|
August 16, 2008
We feel that all city residents should be concerned when something as drastic as dismissing a city manager is suddenly put on the city council agenda.
During two previous city council sessions, we watched Cal Eilrich attempt to diminish Gary Bacock's statutory powers. In both cases the motions were defeated. Mr. Eilrich's current attempt to dismiss the city manager when one of the council members has announced he will not be present is reprehensible. His maneuver represents a die hard attitude that seems to insist on getting its way even though the democratic process has twice rebuffed him. It is not in the best interest of the community to try to bypass the democratic process by picking a time when a council member will be absent. At heart, it fundamentally subverts the concept of democratic rule. In any case it violates a spirit of fair play. We are disappointed and offended. Does Cal Eilrich have a vendetta against Gary?
Gary Bacock appears to be an excellent manager, judging by the results seen under his tenure. We have observed, for example: city staffers being increasingly courteous and responsive, park facilities steadily improving, community spirit encouraged, a wonderful emergency response team, a city hall well positioned to handle our expected future growth, a citizenry that enthusiastically rises to help when needed, and a city staff that considers all its citizens not just special interests.
Since we have been in Friendly Fernley, we have witnessed several instances where Gary Bacock led the effort to secure government aid for desirable Fernley enhancements. The proposed BOR park and the bicycle path are two examples.
Every senior manager in our experience has had the right to fire department heads. Gary has that right, and he should not be penalized for exercising it once in nine years (as noted in a recent city council meeting). The very infrequency of this action demonstrates that Mr. Bacock is not abusing his power. In any case, it is not appropriate to penalize the city manager for doing his job as defined by statute. This is especially true when the effort to change that statute was defeated twice at previous meetings.
In any management situation, it is important that the chain of command be clearly defined. The city council-city manager form of government protects the city from political or personal manipulation. It has served Fernley well as we went from rapid development into a recession. This city is in admirable shape compared to other cities, and Gary deserves a lot of the credit for our excellent future prospects.
Turning to the CIP plan, it has not even come to the council for a vote. How can Gary Bacock be blamed for impact fees that are not now in effect and have not yet been authorized by the council?
Concerning another contentious subject, we all know that the water treatment plant is mandated by the government. All change orders that have occurred were authorized by the city council. Resulting cost overruns cannot be blamed on the city manager since he has no power to authorize such change orders or supply new funding. Gary Bacock simply implements policy. If the overruns are unsettling, then the entire city council is responsible not its administrator of council direction.
We recommend that Cal Eilrich's motion be defeated and that other city councilmen urge him to resist raising his city manager issue repeatedly.
Bill and Ann Maybury
|
