2005 CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE

The 2005 Charter Review Committee met on October 26, 2006, at 7:13 p.m. with Chairman Leary presiding. Members present were Mrs. Greenwood, Mr. Jones, Mrs. Malone, Mr. Scheller, and Mrs. Merritt. Dr. Miller was absent. Mrs. McDowell was also present.

AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS

Mrs. Malone moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Scheller and unanimously carried.

DISCUSSION - FORM OF GOVERNMENT - GUEST SPEAKER MR. TOM WONTOREK, CITY MANAGER - CITY OF LEWES, DELAWARE

During their meeting of September 7, 2006, there were no objections from members to grant the request of the City Manager, Mr. DePrima, for members to reconsider the “form of government” and the opportunity to have a guest speaker to provide some perspective on the subject as was discussed during the committee meeting of July 6, 2006.

Mr. DePrima introduced Mr. Thomas Wontorek, City Manager for the City of Lewes, Delaware (Biography Attached), who has served as a City Manager for several jurisdictions. He advised members that Mr. Carl Luft, City Manager of Newark, was not able to attend the meeting.

Mr. DePrima briefly reviewed with members his role as the City Manager for the City of Dover. In the City Manager profession, he explained that there is no term of office - “everyday is an election day”, because there is an open contract. Typically a City Manager is hired and continues to serve in that capacity until they are dismissed or leave voluntarily.

With regards to the Council relationship, Mr. DePrima stated that he has regular weekly meetings with the Council President and meets with the Standing Committee Chairs once a month (currently only the Legislative, Finance, and Administration and Utility Committee Chairs have elected to do so). There are also meetings held twice each month with the Council President, Mayor, and Chairman of each Standing Committee, that are held specifically to review agendas for their preparation.

Although he does not have regularly scheduled meetings with the Mayor, Mr. DePrima advised members that there is language involving the City’s Budget included in the Mayor’s job description and he recently participated in the department budget meetings and interacted as part of the budget team.

Mr. DePrima stated that when the Mayor and City Manager do interact it is typically to discuss constituent complaints. He explained that people expect to be able to call their Mayor to submit a complaint. The Mayor takes these constituent issues, as do members of City Council, and then discusses them with him for resolution. He also interacts with the Mayor regarding economic development (recruiting), and legislation affecting the City, since the Mayor serves as liaison to legislators. Mr. DePrima stated that during a state of emergency, the Mayor is in charge and that this particular Mayor has been very active in this regard. Therefore, homeland security is another issue that they discuss on a regular basis. He also advised members that the Mayor’s Office is included in the budget and is treated like any other department. Like a department, the Mayor must develop strategic goals, objectives, and programs, which are presented to Council for approval as a part of the annual budget.

For the City of Dover, most department heads report to the City Manager. Mr. DePrima stated that the City Charter is clear that City Council is prohibited from giving direction to an employee of the City Manager. He advised members that recently, he has been given the responsibility of providing oversight to the day to day operations of the Planning and Inspections Department and Tax Assessors Office. He disagreed with the notion that this was done as a result of a personality change. It was his opinion that the reason Council made this change is due to the difficulty to provide proper, regular, daily oversight over employees. Without it, he explained how a department can decline and it not become known until it is at a crisis stage. Mr. DePrima advised members that this is what happened in the Tax Assessors Office with record keeping. He advised members that there was a Planning Director that was not reporting to work, but it was not known to Council until it became a public controversy. Mr. DePrima noted that this would not be the case for an office such as the City Clerk since Council is in constant contact with that office.

Mr. DePrima reiterated that although there are nine (9) members of Council, he does not feel that he works for nine (9) bosses, but rather a Council. He also does not feel there is an issue with micro-managing and that most of the communications with Council is to address constituents’ concerns.

Mr. Wontorek advised members that each of the cities he has worked in as the City Manager, it has been a basic Council-Manager Form of Government. In Wisconsin, his title was City Administrator, which appears to be more like what has been described for the City of Dover. He was hired by the Council, which consisted of 16 members, with the Mayor (part-time) presiding over Council meetings, who voted only when there was a tie vote. Within the Council, they elected one of their members to serve as President of the Council, who chaired Committee of the Whole meetings.

Mr. Wontorek stated that generally in the academic structure of what the Council-Manager form of government is, the accountability should be to one (1) elected body and then the various department heads reporting to that executive who then reports to the Council. Until recently, he advised members that, in Lewes, the Mayor was the supervisor of the Police Chief. The Charter has been amended requiring the appointment by and accountability of the Police Chief to the City Manager.

Responding to Mr. Leary, Mr. Wontorek stated that although he has no experience with the Strong-Mayor form of government, he felt that a positive comment from his colleagues that do work under that form would be that the Strong-Mayor is directly accountable to the citizenry and is responsible for the administration of the department rather than having to go through the Council and appointed manager. At the same time, he stated that in speaking with department heads who have worked in a Strong-Mayor form of government, particular those that have partisan elections, are looking to change their employment.

Mr. Wontorek advised members that in every city he has worked for all department heads were accountable to the City Manager, including the Finance Director and City Planner, although the City Planner would receive planning direction from the Planning Commission.

With the Finance Director and Treasurer reporting to the City Manager, Mr. Leary felt that one of the positions should not be responsible to the City Manager to allow for “check and balance” against any possible improprieties. Responding, Mr. Wontorek stated that the Council Members actually have signing authorities on a number of accounts as far as expenditures, approval of checks, etc. There also is an independent outside audit that conducts an audit annually.

Mr. DePrima advised members that at one time, he envied those municipalities whose Finance Director reported directly to their City Manager; however, from his own experience, he advised members that in many ways, he prefers the independent Finance Director. He explained that it is good to have a co-worker who is independent and can give the City Manager a “wake up call”, someone who is being absolutely honest and not just saying what the City Manager wants to hear. Personally, he feels that it sometimes has proven to be very beneficial.

In offering his personal opinion regarding the City’s current form of government, Mr. DePrima stated that although he is an advocate for the City Manager, it was his opinion that the City’s current organization could be stronger. He felt that the Mayor should be the presiding officer to eliminate any need to report to two (2) individuals (Mayor and Council President), because even though he is not responsible to report to the Mayor, out of respect for the position, he feels obligated.

Regarding the recommendation of the Committee for the City Manager reporting to a Strong Mayor, but appointed by the Council, Mr. DePrima felt that it could create confusion since, in essence, there really would be two (2) bosses. The City Manager would be required to work with the Mayor on a daily basis, who he may or may not agree on issues, and then have a Council who may disagree with the Mayor, which would truly place the City Manager in an uncertain position. The beauty of the City-Manager Form of Government is that there is one (1) boss, that being the City Council as a whole, and could work just as well having the City Manager report to the Mayor if he is a part of City Council (as presiding officer of Council). Mr. DePrima indicated his support for the full-time Mayor and felt that the Mayor could take on the added role of coordinating agendas and presiding over Council Meetings. However, he warned members that historically, when there is a full-time Mayor within a jurisdiction whose members are non-partisan, partisan politics typically follow.

Responding to Mrs. Merritt, Mr. DePrima confirmed that his suggestion is that the City Manager would report to the Mayor as a line of communication as opposed to a line of authority and that the line of authority would be to the majority of Council, including the Mayor.

In response to Mrs. Malone, it was Mr. DePrima’s feeling that the current budget calendar and the time of the election for City Council works well. He advised members that to alleviate any feelings of newly elected members of Council from being cognizant of a budget that they will be voting on, staff provides all candidates with a budget and offers budget orientation. The alternative would be for a Council that votes on a budget and then is not elected, with a new member to serve, would be subject to work with a budget and programs for a year that a person they recently defeated had voted. Although a new member may be rushed, it was his opinion that it is better to have a new member vote on a budget that they will be working with rather than being a part of a budget that they were not given the opportunity to vote on. It was his feeling that an even worse situation that could occur is if there was a particular program that the new member did not like and was elected because of that particular issue, only for it to be included and made a part of the budget because it was voted on by a previous Council.

Mr. DePrima also advised members that it is beneficial for the City to have the same fiscal year as the State of Delaware since the City receives financing from the State.

Members thanked both Mr. DePrima and Mr. Wontorek for their time.

Mr. Leary noted that the committee remains in the process of putting together the written report to City Council. Although a vote has been taken regarding the form of government issue, as a result of this evening’s presentation, he questioned if members would want to revisit discussion on this issue.

Mrs. Merritt indicated she would like to discuss the issue further, and wished that the presentation this evening was made in concert with the meeting held to discuss the form of government issue. She also reminded members that the final vote by members regarding the form of government was divided, which she felt is an indication that additional discussion is warranted, particularly in light of the new information and understanding as a result of the information provided this evening.

Before voting on this matter again, Mrs. Greenwood requested that members be provided with a definition of the Strong-Mayor Form of Government, including specific details as to the duties and responsibilities of the Mayor.

Concurring, Mr. Scheller also suggested that there be flow charts of both the City-Manager and Strong-Mayor Forms of Government, depicting very clearly to compare and contrast the differences.

With members concurrence, Mr. Leary noted that the next meeting will be held on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.

Mrs. Malone moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Scheller and unanimously carried.

Meeting Adjourned at 8:59 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Thomas J. Leary, Chairman

TJL/tm/jg

\Dover_1cityclerkClerksOfficeAgendas&MinutesMisc-Minutes2005 CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE200610-26-2006 Minutes.wpd

Attachment - Biography of Thomas Wontorek