The Mayor

The Mayor's Office, and its current resident, has been the subject of much commenting this week. I've been thinking about a couple of different things regarding Mylott and the Mayor's Office, and because they go hand-in-hand so closely, I'll do it all at once.

First, the mayor is underpaid.

You can make an argument that Mylott himself isn't overpaid, based on performance, but the position itself is underfunded. Consider what we ask of the mayor:

• Capably run a $95 million/year organization.
• Capably oversee a $44 million/year education initiative.
• Have an understanding of public safety.
• Have an understanding of union contract negotiating.
• Be able to spur economic development.
• Understand housing development.
• Be knowledgeable of zoning laws and applications.
• Be knowledgeable of water and sewer systems, road work and other transportation, parks systems, and dozens of other entities.
• Tirelessly promote the community.
• Be on call 24/7.
• Be a calming and optimistic voice in a crisis.
• Play well with a City Council.
• Play well with a School Committee.
• Be accountable to 40,000 stakeholders.

It's quite a job. And we're paying someone $60,000 a year for it? Forget, for now, whether or not Mylott is worth it. Instead, look ahead. Who would put aside a career and a private life to take on this job? Could you afford it? Most people in general, and most capable people specifically, couldn't afford it.

Yes, being mayor isn't about money. It's an advocation, a love of the community, and a desire to see it be better. That doesn't pay the mortgage, though. The city needs to look at raising the mayor's salary in an effort to make it more attractive to potential candidates. There are enough reasons not to run for office -- the constant public demands, the loss of private time, the beating you take in bad times -- that money shouldn't be one of them. It's a hurdle that can be eliminated relatively painlessly, and should be eliminated.

If nothing else, having a quality group of candidates next year puts the pressure on Mylott, who most people here are itching to see gone next year. Some of the frustration was focused this week on Mylott's poo-pooing of Councilor Stephen DiNatale's "come together" plan to fight crime in the city.

It was, lately, a typically Mylott response. Undermining an idea but not really spiking it. Add it to the growing list of things that should be researched, but you know, might be a good idea. It leads me to believe Mylott is unwilling to take a risk, even a well-calculated one. Is it really bad to get the sheriff, DA, staties and everyone else together. Why not enthusiastically endorse the idea? What's so bad about it? Who cares if something similar is in place? Do it anyway.

When was the last time Mylott enthusiastically endorsed something? Even more importantly, when did he independently come up with an idea that he strongly backed? If you have examples, let us know.

Chances are we're going to spend a lot of time looking at Mylott's administration next year. We'll have plenty of time to pick apart the policy and the politics and the individual things that got Fitchburg to where it is right now and decide whether or not Mylott is worthy of another term. My feeling is that Fitchburg needs someone at the top who is willing to roll the dice a little bit, and energetically lead the city forward. That doesn't appear to be happening right now.

In the meantime, let's watch the council try to get meaningful things done. Dean Tran did it with his sex offender residency requirement and is working on the landlord issue. DiNatale and Ted DeSalvatore are working on crime. The problem is, the council can't work as nimbly and quickly as the mayor. DiNatale can put together a petition for his crime summit, gather the support, and demand it eventually happen. The mayor could get it done by the end of the week.

Whatever the issue, what the city needs most is a strong mayor who can make things happen quickly and isn't afraid to try something new, even take a risk, in order to make the city better. The City Council should work on raising the mayor's pay (starting in 2008) to ensure the best possible candidates are on the ballot next fall and into the future.