City Administrator Reporting Structure up for Discussion
Waukesha's Human Resources Committee will take up controversial topic as search begins for next city administrator.
The City of Waukesha’s Human Resources Committee will be taking the first looks at what the next city administrator’s role should look like as the Common Council prepares to hire the next top executive.
The city administrator position has been a controversial one since Mayor Jeff Scrima took office. His clashes with then-City Administrator Lori Luther were sometimes public and ultimately lead to the Common Council removing Scrima’s supervisory role over her. The council’s decision made it clear that Luther was to report to the Common Council, which is the body that makes city decisions. Scrima is a part of the Common Council but can only vote in a tie.
Scrima’s supporters in the months that followed came to Common Council meeting, criticizing the aldermen for the contract change and making negative remarks about the city administrator. Luther has since left Waukesha to become the Peoria County administrator in Illinois.
Upon Luther’s departure, Scrima has asked that the next city administrator answer to him. While traditionally the city administrator is tasked with the day-to-day operations of City Hall, the Common Council needs to finalize the job description and reporting structure before a search firm looks for that person.
The Human Resource Committee, which is comprised of aldermen, will take up the issue at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday at City Hall, 201 Delafield St., to make a recommendation to the Common Council.
Take the high road
12:35 pm on Saturday, March 10, 2012
The Common Council would be wise to take the high road here and return the reporting structure to the position that is elected by the people - that would be the Mayor.
The City Administrator is NOT elected, and the 15 Common Council members are not even part time and are rarely at City Hall to know what's going on.
Right now the checks and balances build into our local democratic structure is broken and needs to be realigned. It all starts local folks...
(Moreover, without returning the reporting structure to the elected Mayor, the new City Administrator will be on the hot seat and held responsible for everything under the sun... including but not limited to: a failed water application, a water application that goes way over budget, a marriage with Milwaukee, Direct Legislation from the citizens of Waukesha...)
Paul Furrer
5:03 pm on Saturday, March 10, 2012
Sometimes taking the high road means standing on principle. The City Council, not the Mayor, approves ordinances, taxes property, passes budgets and sets policy. As a member of that Council the Mayor has input and veto authority. The Mayor is expected to oversee that budget and those policies, but as an elected official the Mayor cannot be compelled to do so. A Mayor is free to follow his conscience and act anyway he feels necessary. However, a Mayor is not free to ask staff to work against policy set by the Council.
It must be a bitter pill to be elected the top dog only to find out that you're just a servant of the people and their elected representatives. A new Administrator will indeed find a "hot seat" if the person they report too, requires them to contravene established policy.
Paul Furrer
Inarticulate Hairdresser
7:28 pm on Saturday, March 10, 2012
Solution: Any potential policy conflict between the elected Mayor and unelected Administrator should be discussed in open session where the citizens can fully see what's going on.
Paul Furrer
12:09 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
Hi Hairdresser, I'm a Barber and also inarticulate so now we have a real discussion.
Your point is well taken. But can we agree that once an issue is debated and voted on, the City Staff has to toe the line?
What was not debated publicly was the change to the reporting structure for the Administrator. That was a contract negotiation with an employee. Politically a disaster but I stand behind it as structurally sound. If the Council wants to keep it in place I say they should.
I never saw the problem as being between the Administrator and the Mayor. The problem was and possibly still is between the Mayor and the Council. And it's not a fair fight! The Council has all the corporate authority (the voters of-course have all the ultimate authority).
The simple truth is that the policy issue that tripped everyone's trigger (future water source) was debated in public, looked at for over ten years. At-least most of that debate was public, all but keeping private our legal and negotiating strategies.
The vote to proceed with the Great Lakes Water Application took place before Mayor Scrima took office (but after he was elected). He had campaigned against it so he had every right to be upset but no right to redirect Staff away from their duties. There are plenty more votes coming on the future of our water supply so we'll see what happens.
wordlady
7:37 am on Sunday, March 11, 2012
The Common Council more directly represents the citizens, since aldermen are elected by a smaller, more local electorate. Their job is to be aware of the wishes of their constituency, as well as to perform the duties outlined by Mr. Furrer above. It is much more difficult for a group of 15 to make decisions based upon emotion than it is for one person to do so. I believe that the Common Council was correct in changing the reporting structure of the city administrator and that this policy should remain in place.
clearthinker
12:13 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
Two Points:
1. The reporting structure should be returned to the previous status. That is the most efficient and workable. We must trust that the new administrator will come in with his/her eyes wide open and be capable of working with all parties involved instead of attempting to bully anyone who dares to disagree. We also trust that the mayor will be on his best behavior and attempt to play nice. The council is indeed less than part-time and to expect some of them to do more than eat as much free food at receptions as possible and to put their drinks on someone else's tab is just asking too much. The mayor is clearly the person who needs to learn from his past errors in personal management and to get it right this time.
2. The local press will face the challenge of developing a relationship with the new administrator. Some of them previously served the old administrator as her conduit for leaked info designed to punish or embarrass her critics. It will be interesting to see how the new administrator handles the press.
Chris
3:42 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
I agree with what the commentator said above,
"The Common Council would be wise to take the high road here and return the reporting structure to the position that is elected by the people - that would be the Mayor.
The City Administrator is NOT elected, and the 15 Common Council members are not even part time and are rarely at City Hall to know what's going on.
Right now the checks and balances build into our local democratic structure is broken and needs to be realigned."
A secure Common Council will debate all future policy conflicts in open session in full view of the citizens.
A secure Common Council will not overplay their hand, because they know they can always override a Mayor's veto.
A secure Common Council will restore the reporting structure to the Mayor, who is the only full-time representative elected by the voters at-large to oversee city operations.