Wednesday, August 13, 2008

There will be suspicion surrounding the hiring of new City Manager Greg Burris

That's just a fact


Yesterday, the City Council held a press conference announcing their choice for the new City Manager.

I made a note of it here. I also provided information regarding what the City Charter said about the qualifications of the City Manager and what the City's job description identified as the "ideal candidate," here.

From the Charter:

"The city manager shall be chosen by the council on the basis of executive and administrative qualifications with special reference to his experience in, and his knowledge of municipal administrations...."


The job description posted by Arcus Public on behalf of the City said (among other things) the ideal candidate would have:

"Ten years of municipal experience, with prior service as a City Manager, Assistant/Deputy City Manager or the equivalent in a comparable or larger community."


There are going to be complaints and suspicion around this decision in some areas of the community. That's just a fact. Does mentioning those facts mean one doesn't or can't hope for the best?

I hope not.

I'd continue to encourage everyone to give new City Manager Greg Burris a chance before judging him.

If you want to read about and hear discussion about the questions surrounding the decision to hire Greg Burris as the new City Manager, I would refer you to Jericho's Journal: Right...Again! and this mornings pod casts at KSGF.

5 comments:

Дж. Хьюз said...

Jackie, I recognize the validity of your citation from the City Charter. I also cheerfully defer to your expertise on the workings of our City Council.

But on the strength of more than a decade of knowing and working with Greg Burris at MSU, I am very confident that City Council made the right decision. I believe that Greg's aptitude, energy, and drive to excel will more than compensate for any lack of specific experience as a City Manager. MSU's loss is Springfield's gain.

Anonymous said...

The first item of business might be how much new debt the City of Springfield has taken on since somebody hired Mr. Finnie.

Jason said...

"I'd continue to encourage everyone to give new City Manager Greg Burris a chance before judging him."

I was pleasantly surprised to see this.

Anonymous said...

With the rather excessive pay scale, it should be obvious that the new, beginner, City Manager will be able to solve the pension problem without a tax increase.

This would make his salary well worth the cost... we just have to wait and see.

Anonymous said...

There should be suspicion...

Why the pretense of bringing in candidates in from Edmond and Hot Springs when Carlson and the Chamber of Commerce obviously already had their minds made up?

Once Carlson and Commerce have their minds made up, Carlson's part-time city council volunteers' ratification is a mere formality.

Of course, 200K for an unproven, unqualified city manager is a bad deal for Springfield. But what exactly are Carlson and city government getting for this expenditure? Hush money to cover up past corruption sounds like a good bet.

This is a scandal. Fortunately for Carlson and his buddy Burris, Springfield's clueless lapdog media will not utter a peep regarding this hideous and ridiculous choice.

The problem is, our mayor and council are volunteer positions... Over and over again, they have shown they will base their decisions not on what is best for Springfield, but on what is best for their own personal interests.

Burris should start his tenure by cutting the fat in city hall. Several hundred city staff hours - maybe thousands of hours - were spent writing and re-writing useless multiple page container ordinances. So we know for a fact we have superfluous staff. Begin trimming the fat right there.

I know you will disagree with almost everything you see here from me, Jackie, but let me also add that the time has come for Springfield to have a full time paid mayor and perhaps council.

We can't continue to pretend that part-time volunteers who come and go with elections can keep an eye on full-time staff. Its an absurd concept and we've seen for many years that it just doesn't work.