We are now a week into the New Year and I know there is a movement to hire a new city manager. Given the city's current financial situation I am not sure the city can currently afford to, in essence, pay for two city managers, given that Mr. Stockwell has approximately six months left on his severance package.
I realize there is a desire, especially by some members of the city council, to shift the tough decisions over to a city manager rather than to have to make them, themselves. But running for city council is not like running for high school student council. City councilmen have to accept the fact that there may be times involving tough choices that have to be made. I understand that cost cutting is very uncomfortable and at times a very painful thing to do.
I hope when the council starts looking for a new city manager that it will be handled better than the last time. I remember we had three councilmen travel down to Utah, supposedly on their own dime, to conduct their own fact finding. As far as I know, they did not share any of their findings with the rest of the council members. Since this was on their own dime, I assume they weren't required to do so. There was apparently no honest sharing in the decision process.
Another problem I have is with the contract Mr. Stockwell had. I do not have a problem with a contract, per se, but I do have a problem with the idea of a contract without a review and renewal clause and the manner in which his pay raises were awarded.
When the council hires a new city manager who wants a contract, they should hire a contract lawyer as outside counsel to review it, to be sure the city's best interests are served, to make sure the contract is balanced and not slanted the way the last contract apparently was.
/s/ Carol L. Peterson, Sunnyside