The Other Proposed Charter Amendments

Let's pick things back up with term limits.

Term Limits - the best tool democracy has to offer.

I know Mayor Cook wants to continue to be Mayor Cook for as long as he lives, but he doesn't see the ramifications of his ambition.  Someone needs to tell him that he's an okay guy, but the next guy or gal may not be and our sleepy electorate could keep returning that person to office term after term. 

Being an elected official is pretty damn cool, but it's best for the voters if we force a change every once in a while.

-----------------------

Ending the Mayor's Veto

Are you kidding me?  Somebody has to be in their right mind and it might as well be the only person sitting in the semi-circle that was elected by the entire city.  Cook has used his veto, and his veto threat, very wisely in the past.  I know some of the more radical people on council dislike his clear thinking on the measures he vetoed, but the whole of the community was with the mayor when he made his move. 

Again, it might sound like a good thing right now because you don't like Cook, but what if the next city council down the road is twice as crazy as this one and there's nobody to veto their shenanigans?  Scary, huh?

You always have to think three cycles ahead in this game.

-----------------------

Ending Staggered Terms

Bad idea.  Bad for you. Bad for me. Bad for everyone.  Imagine how hard it would be to beat a slate of candidates who are well funded, share advertising costs, share volunteers and use their literal mass to push their opponents out.  That's exactly what would happen if all of council and the mayor went on the ballot at the same time. 

It would be easy for a group of well funded candidates to take every seat on council and the mayor's office in an election if they all got to run together.  The little guy running because he cares about his district would not stand a chance against what would be groups of candidates organised like a political party -i.e. democrat or republican.  Candidates running for council would associate themselves with the juggernaut of other candidates running from the same group and no longer be interested in what their constituents think.  Much like congress, they would be carrying the party's water, not their constituent's. 

Right now we have a great system where candidates are out on an island by themselves.  Niland and Lilly didn't run joint ads with Noe.  Mejia, Ness and Villanueva didn't pool their cash to put up a more polished, unified front orchestrated by some behind the scenes string puller.  Everybody ran their own gig and no alliances will built premature to the actual swearing in of a candidate.  This is a good thing. 

----------------

Two year terms

This is a hard one.  Representative Holguin made a true and thoughtful statement to the paper "The council does a lot of damage in those four-year terms."  However, it's hard to do anything at all in two years if you aren't a dynamic player who understands the city. 

Now that we have city manager form of government, city hall doesn't get turned completely upside every time we get a new mayor.  This allows for long-term goals to be carried forward by a stable staff.  But... and you knew there was a "but" coming - that means that the staff may have too much influence over legislative issues instead of the executive ones they are tasked with.  It's an odd balance that may be upset by shortening city council's terms.

On the other hand - we could get rid of someone who is a complete mess in a much shorter time if we went back to two year terms.

This is a toss-up for me.  I could be swayed in either direction. 

------------------------

Pay Increase for Council

I'm 100 percent behind this!  I can't tell you how many great people I've talked to who won't run because they can't live on the pay.  Tim Collins comes to mind immediately and he'd be a great city councilor among other things.

Better pay would open the job to a new group of people who aren't either rich, or retired. 

I say they should make the pay $75,000 and make the job a seven-day-a-week job.  You would love the choices in candidates that kind of pay would attract.

------------------

That's all on that. Sorry for the errors, I'm writing these very early in the morning before work and usually don't have any coffee in me.  Thanks for reading.

Comments

[Texaswoman]

More money does not equal better candidates for office. If you need proof just look at our Congress or the County.

[voter]

Maybe we give every candidate a test on local, state and federal government and if they flunk they can't run.

Same is true in private business - more money for the CEO doesn't make them a good CEO.

[public employee]

i agree with the staggered elections. they should even be more staggered if possible. that way pacs like hunt's cant buy 2 council positions like this past election(Niland and Lilly).

[maria]

Staggered Elections is good.

Term Limits are necessary.

Raising pay is important but remember they do not have to work 8 hour days, five days a week, so those who work 2 hour days, 2 days a week, earn the pay they receive now, which does not include the benefits.

[Tim Collins]

Texas Woman "More money does not equal better candidates for office. If you need proof just look at our Congress or the County. "

You are absolutely correct. But the current salary attracts two types of candidates
1) Those for whom money isn't an issue (either they themselves, or their spouse/family) have another source for primary living expenses. or

2) The job with benefits would be an increase in income/benefits. (Think Ms. Mejia, or any number of the recent candidates)

A whole group of qualified people don't run because they know it is a full time job to be done correctly, but taking it would mean a loss in quality of life and/or actual austerity measures on a personal income level.

I think a rasie would certainly tap a larger and higher quality pool of candidates

[aaaa]

Its not the money. Its the loss of privacy. Run for office and there is no expectitation of privacy.

[Diana]

There should not be term limits. Voters can decide when enough is enough. Maria, where do you get your info? Some reps do work long hard hours. Holguin is NOT one of them. He needs to go. I have a relative who works for Border Patrol and apparently this idiot was making a stink because a Border Patrol Chaplin was giving the invocation at the inauguration. He was yelling and carrying on that it would hurt his constituents. Are his constituents illegals? He did not care that a group of BP could hear him. Very low class.

Diana

[paul j strelzin]

eileen looking good in the el paso inc.

[Sunny]

Do NOT pay Council Members more money! That is my money you're talking about, taxpayer money. Right now, city people, including council members, only work 4 days out of the week. $75,000 for 4 days a week is way too much. And it won't attract better candidates! Look at the County! What it will attract is a bunch more wanna-bes. Leave the pay alone. Most of El Paso hasn't gotten a pay increase and neither should Council.

[Tim Collins]

Sunny

City Council doesn't get a salary of $75k. I believe they get $29k

[EileenK]

Looking old is more like it Paul. But thanks for the compliment. Hope all is well with you and your family.

[Diana]

Sunny, get informed before posting and making yourself look silly. While city employees work 4 days a week, they work 10 hours a day. And Tim is right - Council makes $29,000. Where did you get $75,000?

[Maria]

Diana some of the reps on City Council might work a regular work week, but I beg to differ that it is all of them and it is all of the time. Where do I get my information from, friends who work at the City...that's why you make an appointment to see your Rep, if you walk right in 9 out of 10 it's their assistants you will see every day all day, but not the reps. County Commissioners are the same as well, their staff works entire days but they rarely do and it's only during budget or special meetings, the rest of the time they are all working in their primary and private business. Same application applies to City Reps, they all keep their day jobs and get paid to show up on Monday and read Agenda items prior to meeting, or in some cases during the meeting.

[Mike Armstead]

$75K came from David K's suggestion that they get paid more...not something that Sunny made up.

[Diana]

Sunny said, "Right now CITY PEOPLE.." leading someone to believe that city employees were working 32 hours a week. I agree about two Reps not working the hours. I can tell you that Acosta and Holguin are very hard to find. During the Ramos incident, Acosta claimed she was busy at her office coordinating help yet she never explained why she was not answering phone calls from the residents. Maybe she is too busy selling Avon.

Diana

[not an Emma fan]

How much money does Acosta need? She gets $92,000 a year for her city retirement; she gets $29,000 as a city rep - that's $121,000 - nice money in this town. Is she selling Avon so she can start campaigning early for Mayor? Avon parties - door to door sales and write off the expenses at the same time?