The emphasis should be on your statement about providing more not less
access between constituents and Councilmembers.
One advantage of the present system is that a citizen can contact one
person, their Council Member, about problems arising from some action or
inaction of the City government and that Council Member, since he or she
represents a smaller geographic area of the city and a relatively small number
of people, is motivated by his or her desire to be reelected to get to work on
that constituent's problem and not let it be lost in a maze of bureaucracy.
The problem in Council Members being able to contact employees in the City
bureaucracy on behalf of their constituents is that they are also tempting
targets for those who want to resort to bribery to get special favors from the
City. It is for this reason that certain "reformers" have proposed that
Council Members not be permitted to contact the City bureaucracy without
permission from some type of City Manager. This is not only throwing the baby
out with the bathwater; it is throwing the baby out and keeping the bathwater.
Under this proposed "reform," a citizens' problems with the City bureaucracy
will be lost in the bureaucratic maze of a City Manager who is responsible for
dealing with the concerns of several hundred thousand people. Ordinary
citizens will soon realize the futility of appealing to such a bureaucratic
behemoth and not even bother to try. Meanwhile, those with the resources to
commit bribery will find ways for their money to provide them influence
in the new City structure.
It is for this reason that coming in on these recent proposals for "reform"
should be done with the utmost caution, and probably not at all. Heeding the
siren call of these "reformers" could result in our finding ourselves saddled
with an unresponsive bureaucratic behemoth before we know it.
There is room to discuss whether a City Manager or strong Mayor form of
government WITH constituent access to City Council Members and the Mayor or
City Manager will achieve the goal of a City government whose parts dont work
against one another AND preserve constituent access.
As a final thought, there was much press coverage some years ago of a City
Ombundsman to guide citizens through dealing with the City breaucracy. In
fact, one was appointed. Whatever happened to that?
Robert Halfhill Loring Park
http://halfhillviews.greatnow.com
http://www.thepen.us/e-fraud.html
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL
PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
