MIN CHC 1999-08-11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

• HERKES: RAY: • • Yes. Okay. John. SANTANGELO: I didn't mean to say that more information, and as sensitive as Mr. Balog wants to be, I agree with a certain part of that. What I want to know is are we interested in pursuing this and the point that Kevin brought up was, and part of that discussion would be at what cost. There's things that have been discussed like nonpartisan and other things that may come before us, I wouldn't want to pursue this at the cost of other things like that. I think those are important. On the other hand, what the public thinks, I don't know how we can possibly second guess them. This panel was brought together to get it's collective intelligence to look at things and say do we feel that this would create a higher quality of life for the County, and if we do, let's pursue it, and that's what I'm wondering. How do we feel about this and can we take a straw poll to pursue this or not? RAY: Mr. Balog, and then let's call for the vote. BALOG: I agree with that, with the last part. We were brought together, and it's true for us collectively, to think if you do make a change, if it's for the betterment of the County and we had a summary that was put out and if you go by this summary, there's some things on here that are real hot items that a lot of guys spoke out against and some items that nobody's talked about period. One person brought up and no one else but I just think that John is right, that we have to just, for us to know right now, if we're going to pursue this, let's do it and if we aren't and we feel it wouldn't be for the betterment of the County, then you go that route too, but whatever it is, just get it over with and let's do it. Don't keep saying well, let's see if we need more information or less information, or whatever. If we're going to go for it, worry about how you're going to do it after you figure out you're going to go for it but take a straw vote to see if you're going to go for it. BESS: Coming back to why this City Manager appeals to me is because it appears to be an efficient, professional form of government. It may or may not be at lower cost. It certainly seems to provide for a greater degree of accountability. Those are the things that I would like us to focus on and I'm not necessarily hung up on going City Manager. If we can play with the existing Charter and achieve those same attributes, I'm hot for it and I would certainly be willing to go the route of exploring, and early on in the issue, a look, are we going to provide for more professionalism and accountability in terms of administering this government and let's see where we get with that. And come back to City Manager if we realize the structure itself doesn't provide for that. I'II pull back from - I'm appreciate hearing from the guy from Georgia. It's not a function of more information, it's a function of really discussing this and really coming to an honest opinion about whether or not we really want to go this route or not 23