The Fate of the Borough

Mike Nesper, the cub reporter for the PC, opened his article about tonight's assembly meeting with a bit of hyperbole and declared that our fate rested on if voters should decide if we want a manager or mayor.

Really - like, are we gonna die if we do something?

C'mon Mike. You're supposed to be a real reporter - just the facts, man. Leave the slant for us bloggers, the news comedians like Jon Stewart, or the propagandists like Fox News or Rush Limbaugh.

What's really the motivation behind this ordinance?

It's kinda funny that groups like ACT are so opposed to letting voters decide this issue especially when ACT was all about having a borough manager a couple of years ago. ACT has also been adamant that voters should decide things. For ACT and their ilk, it depends on which way the wind blows. If it is something they don't like, they declare the borough is thwarting the will of the people. If it is something they don't want, they are all about suppressing debate.

The vote will probably come down to Gary Knopp, who introduced the ordinance, but has shown that he will wilt under pressure. During the last assembly meeting, he changed his vote which originally supported an appeals process for borough department heads who sometimes get axed for only dubious reasons, and failed to support the override of Carey's veto that would have established a way for folks who are doing a good job to challenge politically motivated termination.

And maybe that's the reason to move to a manager form of government. The last few borough mayors have brought in their political cronies to do jobs that some are unqualified for - how does that make for better government?

Duane Bannock, the appointed head of the Spruce Bark Beetle program is the most blatant example of the Mayor Carey's cronyism. Duane, a car salesman, replaced a person fully qualified to run such a program, and by all accounts, the former head was doing a fine job. Duane then had the brass to speak up at last month's assembly meeting to voice his support for the mayor.

Of course he did - he owes his job to the mayor, what else is he going to say? It did come across as more than a bit self-serving.

Apparently there are 8 disgruntled former employees that may have been darn good workers who have been let go and replaced by folks not-so-qualified. Certainly, a new mayor should be able to bring in his/her own staff, but one might hope that politics would not interfere with competence.

I dunno, I sure would like to avoid the political grandstanding that the current mayor is so very good at. And why not just let the voters decide?