Mayor vs. Manager

We touched on this issue last month, but after another flood of comments on it, we figure it's time to get a more in-depth on it.

What's better for Fitchburg? The current mayor-council form of government, or would the city be better served by a city manager?

Much of this discussion is based on current affairs. There is a strong feeling Fitchburg is being underserved by the present mayor. That leads to the obvious discussion of making a change in form of government. This discussion probably wouldn't happen if Fitcbburg was thriving. But it's not, and hasn't been for a while, hence the discussion.

Certainly, a strong mayor brings to the table astute political skills, the ability to think big, create support, and make things happen. A mayor is accountable directly to the people every two years, creating a strong incentive to be consistently good. Also, a mayor lives in the community, and likely has for a long time.

A city manager brings a different skill set. While a mayor is politics first and policy second, a city manager flip-flops that. A manager is just that, a manager. It's someone who understands government and to work it efficiently.

A manager doesn't necessarily live in the community. Managers who don't are motivated by doing a good job, not by civic duty like a mayor. Finally, managers for a city like Fitchburg would hard pressed to take the job at less than $90,000, and $100,000 isn't out of the question. You could make the argument that a well-skilled, experienced manager would be worth the cost, but that's a lot more expensive than the current mayor's salary (which may or may not need a bump itself, depending on your point of view).

Certainly, right now Fitchburg could use a strong manager who can efficiently run government. But in the long run, does Fitchburg need a mayor or a manager? Why can't the city find a mayor is a strong manager (that's ground well covered here, but probably needs more coverage as time goes on).

Making such a drastic change is difficult. There's a required charter review and a lengthy approval process that includes the City Council and the voters. While our knee-jerk reaction is to change the charter, we think a decision made now would be clouded by the current political atmosphere.

That said, we're open to change, if its for the good of the city. We think the city should create a review committee to look at making the change and create a report that outlines how city government would be changed, and the pros and cons to changing. It's a long-term effort -- years in the making -- but it's worth the time and energy to make sure Fitchburg is running as well as it should.