If current form of government can solve CH's problems, why hasn't it?
To the Editor:
We have an opportunity Nov. 5 to adopt a form of government better suited to our success as a city than our current one. That choice is FOR an elected mayor.
The opposition wants to carry on as things are. They claim the council-manager structure can solve the problems of a diminishing tax base, deteriorated housing, lack of future-oriented development, uneven distribution of services, etc. Its track record says otherwise. This form of governance was in place as these problems arose. If it can solve these problems, why hasn’t it?
Having an elected full-time mayor (with a hired administrator and elected council) would provide the pieces that are missing in the current model: leadership, vision and accountability.
Think for a moment. Who’s the outstanding leader in our government? Who has the vision to address coming challenges, such as: Energy conservation and conversion in older structures? Regeneration of our declining tax base? Attracting young middle- and upper-middle-class families? Finding ways to upgrade our declining housing stock? Can you name him/her? I can't.
I repeat: If council could have done so as currently configured, don’t you think it would have?
We have a chance to decide how we meet future challenges. If we have an elected mayor, we can choose a person who has leadership and vision. Accountability is built into the system with mayoral elections every four years.
Our structure is not working for us; we need to fix it. We lack leadership, vision and accountability; we need to provide for it.
Please Vote Yes on Issue 26!
Barbara E. Rose