Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnNada
As I sit here typing from my invaded neighborhood that was overrun with police last week during a manhunt I must say Caden you pretty much nailed it with that one. Charleston has not had a dynamic mayor for quite some time. I think we have a 26 member council and no term limits for mayor and these things hurt Charleston quite a bit too. I have no idea who to vote for in this next election but best of luck to whoever gets clean up duty. Hopefully someone with a vision for development gets elected.
|
Much of the problem is due to the type of government the city of Charleston has. City charters are issued by the state now and have been for some time but the state was not always the arbiter, such as when Charleston was originally formed.
There are two broad models for city governments Mayor-Council or Mayor-Manager.
The Mayor-Manager is uncommon. In it the city council acts a bit more like a legislature and the city often but not always hires a city manager to oversee the various departments and act as the CFO. The council in this setting is very much in the back seat, but they still have a role to play. Generally only large metropolitan cities run this form of government.
The Mayor-Council type which is much more common because it used almost exclusively with the small to medium sized cities across the nation. But, it diverges into two types:
The Strong Mayor-Council subtype is where the mayor has been invested with pretty much every power there is to administer and run a city. Elect the best man and you have a city government that can move forward in breathtaking strides but elect the wrong guy and you have a dictator that can run a city into the ground over night, often for personal gain. The council in this form is little more than a backdrop.
The Weak Mayor-Council subtype should probably be called the Token Mayor-Council of Aldermen, because the Council has all of the power. The mayor has few tools at his disposal and is limited to achieving change or progress through the impact of his or her personality. The council runs everything and the mayor's level of participation is the stooge that takes the blame and looks clownish when taking the credit. No one in the city reports to the mayor because the mayor does not appoint or oversee any department, not even his or her own.
Small cities usually have a city council of 5 to 9 people, rarely more. Almost always with an odd number of members with the odd numbered member acting as a head of council and using their powers only when a deadlock comes into being. They are usually elected by their wards from which they must reside. Charleston elects 20 and then that 20 more or less appoints another 6 that the voters have no say upon. Charleston has 3 to 4 times the normal number of council members. This is nothing but cronyism at it's worst. This vast number of council members milk the city budget and give plenty of cover to deflect public opinion when something goes wrong.
In my opinion the form of government that Charleston has can work when the council and the mayor are working toward a common goal but that has not been the case since Hutchinson. Now the council is filled with little tin horns all thinking they run the place and if you look down the list, none of them has any education in government nor would you be very impressed if you had a causal conversation with them. I think each and every one of them is as dumb as a box of rocks. They could not get a job at any company that demanded performance but they can flourish in city government - that speaks volumes!
To change the city government requires - I think - signatures of 10% of the eligible voters, but it may be 20% - sources conflict. This would not be something the council or anyone in the city can thwart as it would be the will of the people. A minimum of 36 months must pass before any new petition could be started once a change were made.
Personally I find the best form to be the Mayor-Council with a strong mayor-useless council. I dislike a City Manager form because it lets everyone blame a guy not voted into office by the people. The city of Charleston could be no worse under a bad strong mayor than it has been under a bloated, bad city council.
But, the 800-pound elephant in the room is the County. They County and the City of Charleston are at war over who is the king in Kanawha County and Kent Carper, Ken Hall and Hoppy Shores have made a lot of bank on beating the city of Charleston down to the ground. Hoppy Shores tries to come across on his radio show like an enlightened, educated man with the good of the people first and foremost in his mind. The thing first and foremost in his mind is Hoppy Shores - narcissist.
The City of South Charleston has a similar problem to Charleston in that the council there has 8 members for a city of ~13,000. This is 5 too many. But, Frank Mullins, love him or hate - no one is in between has a strong personality combined with a council of laid back members that do not want to fight him, mostly because they are all older than dirt and other things going on in their lives that mean more to them. South Charleston is also one of those petrified places, Ritchie Robb served the bulk of his life as mayor under the same system and there was a time during his term that informal talks were underway for Charleston to absorb South Charleston, things had gotten so bad.
Charleston is at a point where progress can only be made if the voters through the process of democracy elect a dictator and hope for the best. Astounding.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
