I did not get to the State of the City speech by Mayor Tom Adams the other night, but according to Facebook postings, Adams suggested the city return to the old system of just having the City Council select the mayor from among by themselves, which generally (not always) turns out to be a simple rotation.
Comment: As a former reporter I have attended many council meetings in several local cities that are roughly Monrovia's size (Arcadia, Temple City, San Marino, Alhambra, La Verne), and all these cities have (or, perhaps, had) the system Adams is proposing, and I never noticed any real difference between how they were run and how Monrovia is run. I think the elected-mayor system is really better for larger cities, but seems harmless in smaller cities. My one thought is that Monrovia should just do whichever is cheaper.
- Brad Haugaard
Did anyone attend the State of the City event? Monrovia has greatly benefited by having an elected mayor. Perhaps it's more of a figure head, but having a single "leader" brings culpability and focus. We shouldn't aspire to follow the lead of any city that you have mentioned. We have had iconic mayors that we cherish and give great credit to. Our mayor still has a single vote on the council, but their position is much greater than that.
ReplyDeleteVery well said! I obviously think a lot of Tom, but I disagree with him on this one. Perhaps term limits on the position would have the desired effect.
DeleteTerm limits? What is the "desired effect"?
Delete