tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2498525082522582900.post6182083237184501891..comments2024-03-22T16:02:08.213-05:00Comments on The Wheel: What Will The Mayor Do For Me?Mark Stegerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02376182294736839659noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2498525082522582900.post-3769804610613751562013-04-06T09:38:07.391-05:002013-04-06T09:38:07.391-05:00Reminder: Comments not identified by the poster...Reminder: Comments not identified by the poster's full name are subject to deletion.Mark Stegerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02376182294736839659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2498525082522582900.post-41083495608905374162013-04-06T01:50:10.702-05:002013-04-06T01:50:10.702-05:00Yes, closed door meeting really raked Bill Keffler...Yes, closed door meeting really raked Bill Keffler over the coals when they gave him carte blanche to ask Deloitte Touche out of Chicago to figure out a way to give Keffler a $350,000 bonus to educate his children. <br /><br />That must have been an interesting closed meeting since Steve kept publically saying they wanted to pay him more. <br /><br />But law says they can review the city manager in private. <br /><br />Cheri Sassy Texanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00498774040581968874noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2498525082522582900.post-5064510121861146952013-04-04T21:13:55.456-05:002013-04-04T21:13:55.456-05:00Destiny, I respectfully disagree. The discussion i...Destiny, I respectfully disagree. The discussion in executive session allows them to speak to each other freely about things that they would be hesitant to say in public. Do you really want councilmembers discussing in public aspects of a councilmember's personal life that would have a negative impact on his/her council performance as mayor or mayor pro tem? No, I really don't think you do. <br /><br />As for a councilmember putting on a fake smile in order to present a unified front, I suspect (without proof, of course) that this happens less than you think.<br /><br />Did the council put on a united front in 2007 when they elected Steve Mitchell? Nope, it was a 4 to 3 vote for Steve Mitchell. Did the council put on a united front in 2009 when Gary Slagel was re-elected? Nope (remember that Steve voted against Gary). Did they put on a united front in 2011? Maybe...but it's also possible that no one other than Bob and Laura were electable with that group.<br /><br />It's easy to criticize and say that they are telling people that "their constituent[s] don't need to know everything", but the fact is that at some point, we have to have some discretion. Our council is allowed to discuss our city manager's performance in private because what quality city manager would come work here if he/she were raked over the coals in public? Our council is allowed to discuss certain personnel issues in private, because they sometimes contain issues that even you don't want to know about - and you are a worldly enough woman to know what I'm talking about. <br /><br />Billmccalpinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02768191960822864278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2498525082522582900.post-86401699635000920212013-04-04T18:06:19.547-05:002013-04-04T18:06:19.547-05:00Bill, you're splitting hairs. The vote does no...Bill, you're splitting hairs. The vote does not take place behind closed doors, but the decision does. I understand them wanting to come out and present a unified front but I also think that's stupid since often times they are anything but. For some of them that means their very first act as a city council member will be deceiving the public. By fighting it out off camera and out of the public eye, then being asked to put on a fake smile and vote unanimously, they are told their constituent don't need to know everything. I'll take transparency any day over simply keeping up appearances. Destinyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15321266512192671566noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2498525082522582900.post-14004432343770384152013-04-04T12:13:50.356-05:002013-04-04T12:13:50.356-05:00"Selection of Mayor pro tem: Both candidates ..."Selection of Mayor pro tem: Both candidates promised to support the selection of the next mayor pro tem in open session, versus the prior practice of doing this in closed, executive session."<br /><br />Just for the sake of clarity, because so many people misunderstand what the process actually was, neither the mayor pro tem (nor the mayor, up until this year) were "selected" in a closed, executive session.<br /><br />What actually happens is the following:<br />1. the council convenes in open session at a meeting after the election numbers have been readied by Dallas County<br />2. they do the invocation, pledges of allegiance, and invite public input in the Visitors Section.<br />3. "canvass the returns" (i.e., accept the election results as computed by the Dallas County Elections Department (despite being in 2 counties, we hire Dallas County to do the whole thing).<br />4. have each elected council member swear the oath of office.<br />5. Only then does the council go into executive session to discuss the merits of anyone wanting to be mayor pro tem (or mayor up until this year) - note that the council is forbidden by State law from taking a vote in executive session.<br />6. Then the council comes back into open session and takes the vote on the mayor pro tem - that is, every single council member is on the record as to how he/she voted.<br />7. finally, the meeting is adjourned.<br /><br />It is unfortunate that so many people believe the facile statement that the "mayor" (and mayor pro tem) is chosen in secret - the mayor was always chosen in public - it was only the discussion by the members of the council that was in executive session - as permitted by the Texas Opening Meetings Act. <br /><br />Also note that the public has a chance to make comments on who they would like to see as mayor pro tem in the Visitors Section, which is BEFORE the mayor pro tem is actually discussed or chosen, a fact that I imagine has eluded most people. <br /><br />If both Amir and Laura want to do the discussion in open session, that's fine - it is certainly within the law to do so - but people shouldn't be mislead (by others, not by you, Mark) into believing that the previous method was illegal or even sneaky.<br /><br />Billmccalpinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02768191960822864278noreply@blogger.com