Plattsburgh’s mayor recently announced he is creating a commission to look into the idea of changing the city’s form of government. Some feel a move from city council/mayor to city council/city manager is a good idea. Others have reservations, especially since the idea has been rejected by residents in the past.
Plattsburgh Mayor Chris Rosenquest has formed a five-member commission to revisit the idea of changing the city government to include a city council and city manager. The Democrat says a manager would bring consistency and greater stability across administrations.
“The question that I have, that a lot of us have, is would the city be better managed under some type of city manager or some type of manager/council form of government rather than reelecting a mayor every four years that may or may not have the expertise coming in.”
Former Mayor Colin Read, Rosenquest’s predecessor, was elected on the same ballot that voted down a city manager form of government for the city. He discounts the idea that a manager would maintain consistency and believes creating such a position would be fiscally irresponsible.
“The mayor as an administrator really doesn’t have that much power to drastically change things, especially all within one term,” said Read. “Most things require the participation of council. So that consistency I don’t think is a particularly important issue. And also all of the various department heads want to maintain a consistent level of services. So I think that argument’s a little bit of a non-starter. I’m still much more worried about the fiscal impact of moving to that more administrative form of government.”
In 2015, a commission reviewed and proposed changes to the city charter. Among the recommendations was to change to a city council/city manager form of government. Voters rejected the proposal in November 2016. Rod Sherman, who chaired the subcommittee that studied the change, still supports a city manager, but is concerned about the current timeline.
“One of the things we were trying to do is to get approval of the charter before an election for mayor,” recalls Sherman. “So if this gets put up to vote this year, we are also voting for mayor this year. So one of the things we were thinking about with a city manager, it would actually open the door to more people to run for mayor to be the leader of the council. So if we’re going to have the vote on whether to go to city manager at the same time somebody’s voting to be mayor, anybody running for mayor is not sure what they’re running for. Are they running to be mayor/manager or are they running to be mayor with a city manager?”
Ward 3 Democratic Common Councilor Elizabeth Gibbs, a frequent critic of the mayor, says the idea is worth exploring. But she also feels the new commission has been created in a way that will divide the council and benefit the mayor.
“I see a commission created to steer the commission into an outcome that’s going to benefit the mayor,” Gibbs asserts. “Because there is no doubt in my mind that the mayor is going to see himself as the only qualified candidate to be the city manager. And if he can handpick a group to create an outcome that he wants he will do it and he will then say well I’m the only one qualified for the job so you must hire me.”
The new commission will convene in early January.
