a Masters in Public Administration. I would also support the requirement that the Director over Personnel have a Masters in Personnel Management or Administration. As to the Directors I would support the idea that they have a Masters in their field or a professional license in their field.
I believe my proposals are non-partisan and would promote a more efficiently run City of Brownsville. They would also promote the notion to our children that education matters. They would also promote the programs being offered at UTB.
The responses should be simple statements as to why you agree or not agree. I know there are a lot of comments ready to go as to why the Commission will never support these changes. I do believe if the people become proactive in this matter and push the ideas of the citizenry, the citizens can change things. I do believe some members of the City Commission support mandated educational requirements. They just need the people to get behind the idea.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)