From the sound of the article in today's Daily News about last night's meeting of the Charter Review Commission, that group doesn't know a whole lot about its government. Here we have a group of city residents come together to review the document that forms the backbone of city goverment, and Joanne Beck writes that "no one" even knows the responsibilities of the city clerk/treasurer. One member, John Deleo, wanted to scrap the position of assistant city manager before he even knew what it entailed. That same member admits flat out: "We're shifting a lot of responsibilties with the stroke of a pen without understanding what everyone does."
Wait a second... What!? Why would anyone who doesn't know what government staffers do be charged with the responsibility of deciding whether or not they should contintue to do it?
At the very least, shouldn't members of such a commission be trained and educated before they begin their deliberations rather than trying to get them up to speed during the proceedings? John Roach heads up the commission, and I know he's a frequent contributor to the site, so I'm hoping he'll come on here and clarify a few of these points for us.
Another question for John: Beck writes that Councilmen Sam Barone and Bob Bialkowski have asked the commission to "consider how much responsibility council has over department heads ... and giving council the power versus city manager." Have those issues come up yet? What does the commission think?
While we're at it: What about going back to a strong mayoral form of city government?
County Manager Jay Gsell told the Daily News that "it will be an "extremely difficult" task to keep the tax rate at or below" its current level. That's a fine assertion, but it makes for a whole lot of confusion sandwiched by statements to the contrary. Gsell also says: "I wouldn't bring anything to" the legislators that would exceed the current tax rate. For their part, the legislators say that they hope to "decrease taxes."
So which is it?
Reporter Paul Mrozek writes in the article summary line: "Gsell's goal: Cut the tax rate." That's a fine goal, but if Gsell himself doesn't believe it's possible, what's the point of calling it a goal?
A meeting of the town of Batavia Planning Board scheduled for tonight has been cancelled. The board had only one item on its agenda—the "draft generic environmental impact statement" for the agri-business park—and it was not ready. It should be ready for review for the next meeting on October 21.
Another decision was postponed, this time in Albion. There, the Town Board put off voting on its local wind law Monday in order to make the revisions—"very minor word changes"—recommended by the Orleans County Planning Board. The proposed law will limit "wind energy conversion systems" to not exceed 120 feet. They will take up the vote at the next session on October 20.
We encourage you to pick up a copy of the Daily News at your local newsstand. Or, better yet, subscribe at BataviaNews.com.