The power play at City Hall appears to be alive and well - as illustrated by the flap over how the new city administrator was hired.
A couple of aldermen are accusing Mayor Bill Ross of overstepping his bounds by offering the city administrator's position to aldermen's second choice last month - without consulting the full council. For his part, Ross contends he acted under the authority the council granted him.
Frankly, the whole thing seems to be a tempest in a teapot.
First, some background on how the story in Tuesday's edition of The Monroe Times came together.
Typically, information related to personnel negotiations is conducted in closed session. But in this case, it was clear that a few aldermen very much wanted the newspaper to see what was in minutes from closed-door meetings and emails related to the hiring of Philip Rath, the city's new administrator. Alderman Thurston Hanson, at a Common Council meeting last month, went so far as to specifically call for the release of all minutes and emails related to the city administrator selection "in the interest of transparency and public interest."
Michael Boyce seconded the motion.
As much as we support having full access to information, it's clear from conversations with Boyce, Hanson and Jan Lefevre they wanted the Times to see the documents for a particular reason - to ding the mayor for not staying in his lane.
But based on what we've learned about the hiring process for city administrator, there's at least three other aldermen - Charles Koch, Charles Schuringa and Paul Hannes - who believe Ross acted in accordance with the council's verbal agreement on how negotiations should proceed. Meanwhile, another pair of aldermen - Keith Ingwell and Dan Henke - were not even present for the discussion, and a third, Neal Hunter, says he can't recall the discussion. However, minutes from the meeting suggest even he - at least initially - felt the mayor acted properly.
The mayor himself maintains he acted in good faith using the authority he believed the council had vested in him.
And we agree. Ross did act appropriately, at least under the procedures the council discussed: After receiving a counter-offer from first-choice candidate Ken Witt, Ross spoke with the hiring firm, Koch and Schuringa, the chairman of the salary and personnel committee.
Based on these conversations, Ross said he decided to offer the position to the next candidate in line.
That said, we can't help feeling there's more than the public's interest at issue here. And that is the division on the City Council.
We aren't the only ones who have noticed.
"I think the political divide on the Council and with the Mayor would make it difficult to implement the change that you need," wrote Witt, in one email during the hiring process.
In early October, we chided Ross in an editorial on this page for what appeared to be a power play for removing Boyce as chairman of the Finance and Taxation committee. Now, it seems the other side has attempted to use the council's inefficient hiring procedure to cast the mayor in a negative light. What's more, we're particularly bothered that Hanson accused Ross of overstepping his authority, yet took it upon himself to contact Witt directly to discuss the terms of the Witt's counter-offer.
Last month, we said the council was at a crossroads in determining how it will conduct itself in the future. Now the stakes are even higher: The Common Council has less than one month until Rath begins his new position with the city. That means the council has just a few weeks to decide if it will continue to play petty politics or if it will operate as a professional, cohesive unit and serve our community as the voters intended.
We certainly hope the council decides on the latter. Because one thing is crystal clear: No city administrator - regardless of qualifications, experience or skillset - will be able to succeed in the current environment at City Hall.
The new city administrator has much work ahead of him. The mayor and the Common Council owe it to Monroe residents to figure out a way to work together and pave the way for Rath to succeed in the job they've hired him to do.
A couple of aldermen are accusing Mayor Bill Ross of overstepping his bounds by offering the city administrator's position to aldermen's second choice last month - without consulting the full council. For his part, Ross contends he acted under the authority the council granted him.
Frankly, the whole thing seems to be a tempest in a teapot.
First, some background on how the story in Tuesday's edition of The Monroe Times came together.
Typically, information related to personnel negotiations is conducted in closed session. But in this case, it was clear that a few aldermen very much wanted the newspaper to see what was in minutes from closed-door meetings and emails related to the hiring of Philip Rath, the city's new administrator. Alderman Thurston Hanson, at a Common Council meeting last month, went so far as to specifically call for the release of all minutes and emails related to the city administrator selection "in the interest of transparency and public interest."
Michael Boyce seconded the motion.
As much as we support having full access to information, it's clear from conversations with Boyce, Hanson and Jan Lefevre they wanted the Times to see the documents for a particular reason - to ding the mayor for not staying in his lane.
But based on what we've learned about the hiring process for city administrator, there's at least three other aldermen - Charles Koch, Charles Schuringa and Paul Hannes - who believe Ross acted in accordance with the council's verbal agreement on how negotiations should proceed. Meanwhile, another pair of aldermen - Keith Ingwell and Dan Henke - were not even present for the discussion, and a third, Neal Hunter, says he can't recall the discussion. However, minutes from the meeting suggest even he - at least initially - felt the mayor acted properly.
The mayor himself maintains he acted in good faith using the authority he believed the council had vested in him.
And we agree. Ross did act appropriately, at least under the procedures the council discussed: After receiving a counter-offer from first-choice candidate Ken Witt, Ross spoke with the hiring firm, Koch and Schuringa, the chairman of the salary and personnel committee.
Based on these conversations, Ross said he decided to offer the position to the next candidate in line.
That said, we can't help feeling there's more than the public's interest at issue here. And that is the division on the City Council.
We aren't the only ones who have noticed.
"I think the political divide on the Council and with the Mayor would make it difficult to implement the change that you need," wrote Witt, in one email during the hiring process.
In early October, we chided Ross in an editorial on this page for what appeared to be a power play for removing Boyce as chairman of the Finance and Taxation committee. Now, it seems the other side has attempted to use the council's inefficient hiring procedure to cast the mayor in a negative light. What's more, we're particularly bothered that Hanson accused Ross of overstepping his authority, yet took it upon himself to contact Witt directly to discuss the terms of the Witt's counter-offer.
Last month, we said the council was at a crossroads in determining how it will conduct itself in the future. Now the stakes are even higher: The Common Council has less than one month until Rath begins his new position with the city. That means the council has just a few weeks to decide if it will continue to play petty politics or if it will operate as a professional, cohesive unit and serve our community as the voters intended.
We certainly hope the council decides on the latter. Because one thing is crystal clear: No city administrator - regardless of qualifications, experience or skillset - will be able to succeed in the current environment at City Hall.
The new city administrator has much work ahead of him. The mayor and the Common Council owe it to Monroe residents to figure out a way to work together and pave the way for Rath to succeed in the job they've hired him to do.
