"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have"
Thomas Jefferson

Monday, May 25, 2009

Councilman Clough - In or Out?

The Jefferson County Legislature is up for election this year along with 2 of the 4 Watertown City Council seats. The are seats currently held by Jeff Smith and Peter Clough and neither have announced their intentions, nor has anyone else expressed interest in the seats.

Speculation is that Clough may not seek reelection and that speculation was fueled when a loyal attendee of the Council meetings reported that Councilman Clough's house is for sale!

If Smith runs and just has not announced yet and Clough does not seek another term, there is an empty seat and no one interested.

No one interested in the non partisan council seats and the two local parties have a difficult time finding people to run for local offices.

These races are just another example of bowling alone.

18 comments:

Dan Francis said...

Oh, the choices: run or not run; one empty seat or two?

No, I'm going to run, so, please don't ask ... LOL.

~ dmf

Anonymous said...

Dan- It wouldnt seem like an election without you.....Go ahead and run...you are interested which puts you ahead of anyone else so far.

Dan Francis said...

I'm always interested; and I like running and discussing issues and meeting people and hearing their concerns and all that a campaign brings. It's the NOT running part that's hard, it's the winning part.

... (I think there's a message in there someplace, right? LOL)...

J.C. said...

....and Councilman Clough has just retired from State Employment.

Anonymous said...

Let's see, Pete Clough is selling his house and leaving NY. JoAnne Wilder is leaving NY. Chief Gomount left NY. Half the damn state office bldg left NY this year right after retirement. The teachers just commute, as most own two places.

Frog. You there, bro?

Earthbob said...

You would think that someone would pick up the standard, with the 5 year projected increases in City taxes.

Does every City Resident believe this is the way the City Government should operate?

More consultants?

More Planners, less doers?

Isn't there a City Resident that believes there are too many employees in City Hall?

How many Person Hours are expended in City Hall and what is being accomplished?

Higher taxes for the next 5 years to keep more of the same?

Anonymous said...

Hey EBob how many Employees should there be at City Hall???

Anonymous said...

Ya know, it will be interesting to see what happens this summer. There were lots of gripes about CSEA getting their pittance raises. But I'll bet this summer's management raises, which were higher than the worker raises last year, go through without a word.

Management costs are where the problem is. It isn't with the folks who do the work. Wait and see what happens on this.

Anonymous said...

hey 6:03- why should all the good jobs be with the gov't? what ever happened to entrepeneurialism?
(Oh yeah, I need a grant to go into business, I can't afford to risk my own money....)

Earthbob said...

How many employees should there be at City Hall?

Let's measure the person hours for each department.

Let's see what consultants are attached to each department.

Let's examine which City Hall Department has had an increase in Persons in the recent past.

Has anyone examined whether Planning could be combined with Engineering?

Just apply an Accounting Rate of Return.

If budgets and programs are truly being reduced, doesn't that mean less person hours are required?

The private sector has had to let people go in their offices to make ends meet.

Would my esteemed anonymous questioner suggest that our City Hall NOT do the same?

The City should NOT be frugal?

The question to my anonymous friend is: why not?

Avoiding costs is just as important as increasing revenues.

After watching the City Council meetings live on the Internet, I have not seen a City Hall Staff Reduction proposed.

No one even broached the topic.

Tonight it was proposed that the 2.5% increase for Management and Non Union Staff be changed to 2%.

That is still an increase.

Anonymous said...

EB- good points as far as I'm concerned. But the public is far more concerned with who's ahead on American Idol, and doesn't care about the gov't pickpockets in their own town. But hey, if raises are being handed out, then the recession must be over!! Not much belt-tightening after all, eh?

Anonymous said...

Well EB the door is open all you have to do is RUN, Vote for Sanjaia.

Anonymous said...

Hey EB who is Let's????, will we have to hire a consulant to find out your formula.???????????

Anonymous said...

Why are we proposing that management get a higher raise than the people who do the work? Who is proposing this? On what basis?

Anonymous said...

It doesn't matter the % of the raise, ie 2.5% for CSEA or 2% for staff, when you're paid thousands more a half% won't matter.

Anonymous said...

Management shouldn't be getting raises at higher rates than the people who do the work. And what happened to that study they did to figure out job responsibilities? Haven't heard a word about that. Another study the taxpayers paid for.

And what's this about the fountain having too small a pump to run it correctly? How hard is it to put the properly sized pump in? Was that Gene Hayes of DPW or one of our engineers? Not good.

Dan Francis said...

Graham had a piece in the WDT, kinda tongue-in-cheek humor.

Seems he is looking for someone that he can support?

I disagree with him on point: it IS public service and NOT merely a job. Yes, it takes hard work, but it is still service to the public - I think it's called government, Mr. Mayor!

If it were a job as he implies, the pay would be a heluva lot more - but the satisfaction probably a lot less, IMHO.

Anonymous said...

Management doesn't get higher rates of a raise, but % of a bigger number is always a bigger number.

Live Blogging