As a genuine who-knows-who from central casting, I'm torn between appreciation that somebody is actually paying attention to the transition and the fact that you get so much of it wrong. No, I don't have time to go line by line to correct your misunderstandings, but I'll simply point out that the who-knows-whos are holding a listening session this week in which you can talk to us directly about our draft recommendations. As a who-knows-who who cares very much about the short-staffing of the new council and the yet-to-be written rules of procedure for the new council and its committees, I hope you will take the opportunity.
Thanks for the comment--I truly appreciate differing points of view.
As for all the stuff I get wrong; I may come to dumb conclusions (probable) but I try to follow the example of IF Stone, who dug into the stuff that our rulers inadvertently publish that gives us mere mortals a glimpse of what they're plotting. It's usually there...but they're smart people and they move faster and more ruthlessly than their critics.
If there is some documented fact that I screwed up, I'll make a correx (I've done it before; you won't be the first).
Anybody who brags that he is “a genuine who-knows-who from central casting” probably helped write the script. That’s what so many of these “listening sessions” turn out to be. Scripted. Those pretending to listen hear only what they want to hear.
“Listening sessions” are a favorite tool, held regularly by politicians at the local and state level in Oregon. It’s a way for “leaders” to look like they’re doing something and to shift responsibility if things don't work out. Hey, it's what "the community" wanted.
Be advised: Richard Cheverton is a trained facilitator. He knows the game.
That meeting on Thursday is on my calendar, and it’s probably on his. Will either of us attend? In my case, it will depend on if I have reached my quota of political BS for the week.
Instead I might listen again to the Rational in Portland podcast where Kristin Olson interviews District 1 City Council candidate Terrence Hayes. He calls out ultra-progressive white women for the know-it-all policies they like to foist on the rest of us. It's not the kind of observation allowed at a "listening session."
The mayor gets authority to pick the city administrator (with city council “approval”), and can also fire them at will (no council approval needed). So there’s that.
Section 2-401 Mayor’s Duties
“(f) Appoint the City Administrator, subject to Council confirmation, and give direction to the Administrator. The Mayor may remove the Administrator and must advise the Council before removal. The Council may remove the Administrator for cause by the affirmative vote of at least nine (9) Councilors. If the office of the Administrator is vacant, the Mayor must fulfill the duties of the Administrator until the office is filled.”
Couple little time-bombs: Council will have to approve (no doubt after contentious "hearings" and other hi-jinks) and god knows how many little sideline deals will be cut to get that 7th vote t. And "give direction" to the admin--if you can define that term, bravo. And does the admin have to TAKE that direction? Sounds typically sloppy and devised without anyone uttering the words, "unintended consequences."
Yep, that is the new mayor’s biggest power. We definitely need Gonzalez…if the failed ideologue Hardesty Junior (Rubio) wins it’s gonna be worse than the current mess we have.
There are only two, maybe three committees that are necessary, and the rest should go into the round can of excrement. Public Safety, Transportation, and maybe Homeless (provided that it could accomplish anything at all).
As a genuine who-knows-who from central casting, I'm torn between appreciation that somebody is actually paying attention to the transition and the fact that you get so much of it wrong. No, I don't have time to go line by line to correct your misunderstandings, but I'll simply point out that the who-knows-whos are holding a listening session this week in which you can talk to us directly about our draft recommendations. As a who-knows-who who cares very much about the short-staffing of the new council and the yet-to-be written rules of procedure for the new council and its committees, I hope you will take the opportunity.
Thanks for the comment--I truly appreciate differing points of view.
As for all the stuff I get wrong; I may come to dumb conclusions (probable) but I try to follow the example of IF Stone, who dug into the stuff that our rulers inadvertently publish that gives us mere mortals a glimpse of what they're plotting. It's usually there...but they're smart people and they move faster and more ruthlessly than their critics.
If there is some documented fact that I screwed up, I'll make a correx (I've done it before; you won't be the first).
Anybody who brags that he is “a genuine who-knows-who from central casting” probably helped write the script. That’s what so many of these “listening sessions” turn out to be. Scripted. Those pretending to listen hear only what they want to hear.
“Listening sessions” are a favorite tool, held regularly by politicians at the local and state level in Oregon. It’s a way for “leaders” to look like they’re doing something and to shift responsibility if things don't work out. Hey, it's what "the community" wanted.
Be advised: Richard Cheverton is a trained facilitator. He knows the game.
That meeting on Thursday is on my calendar, and it’s probably on his. Will either of us attend? In my case, it will depend on if I have reached my quota of political BS for the week.
Instead I might listen again to the Rational in Portland podcast where Kristin Olson interviews District 1 City Council candidate Terrence Hayes. He calls out ultra-progressive white women for the know-it-all policies they like to foist on the rest of us. It's not the kind of observation allowed at a "listening session."
https://open.spotify.com/episode/28wyz9moC5vrkDF8WOB6IB?si=JJvz3YHVTbCF5g-KNgIAwg&nd=1&dlsi=350356030db2488b
So nothing will get done. I can't tell at this point if that's a good or bad thing
The more complicated government becomes, the simpler control can become. Commissars, Politburo, Central Committee….
A recipe for disaster if I ever saw one. Just wow.
The mayor gets authority to pick the city administrator (with city council “approval”), and can also fire them at will (no council approval needed). So there’s that.
Section 2-401 Mayor’s Duties
“(f) Appoint the City Administrator, subject to Council confirmation, and give direction to the Administrator. The Mayor may remove the Administrator and must advise the Council before removal. The Council may remove the Administrator for cause by the affirmative vote of at least nine (9) Councilors. If the office of the Administrator is vacant, the Mayor must fulfill the duties of the Administrator until the office is filled.”
Couple little time-bombs: Council will have to approve (no doubt after contentious "hearings" and other hi-jinks) and god knows how many little sideline deals will be cut to get that 7th vote t. And "give direction" to the admin--if you can define that term, bravo. And does the admin have to TAKE that direction? Sounds typically sloppy and devised without anyone uttering the words, "unintended consequences."
Good luck!
Yep, that is the new mayor’s biggest power. We definitely need Gonzalez…if the failed ideologue Hardesty Junior (Rubio) wins it’s gonna be worse than the current mess we have.
There are only two, maybe three committees that are necessary, and the rest should go into the round can of excrement. Public Safety, Transportation, and maybe Homeless (provided that it could accomplish anything at all).
The new city council positions are a part time job with $133,000 salaries.
Part of government these days is to provide jobs for otherwise unqualified people.
Not only all my thoughts above, but City and County should be merged to eliminate even more unnecessary positions.