CENTERVILLE — Dear Editor,



The letter from mayor and City Hall, published on June 21, 2010 by the Daily Iowegian, states (in the "working notes") that the clerk's position will be filled with an individual who will assume position of clerk/commissioner (individual in charge of) and then on Jan. 1, 2012 when mayor's position goes to part-time (haven't we hard that promise before?), will assume position of clerk/administrator (manager) — in other words — a city manager.

A clerk's responsibilities and city manager's responsibilities are, within themselves, more than two separate full-time positions, if conducted properly, with differing agendas.

A clerk/commissioner/ administrator is not a combination that is inclusively conducive.

A commissioner and/or administrator (city manager) commands not demands respect by virtue of their abilities. Those abilities include (but not limited to) qualifications, education (in areas under their control) experience, et. al. The all inclusiveness of this position means, their qualifications must be equal to or greater than the operators of the Centerville grade 4 wastewater treatment system, greater than the licensed personnel at the Centerville water department, and greater than the city street department's superintendent (with many years of experience).

To obtain this type of expertise will require an excessive salary, if such a person exists at all, and that is not exactly a cost savings measure, even with consolidating salaries from now retired or resigned personnel.

These are not qualities that can be achieved by hiring a city clerk and transporting them to commissioner and "city manager" in a years time.

Additionally, this city had adopted a charter specifying that the city is governed under a mayor-council form of government, consisting of five council members. If city clerk/commissioner/administrator (manager) is hired, then, will that not entail a new form of government being adopted?

With regard to the city clerk's position. The sudden departure of the previous clerk (even after a huge salary increase) and the sudden departure of the city attorney, both within a two week span, should have triggered the council to automatically call for a "cash audit" from a reputable accounting firm, i.e. TD&T, regardless of the fact that the bookkeeper performed most of the duties of the financials. And yet no visible signs that the council has acted.

This action would have been very beneficial for, not only the newly to be named city clerk, but also for the council in their pursuit with the waterworks (who themselves are currently in an "on-hold" position with their own audit).

In this same article, the mayor admits (off the record) that the wording "agreement" was an unfortunate mistake. Instead the wording should have been "working notes."

For a sitting councilman and a mayor to request meeting with the Daily Iowegian; however specifying that it be "off the record," does not fair well with the credibility of our leaders. An admission of a mistake, on the record, would have been much more professional. Michael Schaffer must be admired for his finesseful handling of the situation and his subsequent writing.

Since when does "working notes" require a vote? Is it not only after details have been agreed upon is vote necessary?

Either the council or the powers that be, that influence the council, have a determinate obsession of controlling the financials of not only the Centerville waterworks, but the airport, as well.

The reasons given for these changes include (but not limited to):

(1) Insure city government will run more efficiently.

(2) Will contain/control future operating expenses.

(3) Provide cost savings, greater operating efficiencies and, as with the airport,

(1) Don't understand airport's bookkeeping so city is taking over for efficiency reasons.

There is no guarantee that these actions will secure any of the above mentioned projections.

Whereas the basic reason and the only reason appears to be the control of the money. Even though, by law, as the mayor states, monies cannot be co-mingled. It appears that in the past, this city has not let law deter them from ill-management and unwise usage of the monies.

Ironically enough, the fourth paragraph in same letter from mayor states that City Hall was met with indignation and defensiveness by newspaper management; however, consider this, the complete letter from city was filled totally with indignation and defensiveness.



Respectfully submitted,

Kathy Cooprider

Centerville