News-Record.com

In Greensboro's current system, no. The manager clearly runs the city and city employees work for the city manager. Now ask me does this system need changing...Yes.

In Greensboro, the city manager regardless if it is Mitchell Johnson or Ed Kitchen or whoever has too much control over the city. The most powerful person in our city government is not the Mayor or any member of council it is the City Manager...with a close second place finish by the city attorney.

Under normal circumstances the City Manager would hire a new City Attorney. But with Mitchell Johnson so badly tarnished, replace him first.

I think he's got to go.

Our council manager city government functioned very well for many years, particularly when we had an at-large elected City Council. Our current district system assures minority representation but does little else to promote effective government. There are numerous reasons not to change our current form; namely, nothing better is available within the limits that bind us.

A full time mayor is not a solution. There are notorious examples of corrupt city governments that were run by a paid full time mayor. Further, where do you find a full time mayor? Very few people with the necessary credentials would be able to take a four, six, or eight year leave of absence from work to fill the mayoral slot, and surely we would not want to recruit a mayor from outside the city. The solution for us is to work on making the current system function better.

Voters must elect council members who are willing to roll up their sleeves and dig into the business of making strong and unambiguous decisions that plot a course for the city manager to follow. The elected council must employ a city manager who has wide ranging knowledge and job skills and is capable of excellent performance in providing all basic city services. Public safety, utility services, transportation, and parks and entertainment are the domain of a city manager and this person must be able to deliver quality back to the City Council. In short, what we now have can work if an effective and properly focused city manager is at the helm. To that end I believe we are capable of substantial improvement over our current situation.

Bill Knight, I call for an election mulligan.
We need you representing the city of Greensboro.

Never mind Linda, even when she was there the City was outsourcing the legal services. If you really want to write a story just look at how many high dollar law firms are working for tax dollars as we speak. Also, that must might show you how much confidence they had in the City's legal staff... When you finish counting the zeros you'll see where the extra police manpower could come from

The short answer to the question, no.

Bob, to keep the conversation productive it would be most helpful to site specific examples of the figures you are referencing.

Ryan

Absolutely not! This would open up a huge can of worms and undue political influence at the department level. It also puts the professional staff in a political quagmire. One council person wants this or that, then complaints of favoritism or racism emerge....And let's not forget these folks come and go every two years and have other jobs. Leave the structure as is and leave the politics out of it.

If you look at the organizational chart for the City of Greensboro. You will see that the City
Council, is on the top, and the City Manager, is right below; and below the City Manager, are all the department heads.

From viewing many of the city council meetings,and when an appointment is made to fill the vacancy of a department head. The city
manager seeks consultations and/or recommendations from the city council, and I'm sure from the other department heads, as well, (should he chooses to do so). But, it is the city manager's priority to hire, and to make the announcement to the City Council, and to the citizens of Greensboro.

That is what I was taught during my participation in Government Works: A City
Academy; and that is how I've seen it done.

Now, are we basing this "debate" on the system, or the person and/or persons who administers the system?

Clearly now, we have seen where elected officials, would get a hair up their @#!$, and then go on cross burning expedition. Because the employee did or did not appease that official for whatever reasons. This is not good.

There has been calls for the present city manager to remove himself from the dais, where the elected officials sit. Only because, some elected officials, believe that he should be looking at them, (while they're looking down at him), and that he needs to sit with the rest of the city staffers.

Now, just because across the plaza, that's the way the do it. Doesn't necessarily mean, that's the way, we do it on this side of the plaza.

Let's look past over the years, from across the
plaza. Let's see...remember, Hector Rivera?
Willie Best?, just to name a few. There's another person, I can't for the likes remember his name, but he was recent headliner, too.

It is true, that we get what we pay for, but then again, we may loose a valuable investment for our city. Look, we lost Ben Brown, to across the plaza. Why did he leave? I can tell what the county offered him in compensation was more than what he was making with the city. Did Mitchell Johnson not try to sway him from taking that position. But in any case, we didn't loose Ben Brown from within our community, at that's good.

So, again, what is this debate about? The system of hiring/firing, or the person who is responsibile for the hiring/firing?

Mitchell is clearing over his head in this position. It is not his fault. There was nothing is his record that justified his elevation to City Manager. He has none of the skills necessary to lead the city to where it should be. Mitchell, do us a favor, pls seek work elsewhere.