I ran for mayor 2004 against Tom Gamec with the slogan, "It's me or more of the same."
He hammared me that election; 60% to 40%. People got more of the same.
Now, I would like each of the various "finalists" for the chair of City Administrator to consider how, after much strife, to honestly and convincingly explain to our citizens what they will have as priorities, when the citizens will be expecting more bang for the buck. A lot of profligate spending's been done, and there's a foreclosure and a lawsuit pitting city against a foreclosing bank.
A lot of townhome have been built and a lot have been sold. And the bank [consortium] lent $35 million on a 320 acre project and now there's half the acreage left and the bank says it is still owed $35 million; and what have those individuals been watching, if not the bank's interest; as half the land goes somewhere and there's not been a half-way paydown on the debt? Who gave the individual lien releases townhome by townhome there; without wanting a paydown in exchange?
Real funny banking if you ask me. Most people, you don't service the debt, the banker gets real unfriendly real quickly. Here, half the land goes elsewhere and no paydown. They sure did not get much bang for their buck, did they?
THE CITY: Bang for the buck from consultants - THERE ARE SO MANY - all of the contracts, bond counsel, comprehensive plan consultants, the Hoisington firm that appears to have been abandoned, economic development and TIF and CMDC, Tinklenberg, the parking ramp guys; everyone; and where's the bang for the buck? Where's the bang for the buck from staff? Why was Ramsey Blvd. dug up twice, and closed off twice. Once should be enough if it's done right the first time.
Sure the new City Hall building is bigger, with more space, but a bureaucracy does not need to expand to fit the space available to it. It is not like gas in a cylinder where you pull the piston out the pressure goes down, and if there's any leakage in it just fills up with more molecules, slowly but inexorably.
That's one of my bigger worries about the new big spiffy expensive non-referendum city hall.
And, bang for the buck - with four of seven seats up for reelection, presumably, in 2008; a presidential election year - have any of the four given us enough bang for the buck? Not that council pay is great. It is not. But the only big bang has been the Town Center deal exploding in people's embarassed faces.
So, 2008 election cycle: Will it be a triumphal return to office, or the broom?
Any candidate for the City Administrator job has to know such jobs are secure from one election to the next - usually - but there is much discord in Ramsey over the botching of things with the Town Center - and nobody but the incumbents from before the 2006 election are responsible for that.
I ran against Elvig in 2006 and got hammered - same 60% to 40%, and I ran saying the first priority I had, I would have fired James Norman. Well --
In any event, with James Norman gone the potential for good government has not suffered from the change.
So, Norman-replacement finalists, how will you tell the citizens and the four new council faces [presuming a bit there] how you during you tenure propose to get more bang for the buck?
Show up tonight. Ask each one.