The “Water Cooler” is a feature on Claycord.com where we ask you a question or provide a topic, and you talk about it.
The “Water Cooler” will be up Monday-Friday in the noon hour.
Most cities around Contra Costa County appoint their Mayor on a yearly basis.
QUESTION: Do you think appointing a Mayor is good, or would you rather them be elected by the voters?
Talk about it….
Yes! Appointment by city reps leads to cronyism and group thinking.
Look at the politicians (on both sides) that the People elect already – not a lot of confidence in that process…
Mayors and anybody else in public office should be voted in. I have lived in Concord since 1981 and I have never known who the mayor is. Once in a while a name floats by me, but it doesn’t matter because I never heard of them anyway and I’m not about to do any research on them because it wouldn’t do me any good. If the mayor was elected I would have had the opportunity to learn something about them and at least know their name.
The only thing I know about our currant mayor is that he or she, (I don’t even know if it’s a male or female) is doing a crummy job. The city is filthy thanks to the filthy homeless, who leave their litter everywhere.
Yes.
For one term only.
Council members should be chosen from a lottery of city residents. One year term, one year only.
Let everyone have a chance to represent the people of the City.
Yes. The council being able to choose from themselves on who is going to run the city is ridiculous. But you know they would fight tooth and nail if we try and take that power from them.
All representatives should be voted into their positions. And I don’t believe in the district idea. There should be one vote which covers the city as a whole. But that’s just my opinion and we know what that means in California. The state where the Governor openly goes against the will of the voting public!
The concept of mayor should be ceremonial. There shouldn’t be a position in which 1 person has a higher authority than the rest of council. The current system of the rotating mayoral position is good.
A 4 year mayor with a strong authority can be corrupted, manipulated, or can set an agenda that might be counter to the majority of council or that goes against the majority of popular opinion.
Random there’s no voting out of this mess
Either way – as long as there are term limits on consecutive terms of office. How would you like to have the same mayor for 22 years the same way Concord has had Hoffmeister on counsel consecutively for that long?
Normally I would say yes. But in Concord, why bother. Like we have any say in who gets elected to the Council. That is decided by the Police Union.
You don’t get representation if you don’t have the money to buy it.
The big weakness in the current set up is our unelected and unaccountable city manager runs the city by default. I would support an elected Mayor if that role was defined as executive only – not a sixth vote on the council.
Elections would be a non-partisan open primary, with the top two vote getters running against each other in the general election. 4 year terms, 3 terms lifetime max.
I would also require a public vote of confidence every 2 years. If the mayor can’t get a 50% vote of confidence they would be removed immediately and replaced by the runner-up in the last election. That way we are not stuck with a lemon for a full four years.
Who cares? The only thing that matters is that candidates have a “D” by their political affiliation. Brainless voters elect brainless candidates and then wonder why things are so screwed up. After 10+ years of prosperity, cali should be in much better condition than it is. “Budget surplus” you say? Subtract that from the billions needed to fund the state and local pensions and healthcare and you get billions in deficit.
I prefer election over council appointment.
When the position of Mayor is purely ceremonial – as in Concord, then appointing the Mayor is good because it gives everyone on the City Council a chance to play being important. Concord’s Mayor is a member of its part-time City Council and is appointed to the position by the council’s other members. The Mayor has no more power than any other member of the council – except they get to bang the gavel. Concord, like most cities with part-time City Councils, is run day-to-day by a professional administrator called City Manager. City Managers are typically educated in running large public non-profits and have years of experience and are less likely to be influenced by special interests than elected officials. City Managers are usually hired and fired by the City Council and its gavel-banging Mayor.
natalie posted
A 4 year mayor with a strong authority can be corrupted, manipulated, or can set an agenda that might be counter to the majority of council or that goes against the majority of popular opinion.
fault 1 …no council or have you not seen what the council is doing or are you in favor of your children getting subpar education while the city spends all your money on building and maintaining and supporting a soccer stadium I bet you will never use or go to
fault 2 …the mayor will be elected and be responsible for their actions …or be dismissed and lose their benefits and pay ….
fault 3 …yes city manager ….that does what exactly …as in the city manager was just asking what they should do …I do believe a city manager has gone to college and has experience and knowledge of how to bring forth a prosperous and safe and thriving city …since uhh they are being paid to do so ….
fault 4 no city corrupt council building things we don’t need and allowing scamming contractors to build on a gift of land that could really make this city a really great place for all to live and visit …
but with the council … we get a scammer construction pitch and sham bidding process and attorneys associated allegedly jumping from a parking garage …
council has been given absolute power over our money our lives and our future…and if you think they are listening to you and making elis park safer and ridding the city of drug users and criminals and making sure those that do are sent to prison or drug programs then it is you who are failing the city
the city manager we have is a paid pony by the city council with our tax money to be the scapegoat ….and or a barrier …I have not seen one thing effected or brought forth or even stated as bettering the city from this manager that has been here for at least 2 years
now do I go council meetings no ..I also don’t go to hoa meetings
they are the same by the rules they have to listen they do not and I repeat do not have to do anything you bring up or are upset about or are against …they do what they want when they barter behind closed doors as to whos family member will get the tax money that they can skim ….
as for an hoa they do what they want to better their street or home or neighbors wishes or favors ….
so you see 5 people together in this state in charge of property or people are not checking on each other making sure everything is kosher they are figuring out how they can group together and legally rip you off by covering each others rear ….
at least a mayor only system would make them liable and responsible for their actions as councils are not or boards or hoa or any organization or fund …
.they just rip you off and by the looks of it you enjoy it repeatedly
and vote for them to do so lol
the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting things to change ……..
lest we forget about sanctuary status that has thrown American citizens to the streets in favor of housing of illegals paid for by the state
which is why the rent is so high ….first from the bubble burst of 2008 …
because the banks would not give homeloans
so the rents increased per demand
enter sanctuary where the gov is flooding in illegals to pad the population so for the next ten years they can reap an increased federal stipend and use it to their will and not on the American citizens in the state
and where do the illegals stay??? on the street nope they are entered into the system with expedited paperwork and the gov puts them up in over priced so called low income housing at 1200 a month or higher rents forcing American citizens out as they are by passed in favor of latino names
you say housing crisis lol
the 18 million illegals are putting American citizens in the street
but no one is talking about that …the media never mentions it unless some politician is touting housing crisis and more taxes
year ago the media would have outed the sanctuary policy but now they are all lined up like democrat puppets in some holy war with anyone not on their side and wearing a rainbow on the psyche.
anyone tell me anything the city council or manager has done for the people as a whole like …reduce crime or fix roads or help fill business fronts or strive for ridding parks of bums and druggies …see they are different even though they like to label every one into a lump of HOMELESS OR UNSHELTERED <<< MY favorite dem attention grabber to show their ineptness and lack of vision and idiocy that voters eat up as well as media
the truth is low income Americans are being left to the street and being used to further a democrat political narrative
best part is land lords have to comply or be called racist ….
and yes the D next to their name enables them to media attention and backing as well as increased favor and money
oh and the state has been recognized and awarded the prize for ……
highest porch pirate rate in the nation ….ahhh sanctuary seems a lot like mexico city …bad roads ….dirty …bums …corruption ….no police or rather non allowed to police ….
well looks like demifornias invasion has succeded now
all mexico needs to do is get texas and new mexico back and they will have succeeded the union.
here is a seattle mayor discussing the homeless
Anderson Cooper: Do you actually feel that the City has a grip on this problem?
Mayor Jenny Durkan: I think we know what works.
Anderson Cooper: I counted 12 people homeless right outside city hall right now. If the city knows what works, why are there still so many homeless people out there?
Mayor Jenny Durkan: Because it’s so complex, there’s no one city in America that’s going to fix this. This has got to be both a regional and State-wide and federal answer.
ahhhh this sums up democrat mayor political prowess
we know ….
oh really …
well the fed needs to do their part now that we screwed our city up
lol
Technically, don’t we elect city counsel members, and then from that group, they rotate who’s mayor? Among the elected members, everyone has an opportunity to be mayor for a year. Seems democratic, no?
The mayor and all government officials should be elected by special interest stake holders. Labor unions, developers, business leaders, financiers, green bullies, military industrial complex, etc.
We unwashed working tax paying stiffs cannot possibly comprehend the complex intricacies required to perform these jobs.
Yes, we should have an elected Mayor and an elected Vice Mayor in the City of Concord, but only if term limits are applied to the positions. No more than 2 consecutive terms as a councilmember, 1 term as Vice Mayor, 1 term as Mayor, and must be out of the position of Councilmember, Vice Mayor, or Mayor for 2 terms (8 years) before being eligible to run for any of those positions again, could serve more than the term limits if first term was a partial term from being appointed to serve out the term of someone else. Anyone appointed to fill the position of someone that vacated a seat should be the runner-ups for those seats in the last election, if no runner-ups the appointments would be opened up to eligible residents willing to serve out the remainder of the term, but wouldn’t be eligible to run for the seat in the next election.
The Concord City Council needs to stop appointing their like minded friends to open seats. Concord City Councilmembers are also unwilling to institute term limits on themselves.
Elected by the voters for 1 term only. We need to break up the good ole boys and girls club that runs the city for way to long.
Sigh – The amount of ignorance in this thread, as usual, is astounding. Only five cities in California have Strong Mayor systems, and those are all directly elected by the voters.
Strong Mayor = Elected by voters w/ more power.
Weak Mayor = Appointed by council w/ no extra power.
Asserting that all mayors should be directly elected would mean we switch all councils to Strong Mayor systems. Weak mayors have ceremonial duties; ribbon-cuttings, chairing meetings, etc.
RJ,
The 5 California cities with “Strong Mayors” are Charter Cities, the City of Concord is a “General Law City,” and “General Law Cities” in the State of California are permitted to directly elect a Mayor, a “Weak Mayor,” by a vote of the people, there are about 150 “Weak Mayors” elected by a vote of the people in the State of California.
Yes, the amount of ignorance in this thread, as usual, is astounding. Direct election of mayors does not necessarily mean councils would switch to Strong Mayor systems, as evidenced right next door to Concord in Martinez.
Voters should elect the Mayor/Council for 1 year terms. Likewise, the City Manager should be a resident of the city of Concord, not Walnut Creek, as she is now. She know nothing about our city.