People have been talking about having a city manager in Hudson for almost two decades. Back in 2007, when I was on the Common Council and before I started writing The Gossips of Rivertown, I did a little study that looked at the governmental structure of municipalities that had, up until that point, won the National Trust's Great American Main Street Award. The thinking was that these were places Hudson should emulate. What I discovered was that the majority of these cities had city managers to provide the continuity and expertise needed to run a successful and sustainable city. If the city had mayors (and many did), they served a more ceremonial function.
There is a group of people in Hudson who are taking the idea of a city manager seriously and are proposing a charter change that would alter the structure of city government in this way:
- One mayor--elected
- Five, not eleven, members of the Common Council. One member of the Council would be elected chair by the councilmembers.
- One city manager, hired by the Common Council and accountable to them
- Term limits--three two-year terms for all elected officials
TIME FOR A CHANGE
Our local government shapes countless aspects of our daily lives—the streets we travel down, the rules our local businesses follow, and the school system our children attend. Public safety, libraries, housing, to name just a few—they all directly impact our day-to-day lives.
Charter change is not a new idea. In 2011 there was a proposal to create a Charter Revision Commission, to "optimize efficiency, foster fair and equal representation, and seek the best possible model for responsible government.” At least three former mayors have mentioned charter change. So have several members of our Common Council. Not so long ago our Common Council president said he wanted a task force to develop a Charter review proposal.
The last significant charter change in Hudson was in 2016, when voters overwhelmingly approved a change to equalize Common Council members’ voting power. It was a good first step.
Let’s restructure city hall. When we do, we’ll usher in greater efficiencies and a higher level of professionalism.
We think it’s about time we did.
The following chart shows the organizational structure being proposed.
Interestingly, neither Mayor Kamal Johnson nor Council president Tom DePietro, both of whom serve ex officio on the HDC Board, were present at today's meeting.
In sharing the document with HDC, Rasner recounted the process leading up to this point:
When I first met with those who initiated this project some years back, we discussed how to move beyond legal writing to public discussion. We agreed on a “ground level” effort: simple get-togethers with anyone who would listen and offer ideas and opinions.
Although the effort to bring this about has been called "secret," that is far from accurate. I have personally met with almost 100 citizens, ordinary people, who are interested in their city: former and present members of Common Council, business owners, a barista, city employees, a carpenter, a hairdresser, a restaurant manager, a barber, and a house painter, as well as a former Mayor. They listened. I listened. We left those conversations thinking about Hudson’s future, and how we might collectively improve our lot.
Until today, the revised charter has only been a discussion and a lot of notes, not yet printed or distributed. Yet those who find criticism the easiest response to change have already claimed our efforts to be the “end of Democracy” in Hudson. . . .
Tell that to the 89 million Americans who live in 40 percent of all cities in our country governed in this style. Do our neighbors here in New York, 25 percent of all our cities governed in this style, feel they have lost democracy? I don’t believe that to be true.
"Drafted by old white guys." There’s some truth to that. I’m an old white guy. Does that disqualify me from being an activist. And for the record, I did not do any of the legal heavy lifting. A team of attorneys did that, giving unselfishly of their time and talents. Those attorneys are a generation younger than I. And note, this was not just “guys.” Women were involved in the development of the proposal and are involved in carrying it forward. If I might make a prediction, it will be women that will be instrumental in its success.
Rasner also described the path forward. Next month, signatures will be sought on a petition to place the proposal on the desks of councilmembers. For this petition, 204 signatures are required. If the proposal is not approved by the Council within sixty days, another petition will be circulated, requiring 102 signatures, which would circumvent the Council and allow the proposal to be placed on the ballot in November 2025 as a referendum item.
COPYRIGHT 2024 CAROLE OSTERINK
π️ πΊπΈ π«‘ π³
ReplyDelete----
π€― Ok … wow, wow wow…. stop the train; let me get this straight:
1️⃣ There is a way to have fewer politicians in Hudson… and more professionals (like current Department Heads Heather, Tracy, Mishanda and the always improving and funny gentlemen) in City Hall?
Yes, please. π
2️⃣ Public service delivery and town operations will be managed by an individual who must be apolitical, adhere to a strict code of ethics, and execute the Common Council's directions—the council members whom we elect directly every two years?
Yes, please. π
3️⃣ And research shows that this form of government is:
- growing in adoption by award winning cities
- 57% less prone to political corruption (e.g. Mayors dating subordinates)
- more efficient due to professional training and aligned incentives
- leads to increased civic participation due to no single mayor of variable quality and bias
- better for long-term city goals because the council can focus on long-term planning and leave the day-to-day in the hands of a trained professional with a clear job description who treats every resident as an equal customer?
- we will stop neglecting business owners and tax payers and respect our residents
ππππππππ
So why haven't we done this before?
~
Sincerely; can someone please tell me who in Hudson (or the world) can make the most persuasive and data-driven case AGAINST a City Manager system generally? And specifically for Hudson?
π¬ Let's seek out opinions and data that disprove the hypothesis, to test it.
Bob - could this lower our property taxes?
π² I am assuming the City Manager will be paid for by the mayor's salary ($85k plus) and the mayor's aide ($50k plus) going away?
The real benefit will be fewer lawsuit settlements, lower legal bills by the Common Council President, increased revenue due to correct prioritization (parking, unpaid taxes), and last but not least; pleasant City Hall meetings.
Imagine if you give the City Manager a $X bonus for every $100k she saves the City tax payers in wasteful spending or mistakes.
π¦ π π ♂️Heck, maybe we won't force our senior citizens to get a City of Hudson blue trash bag at 1am in the freezing cold from a vending machine that looks like condom dispensary.
¯\_(γ)_/¯
Let's do it for grandma.
π³ Let's do it so that we incentivize an efficient and apolitical Hudson, and stop rewarding the waste and acrimony with our hard earned tax dollars.
Sources:
https://www.nationalcivicleague.org/assault-on-city-management-undermines-local-integrity/
https://icma.org/benefits-professional-local-government-management
https://icma.org/sites/default/files/302618_Council-Manager%20or%20Strong%20Mayor%20-%20The%20Choice%20is%20Clear.pdf
Amen! I’m 110% in support of this.
ReplyDeleteA few thoughts: a well qualified city manager will probably command a salary of $150-200K+, but that completely be budgeted for in this restructuring. They usually have 5-10 year contracts, but could be terminated at any time by the council.
If there mayor title becomes ceremonial, the council could just name the person who would be the council chair to assume that role annually at the organizational meeting. Many cities do this, like Cambridge, MA, with the same amount of councilors as proposed, and they have a much larger population. This would be more democratic as each voter in each ward holds more seat over the levers of power.
There would be much better oversight over the departments with an eye on serving the constituents.
It’s a no brainer. Hudson is too small of a city to work as a “strong mayor” system. Large cities like NYC have a massive civil service and talent pool to advise an elected mayor and run the day to day to keep the lights on.
Also, a city that Hudson looks up to, Ithaca, (like the sidewalk improvement districts) just switched to this very system. Let’s follow their lead.
This hasn’t been done before bc it will get in the way of career phony politicians getting their family members city and county jobs. Which would also get in the way of giving huge contracts to certain businesses connected to said families. Simple math.
ReplyDeleteWhile they're at it, this would be as appropriate a time as any for an entire redo of the charter and code... It is long past due, as a city manager is. There are simply too many outdated and incorrect aspects to them -- we all know this, but there is no push to fix this obvious problem. For example, Chapter 19 of the city charter describes the functions and hierarchy at our Police Department, much of it having no basis in reality.
ReplyDeleteThe title of Police Chief is barely mentioned in the many sections of that chapter. The Police Commissioner title, however, is widely mentioned -- AS THE PERSON IN CHARGE OF OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT giving orders to others, including the chief! EVERYONE KNOWS THIS TO BE FALSE. That chain of command with the commissioner at the top was obviously true once long ago, but we continue to live in this weird stuck in the past can't move forward quick enough quicksand. Gee, I wonder why.
If we do get a decent city manager, one of the first things he or she will want to do is get our code and charter into the 21st century. Sounds like a whole lotta fun. Hire a consultant.
What momentous timing!
ReplyDeleteDid the City of Hudson's leadership bumble through 2024 inventing numerous new ways to squeeze money from its residents only so that they could propose a new shiny, inflated 2025 budget?
Would be a shame if it were their last such proposal. The vox populi, certainly angered as of now, may seem inclined to give them the boot come next November to vote for and install a leaner administration.
I wonder if maybe now has come the time that Common Council Prez Tom DePietro is finally rueing the countless times he has ignored or talked down to citizens and members of the council in his feeble efforts to exert dominance.
Well, God bless him. He's perpetually a source of entertainment and seeing him potentially go may tug on my heart strings.
A little bit of citizen action, petitions and referendums could end these petit tyrants. And a lean council with term limits, the citizens could actually could actually have influence. Votes would matter. I love democracy!
DeleteWhy still have a mayor?
ReplyDeleteHow many of those municipalities with managers also have mayors?
If I remember correctly, Newburgh, which revised its charter to hire a city manager, still has a mayor.
DeleteI would think there's no harm in having one. A strong mayor, even in a purely ceremonial role, still can do a lot of good.
My biggest complaint with the current mayor Kamal is not that the city isn't in good shape. The problems and issues that have mounted may at this point be beyond fixing by mere mortals. The problem is that he isn't even putting them on the public agenda.
Instead, what I am seeing is him acting out love fests on FB with members of the HCSD school board despite that school district being by every objective measure a failure. Every time he does take a stance it's to appease his base.
The whole polity and decorum in Hudson is wrong and counter-productive when it concerns local politics. An elected, yet unpaid, mayor has the liberty to stick fingers in the wound rather than being fearful of repercussions on the ballot when their economic livelihood depends on not losing an election.
Mayors in small municipalities of the country that I am from are fulfilling a so called "Ehrenamt" - an honorary office. They are not paid and as a result of that, when they voice their opinions they are being listened to because they are not saying it for ulterior motives.
Hudson can do with a voice that occasionally brings up inconvenient truths.
I am 100% behind this effort. When I was Chair of the Hudson City Democrats we brought proposals forward a number of times for an overhaul of the city's governmental structure, without the Council ever picking up the ball.
ReplyDeleteBut the "Fair and Equal" campaign for the end of weighted voting on the Council showed us the way to get it done. Collect a couple of hundred signatures on a petition to the Council. The Council must take the proposal exactly as stated in the petition. If they take it up but vote it down or refuse to take a vote on it, we collect a small number of additional signatures and it goes on the ballot with or without the Council's support. A great deal of this makes complete sense. I believe it would get widespread support and I will be happy to carry petitions and help build support for the proposal.
And… a city manager could force updated assessments as they would be taken away from the political hot potato that it is
ReplyDeleteAmen. Where do we sign?
ReplyDeleteI fully support the idea of evaluating Hudson’s charter and agree that creating a city manager position could make a lot of sense. Professionalizing our government and improving efficiency are worthwhile goals that could benefit everyone.
ReplyDeleteBut do I understand this process correctly? A small group of private citizens crafted this proposal without public input, and they’re hoping to bypass formal channels to get it on the ballot? They don’t seem to intend to revise or refine the proposal through any sort of structured, inclusive process that allows for meaningful community engagement.
This is a serious concern. Any changes to our city’s government—especially ones as significant as restructuring the charter—should be done transparently and with the involvement of the entire community. If this proposal is as good as its proponents believe, why not engage the public openly and incorporate feedback? Hudson deserves a process that reflects the diversity of perspectives in our city, not one dominated by a small, insular group.
Frankly, this approach feels like a dangerous precedent. Hudson Development Corporation and Bob Rasner had every opportunity to invite public input if they truly cared about what the community wanted. Instead, HDC has a reputation for excluding voices that don’t align with their narrow perspective—a perspective that tends to come from a very homogenous group as Rasner himself notes.
This isn’t how government reform should happen. If we’re going to make changes to our charter, they need to reflect the will of the people through a transparent, inclusive, and properly structured process. Let’s do this the right way, not in secret or through shortcuts. Hudson deserves better.
Read the proposal, then you can sign the petition or not. If it goes to referendum you can vote yes or no. Somebody has to get off their butts and put this together. Only so much can be done commenting on blogs and social media.
DeleteIf you want to talk about things being done in secret, look at the comprehensive plan. And there will be no referendum on that. Just the council president, the mayor, the mayor’s girlfriend, and their hand selected low-information committee.
No formal channels are being bypassed. https://dos.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2024/09/revising-city-charters.pdf lays out three paths towards charter reform: The one being used here is "Charter Revision by Initiative and Referendum" (page 5 of the aforementioned document).
DeleteHow one arrives at a specific charter proposal to me is entirely secondary. I had talked with people in Hudson who seemed reluctant to even look at the proposal based purely on who were involved in crafting it. I by the way was not - this initiative had started long before I had heard of it.
If the proposal is good, it's good and should be adopted even if Satan himself had scribbled it on two stone tablets. Everything I've heard about it so far makes me think it is very good.
If it's bad, the public should reject it. That is in my mind the purest form of democracy and feedback.
I am meanwhile skeptical that what you describe as a more inclusive approach would work all that well. A city charter is a pretty complicated thing. For one, it cannot contain any verbiage that is in conflict with existing state laws.
Hudson is currently employing an uber-inclusive process to craft a new Comprehensive Plan. We will see what it will yield but so far all it has achieved is costing the city more money.
A: Who wants to take a $100 bet that Tom will call this reasonable data-driven City Manager solution that increases democratic participation "racist" or "undemocratic".
ReplyDeleteT-minus....
Tom - if you are reading this, please don't do that... it is 2024.
B: Kamal - please don't fight this noble effort because your job and local influence depends on being Mayor until you run for some higher office.
If you disagree on merit with the City Manager system, great, let's hear it.
But Kamal:
1. You find a great job in Albany or in the private sector in areas of work that you care about deeply.
2. Nothing stops you from applying to be the City Manager of Hudson if you think you can be be the best City Manager.
3. Nothing stops you from running for one of the Common Council positions in your ward.
Let's let the best ideas and the best people make Hudson better.
The only criteria for city manager as laid out in the new charter is that the applicant hold a masters of public administration and 4 years of increasing responsibility in a like position. So, unless Kamal earns an MPA or similiar degree (MP Finance), he can't apply for city manager. He can, however, run for mayor or city council.
DeleteWhile that makes sense John... could that parameter perhaps restrict qualified candidates?
DeleteFor example, what if the COO of a successful logistics intensive startup wanted to move to Hudson and be City Manager. Let's say an operations leader from SideWalk Labs (city/town focussed startup funded by Google) with an undergraduate in mechanical engineering, finance background, but can swing a wrench... but no masters...
(just one person I am already recruiting to apply and who is quite keen if she can convince her husband)
I like the 4 years of increasing responsibility... so you can sniff out repeat failures... the HSCD leader would not have passed that test.
But those who can excel academically cannot always practice what they learned. And not all degree programs are equal. MPAs often select for those who aspire to state or national government, at least in the better programs. The last thing you want is a Harvard or Princeton MPA... as much as I would like someone who can write and think clearly.
Some of the best operators in tech and finance have semi vocational bachelors degrees (and not a masters), from schools like Babson, Waterloo, etc.
Masters programs often saddle graduates with debt... so might need to work for bigger cities. Recall how Kamal used that argument to help raise Michelle Tullo's salary before commenters posted that they were in a romantic relationship.
Why not make it a requirement that all applications must be published on the City of Hudson website, all personal or commercial relationship to anyone in City of Hudson government, past and present, must be disclosed on a public disclosure form, and that open positions must be competitive and see at least x number or more genuine applications.
Just spitballing here... I know you have thought about this a lot... how do we get the best and avoid career politicians and cronyism.
FNI, you're raising a point that occurred to me as well: Job requirements are tricky and if you make them too narrow you may shoot yourself in the foot.
DeleteThe way private companies and corporations solve this is by wording requirements with just the right amount of fuzziness. My company's job offerings always require a university degree and practical work experience, but it always says "or equivalent".
If our hiring system were totally rigid, they could have never hired me 18 years ago. I had just received my academic degree but had for obvious reasons no job experience.
That fuzziness may be harder to implement for a public entity like a city that is governed by its codified laws. Hopefully John et al managed to square that circle.
A group of citizens exercising their constitutional rights, who spent three years studying the issues, legalities and technicalities of constitutional charter change, meeting with literally 100s of Hudson citizens to garner input and critiques of their work is upsetting? I guess the Founding Fathers must have really pissed you off.
ReplyDeleteI started this project 3 years ago and it was never a secret. In that time the city’s elected officials made noises about charter reform but that’s all they did. And, by the way, neither the mayor nor council president would meet to discuss the project and neither has yet read the amended charter we offer up in this process. Not that’s stopped them (or their shills) from downplaying the ideas encapsulated in the proposed charter changes.
As far as the process is concerned, it’s set out in portions of the state constitution, election law, home rule law, general municipal law and general city law. And these rubrics and the citizen initiative process brought the city the Fair and Equal project which made council voting reflect the constitutional norm of one person one vote. Any citizen or group of citizens can do what we’ve done. The council could have. The mayor could have. Both chose to sit on their hands and exploit the status quo.
Was our work done in secret? No. Was public input solicited and listened to? Yes? Does Hudson deserve better? Yes, it does. It deserves professional management of its day to day operations under the leadership of its common council, advised by an elected mayor — precisely what is proposed. And Hudson definitely deserves better than do-nothing leadership which, confronted with its lack of initiative and unwillingness to do the jobs they sought and were elected to do, insult and denigrate its citizens who, concerned about the city’s rudderless drift, devote literally 1000s of hours of their time to catalyze positive change.
Based on my more than 40 years of living in Cambridge, MA, I strongly recommend the city manager form of government. The City Council formulates policies, and the city manager implements them. Cambridge has used this system since 1942, very successfully. Mark Orton
ReplyDeleteMulti-decade Cantabrigian over here as well... one of the best run small cities in America.... by the numbers.
DeleteHudson has done the exact opposite of Cambridge.
- Passed rent control
- Exorbitant taxes
- Strong mayor system
- Bad schools
I always joke we should by Tom and Kamal plane tickets to Africa so that they can appreciate how much money Hudson is wasting and see actual systemic racism... but maybe we should just ask them to do 1 month externship to Cambridge, MA to see what good looks like.
I guess too late now anyway.
Hi Mark,
DeleteHave you heard anything about the most recent charter review committee?
It seems they are reconsidering it’s form of government. From the Final Report of the Cambridge Charter Review in January of this year:
“Regarding the most fundamental aspect of the Charter, whether to amend Cambridge's existing form of government or propose a different form of government, the Committee was not able to come to an agreement of two-thirds of its members, as required by the ordinance that established the Committee.”
More interesting, to me, is what they were not undecided about: the creation of a Resident Assembly to enhance “participation and accessibility of the city government for all residents:”
“The Committee did, however, reach two-thirds agreement regarding certain aspects of government common to both the Council/Manager and Mayor/CAFO/Council forms of government….of particular note, the innovative addition to government structure of a randomly selected Resident Assembly that would be tasked with consideration of Cambridge’s most controversial issues.”
This would involve a lottery-selected panel of at least 30 compensated residents convened once per City Council term to provide recommendations, endorsements, or even draft legislation on critical issues.
For anyone interested in more participatory forms of governance, there is a lot to read in their adoption of resident assemblies.
http://rwinters.com/council/021224CharterReviewFinalReport.pdf
`
@Hudseeker, in response to your note—HDC has open links on their website to join their meetings, which is more than I can say for the City of Hudson, where meeting links, when posted, often don’t even work. Additionally, when I joined their last meeting, it was clear they are actively working to diversify their board and outreach because they genuinely care about representing all voices. Your comment about HDC’s approach and the claim that they exclude differing perspectives is highly inaccurate. If HDC and Bob Rasner didn’t care about public input, they wouldn’t be making such efforts to involve the community at large— they mentioned talking to many, many individuals in the community and moving this forward to get more visibility in the coming months— you should have joined versus making blanket statements... Regardless, I strongly disagree with your characterization.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, I find it troubling that race is so often brought into these discussions re: “old white guys.” Just because the HDC board may be made up of “older white individuals,” that doesn’t mean their perspectives or input are any less valid. This kind of divisive language only serves to polarize to push Kamal’s agenda, rather than unite. It’s important to recognize that most people, regardless of their background, support progress and vision for the community at varying degrees (I’ve spoken to my Galvin neighbors, people who have been in the community for 50 years and people in local government). We need to focus on finding common ground and working together, instead of reducing every issue to race or identity politics. Let’s move beyond divisive rhetoric and have a more inclusive, open conversation that benefits everyone. It’s time to stop with the “us vs. them” mentality and start uniting for the future of Hudson.
Re: working in public vs private...
ReplyDelete- Tom and Kamal rarely answer their emails.
- Tom recently stopped receiving and publishing public letters to the Council.
- Tom and Kamal regularly make false statements to the public.
T&K, we are making.a list... would you like me to publish it here or in a separate blog post? Happy to run it by you for comment first. I already asked Kamal for comment. #Receipts
π« In contrast...
- Bob Rasner and the other leaders (many not yet publicly named... stay tuned... ) respond to emails the same day. They take calls.
- They take meetings and introductions without discrimination and all those who meet with them come away with praise.
- The reformers are not paid and most have contributed for decades to this city.
- Kamal's office costs us six figures and no professionalism or engagement.
= If we only look at the evidence of their actions the
π Charter Reform team is professional and open.
π Tom and Kamal are unprofessional and closed.
It would seem hudseeker would advocate a Citizen Assembly format to explore charter options. Hudseeker, might you tell us where in the United States that approach has been used successfully, what issue(s) were studied, and the cost of the project?
ReplyDeleteAnd if you believe this to be an appropriate road to travel, why have you not initiated an action plan to get underway?
Criticism of the current effort is easy… rolling up your sleeves and doing the hard work… not so easy.