HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport of the Town Manager Study Comittee to the Supervisor and Town Council of the Town of Mamaorneck 4/15/1981 APRIL 15, 1981
REPORT OF THE TOWN MANAGER STUDY COMMITTEE
TO THE
SUPERVISOR AND TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
MAMARONECK
SYNOPSIS OF THIS REPORT Page Two
As a result of lengthy studies, including careful analysis of
what former Supervisors Helwig, Vandernoot and present Supervisor Leo Goldsmith,
Jr., actually did to accomplish their responsibilities,
the study group has
concluded that a professional administrator, serving the Supervisor at the
pleasure of the Council is desirable and should be cost efficient.
The Committee has met with numerous public officials from other
Westchester communities, and the need to change slowly, to move to an adminis-
tratative assistant rather than a fully empowered professional manager, has
surfaced again and again. We recommend this choice, as a charge against the
unincorporated area alone, if at all possible. We do not suggest the local law
establishing this position go to a referendum of the electorate, as no new powers
are created requiring such action. The question of paying for this position,
estimated to cost between 22 and 35 thousand 1981 dollars annually, depending
on the individual candidate selected, will be of the same type expense allocation,
town-wide, as the present Council, Supervisor, Clerk, etc. This Committee suggests
the portion of the expense allocation to the two villages be offset to a maximum
degree by other credits to existing expenses, thus avoiding a potential problem
of the villages being forced to pay a share of the new position, however minor,
for which they might perceive receiving an unknown benefit. •
The Committee also recommends an appointed selection committee to
interview, screen and recommend qualified persons for the new position.
The Committee wishes the Supervisor and Council to note that, this
time, there are no dissenting votes on this recommended course of action, from the
membership of this Committee.
Lauren M. Miralia, Chairman ' Richard Felner
C. Benjamin Brush, Jr. Gerald Page
Richard Coulter Margaret Shultz
Harry DeMaio
PROLOGUE Page Three
We live in a political environment which seems to be minimizing
aid for education and expanding the cry for a slowdown in tax increases and budget
cuts. Controversies over higher local taxes and debates with citizens who do
not perceive delivery of many town services as essential, all add to the confusion
over which solution is desirable. The answer is not simple. The responsibilities
of the Town Council are enormous. However, since the answers do not present
theuselves clearly, with unequivocal proof, certain judgments must be made.
The Council Members have the obligation to select alternatives
in allocating funds in a way that makes the Town foundation as strong as possible.
There really is not issue - - the budget is a fact. Where in a Town budget, the
expense of an administrator would go is up to the Council.
Since the initial report of this committee was delivered to the
Town Council in August, 1979, a subtle but fundamental shift has occurred in
our economy, in our society. 1980 was the year when Americans started to ask
the tough questions. How did we get to this point? What are we doing wrong?
What can we do to correct it? Spending no longer seems to be the panacea. In
fact, cutting spending is the major topic of the times. We're fighting back - -
with decisions to endure painful cutbacks short-term, if the benefit to our homes,
families and jobs appears worth it over time.
If the Town Council expects to enjoy the support of a particularly
enlightened, knowledgeable and active community as Mamaroneck/Larchmont, it should
lead in the decision of adopting a professional employee who can help reduce
Page Four
expenses and costs, assist in labor negotiations from a perspective of past
involvement, can see areas for increased savings, can address the tough questions
about joint services and economies of scale as they apply to three interrelated
communities. /
A properly conducted search for a town administrator to assist
the Supervisor can and should be expectedto be cost effective within two years
at most, and we fully should realize additional benefits, not only in reducing
visible expense growth rates, but in increasing productivity within the Town
as well.
Larchmont/Mamaroneck is not immune to national productivity trends.
Declining productivity is frequently cited as a major threat to the
American standard of living. The growth rate of productivity has slowly declined
over the past three decades and has fallen precipitously in recent years. The
combination of a long run productivity decline and this recent unique decline has
sparked new concern about American productivity. Productivity in 1979 dropped
2.1%. In the first two quarters of 1980 it continued its decline, though it did
show improvement in the third quarter of 1980.
Economists define productivity,(i.e. , labor productivity,) as output
per worker hour. This definition provides for easy measurement, but it lacks
completeness. Productivity encompasses how efficiently all inputs (labor, materials,
capital) are used to produce output (goods and services) . When considering the
factors which have contributed to the decline in productivity, it is important
to keep the full meaning of the term in mind.
A professional manager should be able to significantly increase the
productivity of Town personnel.
HISTORY Page Five
A report on the Town Manager question was delivered to the
Town Council by this Committee in August, 1979. At that time, Councilman
McMillan and Bloom did not agree as to what direction the report was to take
from that point. A move to table any motion to proceed with the recommended
Town Manager was accepted. With an election pending in the fall, both supervisor
candidates expressed support for the post, but demurred any concrete stands
until the new Supervisor and Council were installed.
Supervisor candidate Goldsmith served as the Chairman of the
Committee that delivered the report recommending a Town Manager. Supervisor
candidate Quigley said, on August 12, 1977, that:
"He believes the town and village may jointly consider sharing an
'executive administrator' . The advantage of an 'executive adminis—
trator' over a manager is that the local council and board would
still retain their present powers, Quigley believes."
The Daily Times, August 12, 1977 (enclosure #1)
This proposal was not new, since Supervisor Helwig received a
similar proposal in 1968 (enclosure P2) .
Nevertheless, in January, 1980, the newly constituted Town
Council did not formally schedule any actions on the delivered report. Nothing
was said of it at the 1980 organizational meeting. In the second 1980 meeting,
Councilman Bloom was reappointed to act as liason to the Committee, and former
Councilman DeMaio was asked to continue to serve on the Committee, without
portfolio, as it were.
4
HISTORY, continued Page Six
In an interview with The Daily Times in early January, 1980,
Supervisor Goldsmith asked for a review of the Manager Study Report of 1979.
To quote that article:
"He also said action would be taken to have the town manager study
committee review its recommendation that a full-time professional
`administrator' be hired. The committee, of which Goldsmith. had
been chairman, recommended that the less-powerful position of ad-
ministrator be created as an experiment to decide whether to even-
tually hire a manager. Goldsmith said he hoped the committee, after
picking a new chairman, could issue a new report 'very soon' ." (Enclosure #3)
It was not that simple. When faced with a report •that 4 -town-wide
referendum be held, the Committee anticipated a negative response from the villages,
who might be asked to approve something that might primarily benefit the unin-
c•
orporated area, and about which they knew little. The Committee was reconstituted
and decided to invite liason from both villages, as well as to re-assess the im-
plications of the town-wide charge believed to be necessary.
•
Trustee Norman Rosenblum from the Village of Mamaroneck was
designated as liason, as was Trustee Margaret Piccone from the Village of
Larchmont.
Trustee Richard McCarthy of Larchmont and Councilman Charlotte
Monsell of the Town also participated, with many serious and positive suggestions.
Finally, the Committee requested Town Attorney James Johnston
to inquire of the Attorney General of the State of New York for guidance as to
HISTORY, continued Page Seven
the referendum requirements of establishing a town administator, based on the
Municipal Home Rule Law.
This law, Chapter 365 of the New York State Law of 1976 granted
broad powers to towns, and gave them a wide range of authority to reorganize
their town governments to fit local needs. (Enclosure #4)
In lay terms Chapter 365, by authorizing the towns to supersede
State law by local law, removes most, if not all, of the statutory obstacles
for towns to reorganize and structure their town governments virtually as they
see fit. Chapter 367 is a specific grant of authority to establish the office
of town manager. Given the extent of authority in Chapter 365, it may not have
been necessary, but it does remove all doubt about the matter.
Under Chapter 365, a town may, for example, establish by local
law an executive department headed by an elective "town executive" who might
be called a town "president" or whatever other title the town might wish. " This
office would be independent of the town board, in the same way that an elective
mayor may be independent of a city council. The town also may departmentalize
its governmental structure in almost any way it wishes.
• A letter from Mario Cuomo, Secretary of State to Lauren M. Miralia
of the Committee indicated willingness to develop such a position in concert with
the Legal Services Division of the State, since no other town had yet developed
a precedent. This Committee strongly supports a request to the State for
assistance in creating a job description, and with agencies of the Department of
Audit and Control, if deemed helpful in budgeting expenses and analyzing performance.
(Enclosures #5)
HISTORY, continued Page Eight
While this process was evolving during .1980, it became apparent
that the Village Trustees could not in good faith encourage the Committee to
expect approval from a town wide referendum, if the cost of an administrator
would be a town-wide charge (see enclosure #1) , and if we could not absolutely,
conclusively, prove net cost savings from such a position which would be
guaranteed to all three governments.
This could not be assured, although every manager, politician
and civic group who has first hand experience with the professional manager
form of government, strongly believes it is most cost effective.
Finally, on January 21, 1981, the Attorney General of the State
•
of New York responded to James Johnston's request with a letter that makes the
decision to recommend an administrator quite simple. In brief, Assistant
Attorney General James D. Cole states that a mandatory referendum establishing
a local law creating an administrator or manager is required if the law changes
in any way the powers of an elective office. The powers of the office under
the local law are the determining factor. (Enclosure #6)
If, however, the local law permits the administrator to act only
with the approval of the town board, there is no transfer of powers. If the
council kept the right to approve or disapprove any of the administrator's
actions, a local law need not go to mandatory referendum, town-wide.or unin-
corporated town alone.
If the town council passed a resolution that assigned, modified
or revoked administrative powers from time to time, and might require the
•
HISTORY, continued Page Nine
•
administrator to report periodically to the council, no 'referendum is required.
In short, the Council can delegate whatever powers it currently has to an ad-
ministrator, if it keeps the final authority, without requiring a referendum.
POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS
A referendum of any type will quite probably be defeated at the
Village level of government. Current political currents seem to oppose any
expansion of government, even if the available universe of data indicates it
is efficient and cost effective. This Committee does not recommend a town-wide
referendum at all, even voluntary. The Committee also does not opt for a
permissive referendum in the unincorporated area for the same reason, but will
support the educational process of the electorate on an individual basis, if
the council chooses this approach, through open council hearings or public meeting.
•
SUMMARY
1. The topic has been fairly thoroughly researched.
2. Statistical findings alone fail to produce results which prove
the cost effectiveness of a Town Manager, or Administrator.
3. The interaction of many variables, including lines of authority,
inter-governmental relationships with the two villages, and delegated
powers determine the quality and effectiveness of a professional
administrator.
4. There exists substantial meaningful evidence that professional ad-
ministrators benefit the community in a demonstrable way.
5. Until a letter received January 21, 1981, there has been great
ambiguity emanating from Albany as the necessity of holding a referendum,
CONCLUSION Page Ten
Six towns in the State have moved toward a professional manager.
This Committee recommends a Town Administrator to be selected after open hearings
of the Council, but at the earliest opportunity. We do not recommend a referendum,
since we suggest that such an administrator serve the Supervisor, at the pleasure
of the Council, and that no new powers be granted this person. A proposed local
law creating such a position is attached hereto. . (Enclosure #7)
This position should be filled upon recommendation of an appointed
of
selection committee consisting of a minorityhcouncil members and a majority of
outside citizens with working experience in the area of local government and
public administration. Such a position should be evaluated annually for two
years.
At that time, if the council and residents are favorably impressed
by the results, then the council may wish to enter into joint proposals with our
surrounding villages for increasing the economies of scale and management that a
much larger span of control and responsibility should bring. Only after pragmatic
experience, as a town-wide administrator, should a permissive referendum be en-
couraged, which would then create a'position of full-time professional manager,
with substantially broader powers anticipated than are conceived in this report.
t-_1 ''''
• . . • r
i '
•
•
•
. i LII• voo •((( j,.ivti 14 Y • rI', , Y tyb • .
10
it
!, I Si, ,ti dip ,,, j.k, ,, , ,i.
•,,i. ., „,.‘.;r. 1 1,.).,,, :. e„,,,,,,,,
, . ,
A Or 1' 67) .
- .,,,.1,44f 4 0 r •'' .‘ ..d .; , 1
.A.
. Mamaroneck, 11.Y, Friday, August 12, 1911; A
. ., • • 11 ; . 4 ' ' i . ' . ;
i‘ .1, :of. ,n 4,e ,e ek, . .: w 4 A. 1 . 1 4. ,,. 4 4,•,, , L ftt w n 1=1 w 1 l.,, e cos A--
' By JOE BFItGAN'I'INO Bit, he added, "the laws is very clear $10,000)," . said co•mmittee Richard trator"over a manager is that the local court-
Staff Writer • •about whether a town manager.'s salary in ' Coulter. cit and board would still retain their present
'a town-wide charger • ."`That, along.with other savings, would powers,Quigley believes.
All property owners in the Town of ' "A court shouldn't•have much trouble' `, offset the cost of a manager," Coulter
Mamroneck-— not just those in the unin- agreeing with us,"Cooper added. added. ''' AN ADVISORY COMMI'Ii'!I to the
•corporated area — would be required by ' Other" opinions similar to Cooper'sLarchmont Village Board is considering the
state law to help pay the salary of a town . were given by the State.Attorney Getter:..-. OTHER COMMITTEE members, Mar- question of how to best manage the village.
manager or any other chief administrator 1.' .Al's office and the New York'Department' garet Shultz and Larry Mlralia,expressed In Mamaroneck village, opposition to
of the town, according to three state attor of Statd. ,similar views. :paying for a town manager is also related
neys. Officials and neighborhood association But Everett:W. Bovard,• president of to the villages push for independence
1n addition, town residents would have. ' :officers in' Larchmont'•and Mamaroneck' the Pinebrook District Property Owners from the town.
a chance to vote in a referendum propos `'Y;Village reacted to the legal opinions with. Association, was more disturbed than en- "I'm against anything that ties us in with
ing the hiring of a manager only if the , dismay • . . • . thusiastic upon learning of the legal opin •-
ions. : the town," said Rocco Ciccone, president of
powers given the administrator dimihish V "IT WOULD BE'a'very unfair request'., "1 think the town has to move with ex..., the West Basin Neighborhood Association.
those held by an elected town official, to have to pay toe's town manager,"said. '''Verne caution in decidingwhether or not to "having to pay for a town manager will
says one of the attorneys. Otherwise, the Louis.Wr(Bill) Bergesch, president of the
town councildecides the manager ues-, hire a town manager,"he said. , increase the village's participation in the
g q ;Coordinating Council o[Neighborhood As
tion. ;;;sociations (t;CNA) in. Mamaroneck Vtl, • "I can'tahink of any benefits there would town at a time we're trying to separate from
The opinions, requested by Town Su , lage.. `;i•?, • be for Larchmont Village." the town,"he added.
•
pervisor Joseph F. Vandernoot, ate being "Our taxpayers areoverburdened with. •IiOVAItD,'I'Itrn• ' That the town Village Manager Armand .l. Gianunzicr-
considered by a town council advisory taxes as it Is, he added. • , , , ' ' ; mana cg'r issue "w"willp produce a real critical echoed Cioconi�'s views.
committee studying the feasibility of 1111.7 . . But at least two members of the towns
•
in a town manager. advisory committee.believe •a manager;.• examination of the overlap'of the• village an charges that
Ing ' ., .> g , : r'- :` • '+ town governments." There are a int of town wide chart,
{ t•may save the town at least the cost of his , paying
''"OUR OPINION is purelyiadvisory,",. , • rojected$30,000salary.,-... {, .;. •,'• Larchmont trustee Martin Quigley said he we don't get any service'cor. Wfrom
tarc p town '
iibelieves the town and village may jointly con- for administrative sere
said James Cooper, associate council hi'`::' ,; "If we hire;a'manager,:the supervi- that we already provide for our rmm�t.u6
the state Department of Audit and Con- ,.'sor's salary would probably drop to that of:{ s•
kier sharing an executive administrator,
,trol. ' • ' • ' r i `t 8 councilman•.••,(a ••decrease .of about:,-; << The advantage of an...;executive adminis- Cy,"the manager said.— _,—r.,.....—
.
PROPOSAL r0; AD'iI ISTPATIVE f.SSIST , TO THE TOi:;; 07.RD EJCL ITS-- '
This proposal does not contemplate the surrender of any statutory duties
or responsibilities either by the Supervisor, the Town Board or any
official whose duties are a matter of State law. The Town Board would
appoint and would continue to exercise general supervision over the
Administrative Assistant. He would be directly responsible to the Board.
The position should require a qualified professional in municipal management
with experience in general management , purchasing, planning and budgeting
procedures. His function would be to administer policies adopted by the
Town Board and to coordinate the work of the various departments in order to
make the most economical use of the physical and financial resources and the
personnel of the Town.
His duties would include:
Providing the Board with information that would enable it to determine
policy on'any matter re=erred& to: him for research and recommendation
Advising the Board on matters of organization and management that will
introduce the best principles of administrative organization
Preparing such reports on matters of concern to the Town as the Board
• may from tine to time require
Keeping the public informed through such reports on the operations of
Town government.
Coordinating purchasing with the various department heads and with other
governmental groups where feasible.
Controlling, under the supervision of the Town Board, personnel rules and
regulations. Interviewing and recommending_employees for appointment in
cooperation with the appropriate Department head.
Working with the Supervisor and the Comptroller on the preparation of the
annual budget including a capital budget plan.
Keeping the Board informed of developments in other communities that affect
policies or fiscal operations of the Town. This should include information
on aid programs available to the Town government from any source. It could
should also include all possibilities for municipal cooperation with other
governmental bodies that would effect economies in operation.
Performing such other duties as may be from time to time delegated by the
Town Board - i.e. attendance at conferences or meetings to obtain information,
conferring with other municipalities or with civic groups on problems
affecting the Town, etc.
eL C, 6 — 9
Cr 2, pc,l CT c cci� .n fit cL le—w>„ /)7 r,;a q en--) Pra.c.6,Cr) .
•
jciz.
„nal- r �'lk-r-�r t_. Mill seek review :
- - of manager study
Continued from cage one study matters does not mean he will end I
up not taking action on various issues.
the council "in the ru- of this busi-gI don't want to get into the situation
ness called the Town of Mamaroneck,” where we maintain little hierarchies for I
said the supervisor-elect, the sake of independence," he said.
Members of the citizens budget corn- He used the same theme when he was 1
mittee have already asked the town to asked about the painting ordinance that
enlist an advisory group year-round. has been proposed several times over the
As for appointments to boards and last two years by the tenants council.
commissions, Goldsmith said he hopes to The town council has not -taken any
retain whoever remains. If vacancies action on the ordinance which, if en-
occur, Goldsmith said, he will propose acted, would require landlords to periodi- 1
replacements based upon "ability and cally paint apartments.
dedication." Although unfamiliar with the partic-
The supervisor-elect also said he sees ular proposal, Goldsmith said that if the
no need for immediate changes among town council agrees, he will ask the
the tow—n's paid employees. "I don't see tenants council to study the broader
any sign of overstaffing. As for under- issue of a general maintenance ordi- -
staffing, there's a tendency for any de- nance. He vowed that if such a study is '
partment to feel they are understaffed," completed, the town council would take
he said. - action. "By action, I mean either positive 1
But if any fat is found in the town's or negative, but not inaction," said Gold-
budget, Goldsmith said he would not smith.
hesitate to make a cut, citing as an r•-- He-also said action would be taken to
example the possibility of eliminating a ?have the town manager study committee
recreational program if it were costly '•"review its recommendation that a full-
and not serving more than a handful of !time professional "administrator" be
persons. !hired. The committee, of which Golds-
Goldsmith said, however, that he ° mith had been chairman, recommended
wants to maintain the town's present that the less-powerful position of admin-
level of services. istrator be created as an experiment,
The problem with maintaining serv- decide whether to eventually re e amn-
ices is containing costs so that property ; ager. GoIdrnsith said he hoped the corn-
taxes do not skyrocket mittee, after picking a new chairman,
"Consolidation has become a dirty i could issue a new report"very soon."
word," he said, expressing his preference ` One of the many tasks facing Golds j
to speak about cooperation instead. mith as he takes office is the negotiation I
Goldsmith observed that the rising of labor contracts with the town's four ;
costs faced by the taxpayer all are paid unions. The present supervisor has 1
for "out of the same pocket," whether played a strong role in negotiating with- ;
they pay for local government, schools, the unions; but Goldsmith said he will try
county government or even gasoline. to delegate that•responsibility among the -
Goldsmith was cautious in discussing town council members who already ,
possible additional shared services with serve as liaisons to police, firemen, joint '
Larchmont or Mamaroneck Villages, and garbage commission employees or mem-
equally cautious as he discussed possible bers of :the Civil Service Employees
• mergers within the town government. Association.
Asked whether he favored a merger In settling labor contracts and hand- ,
of the police and fire departments into ling other matters, Goldsmith indicated
an Office of Public Safety, Goldsmith be would remain low key. "The individu-
said he has heard "all shades of opinions" al things which become matters of public
about how it has worked elsewhere. With interest are interesting, but what is most
volunteers already working in unison important are the day to day needs of
, with paid firefighters, Goldsmith said, people. Our lives are more pleasant I
I "You think not once, not twice, but a because these things are done without it
1 thousand times before you upset that. being spread all over the paper," said
But, Goldsmith said, his desire to Goldsmith.
j
•
• •
•
•
•
•
• • , . .
0 1 ^
fi • p1an s.. 6 "' e entrance
Vee
New r i �� . Impulse.
I dont' want to do things on p
By StaffBRIAN TUMULTY . I'd like' to do what 1 do as a result of
Staff,Writer L•eo Goldsmith Jr.: I don t want,to do.' studies," said Goldsmith.
He is sworn-in as Mamaroneck Town •
T ��' � � Goldsmith said he will make one
theeoon T Monday,, and legallynassumesathings on impulse. 1 'd', lilce' to do what proposal to the town council in the near
'faces
post 'Tuesday, on Wednesday things - future— the formation of what he calls a
[aces a normal working day as a partner I do • "finance advisory committee." The
in the Manhattan law firm of Greenwald, CIS a 1'esul t of studies ; , group would assume on a year-round
Kovner and Goldsmith. � basis th@ work started by the citizens
To Leo Goldsmith Jr., such a dual cautious as he spoke in an interview r "1 have. personally refrained from budget committee.
owilnot be not new, After all, he The new committee,
continued to pursue his professional ca- Friday about his plans as supervisor. injecting myself while Joe Vandernoot is Goldsmith said,
Goldsmith has made several visits to the in office," said Clolsmith,,explaining that could be either independent of, or the
Feer from 1966 to 1974 while he served town offices at 740 W. Post Road since to do otherwise would not be courteous. same as, the citizens budget committee•
as mayor of the Village of Larchmonl• his election Nov.6, and Friday met with The important point is that the group
Before that.he served Larchrnont as a the outgoing supervisor, Joseph F. Van- .'' 1Ie said that the main. result of his would exist throughout the year to advise
trustee and chairman of the •zoning dernoot. But Goldsmith has deliberately • few visits to the town offices `"has beene turn to
board. . stayed out• of the limelight since his to learn that.there are a lot of things to Plon rick page of OLD�SMITH
Even so, the 67-year-old attorney was election.
• learn. . • ;
rr\
2
J
•
•
•
CL 365 ;�- Town Manager ,' .r,!•..;, !
• LAWS OF NEW YORK•1976 • CHAPTER 367 ".-„` "'r'
• • ••• :. .. •r •.ri ..., :err :.J. Act to amcr►d the town low. la relation ',', ,�'•
•
• • ment of a. town to authorizing the establish•
-•,c
Town Law--Powers to Adopt and Amend Local Lawr ,I +tasrr. , • , .,
Approved and o 15 ' ' '
:' effective Jun 1778, r
1 CHAPTER 3fi5 " • ..„:..,;,•- The People of the State
, .a Assembly, do of New York, represented in Senate and
An Act to amend the municipal homo rule law, to relation to tho enact as follows;
of towns to adopt a amend local lawn to Iaag to th al powers
:,I
•
•
Section 1. Tho town law is hereby amended byadding
the town law tl local taw In certain erica. article, to be article three-B, to read as follows:'' Y
Approved and effective Juno 15, 1778. ', thereto a new
The People of the'State of'New York, represented in Senate and Sec. . -: .: MANAGER
Assembly, do enact as follows; ,.. ►, ---- •
—
Section 1. Paragraph - • b8• Torn manner, " '
•
icipal homo rule lahembyu ndccl bysion oA dingtthcrcto a ion ten of the man- 5d-a Powers and duties. '` �•.r ...>
•
para,-raph, to be subparn�raeb three, to read as follows: new sub- '' .- .
3) Tho amendment. or nu eersession in its n) licntion to if •of ane ,r8• Town manager
.1n town ma b• tocol Inw, establish the office of town mnnr►,rr
provision of tho town law rclutin • to tho
proneity, affairs or govern• rovido for his a intment and Bele to to each office such wets
meat of rho town or to other utters ►n relation to which and to rho er-
and duties as ma be rescribed modified or revoked from titan to time
tent to which it is authorized to adopt,local luws by this section, not- tho totrn board•
withstanding that such provision is a general law, unless the legisla.
taro e. resale shall have rrolribiled the ado 'lion of such a local law. 58-a. Powers and duties
Unless authorized b other statute this.sub ental-ru h shall not bo deem- �flro torn mann ve shall be______the chief ties b streat law,officer .. the
ed to authorize su >crscssion of a : town and may be sen such ,wets and duties b local its the town
:enema law relating to 1 creation, board in its discretion shall rescribo notwithstandin
•abolition or alteration of n seeciul or im movement district or of on
impmvement oxen, ('?) creation or alteration of areas of taxation an general or s clot law to the contra , unless ihohlrg e tattle-egc.xf
authorization or abolition of mandato and (d) ressly shall baso restricted or rohibituc the ado tion of a local law
1)
authorization
finances as mandatory permissive referendum or rclntin r
provided in article eight of the town law.1 ---�..� h to tho•delen>ntion or ant of such wets trovidcd however
vided, however that nothing set forth herein shall reeluclo the transfer
or nshoweve of at not ns, ewers and duties all eelne town officer or ' that the wed, S b ct toon and a n of
sec shall 'be exorcised b
the town board•the mtzzj t tho ronile
a law of the sections twentbear -thrco and
employee to another town officer or em_ployee., and_trovided, however, •
further that, the towers of local legislation and 'n t ro riation s twent -four of muaici al home t town board ma also
b local law grant or transfer to such town man >
exercised by the local lcgislative body ,'..,-.•„ ,,r held by elected officials of the town, .cr ewers and duties
ITownLars, 03100to121. _.. _ ''. ,, :!• n
7"
§ 2. This act shall take effect imtnediutely;`.�•'; •: ►...'-•- --' §..2' t°f all take effect immediately.'_ ,' ):'. .
. • . •• !: .,,,__ -_ ~• r +---
f)1
ti
n
r-
„r:A S M.CUOMO NELLLJ 'Ir hI..�
-”' a 0 ir7
Secretary
State of �'i.F *1 J
STATE OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
162 WASHINGTON AVENUE
ALBANY, NEW YORK 12231 C--tJCL• .�
August 9 , 1977
Mr. Larry Miralia
Senior Vice-President
Municipal Bond Insurance Assoc.
34 South Broadway •
White Plains, New York 10601
Dear Mr. Miralia:
Pursuant to our. telephone conversation I am enclosing
copies of Chapters 365 and 367 of the Laws of 1976 , accompanied
by a copy of a memorandum prepared for the Governor' s Office by
our Legal Services Division concerning Chapter 365 . From these
materials you will see that these statutes give the towns a
wide range of authority to reorganize their town governments to
fit local needs.
-
In lay terms Chapter 365 , by authorizing the towns to
supersede State law by local law, removes most, if not all , of
the statutory obstacles for towns to reorganize and structure
their town governments virtually as they see fit. Chapter 367
is a specific grant of authority to establish the office of
town manager. Given the extent of authority in Chapter 365, it
may not have been necessary, but it does :remove all doubt about
the matter.
Under Chapter 365 , a town may, for example, establish by
local law an executive department headed -b' an elective "town
executive" who might be called a town "president" or whatever
other title the town might wish. This office would be inde-
pendent of the town board, in the same wal that an elective
-mayor may be independent of a city council. The town also may
departmentalize its governmental structure in almost any way
it wishes.
I have discussed your request for assistance with the head
of our Legal Services Division and we would like to suggest to
you that when you are ready to pursue this matter in detail, we
will be glad to work with you directly in developing your
reorganization and in drafting the appropriate local legisla-
r tion. No other town in New York has fully availed itself of
the authority granted by Chapter 365 and for this reason there
are no direct precedents.
Mr . Larry Miralia
August 9 , 1977
Page Two
We will be glad to set up a meeting with you to identify
the general dimensions of what you have in mind and what you
would like to do by way of structural and functional reorgani-
zation. We can bring into these discussions representatives
of the State Department of Audit and Control and any other
agencies whose advice might be helpful to you. In this way
we should be able to help you to avoid possible pitfalls and
at the same time establish sound precedents for other towns .
Please let us know if you would like to have us meet with
you and we shall be glad to arrange a time and place.
Very truly yours,
j; &L- (,)11 /
/)
Franklin M. Bridge
Director
Bureau of Management Services
•
Enclosures
. : 6) i__ is.,, . -
�(��f�t�i='� .''SIJ
�i �1�j✓yy_/�r��
. STATE OF NEW. YORK y
DEPARTMENT OF LAW .
ROBERT AHRAMS •
- ALBANY, N.Y. 12224 •
ATToRNQY GIN 1RAL "
January 21, 1.981 •
•
• James J. Johnston, Esq. Informal Opinion
Town of Mamaroneck - NO. 81-10
. Town Attorney' s Office .
. 1889 Palmer Avenue
Larchmont, New York 10533
. Dear Mr. Johnston:
•
You inquire whether a local law establishing the position
• of town administrator and conferring upon the holder of the
" - office responsibility for daily town operations under the -
supervision of the town board, is subject to the referendum
requirements of the Municipal Home Rule Law. In the- • - -
alternative, you• ask whether a local law would be subject to
referendum requirements if it authorizes the administrator
• - to exercise his duties independently of the town board. -
The position of administrator or manager may be established
by local law (Municipal Home Rule Law, § 10 [1] [i] or [ii] [a) [1) )..
. This may be done notwithstanding general provisions of the Town •
Law. because towns have been granted the power to supersede
the Town Law when enacting local laws within .their grant o•-
home-rule power (Municipal Home Rule Law, § 10 [1] [ii) [(3.) [3] ) : .
There is also authority to establish the position of manager .
under Article 3-B of the Town Law.
- A local law. is subject to mandatory referendum if it
abolishes, - transfers or curtails a power of an elective .
officer (Municipal Home Rule Law, § 23 [2] [f) ) . • The abolition,
transfer or curtailment of a power of an elective board is
subject to this referendum requirement (McCabe v Vooris, •243
• NY 401 [1926) ; see also Fogarty v Warden, 191 Misc • 916
[Sup Ct, Orange Co. , 1948] , affd 273. App Div 910 [2d Dept,
1948] , affd 297' NY 963 [1948) ) . Thus, the questions you ask •
is narrowed to whether a local law establishing the position
of town administrator or manager with the responsibilities you
suggest would transfer a power of the town boat,-d withintters
n
the meaning of section 23 (2) (f) . We believe
little whether the officer is called administrator or
manager. The powers of the office under the local law are
the determining factor. .
The town board is the legislativelland
d iniStrand tere arm
of town government. Unlike Cities, villages
counties that have independent executive branches , town boards
have traditionally performed both legislativef New andmany -
rk Departnent of
administrative functions. ( 123-4 .)
_ ook 1976] pp State, Local Govlocalnlawt ao�administrativeofunctions to a -
• � Any transfer by .
town administrator or manager woulmandatoryareferendum under ower o .'
an elected officer subject
section 23 (2) (f) .
The referendum requirement of section 23 (2) (f) preserves -
- the franchise of voters to elect candidates to publicose ffiice.
votersIn casting their ballot, are able
•
of a particular office. If
theyprefer to exercise the powers -
r h local legislative action, the powers of an elected
through officer could be abolished, tranferred, or curtailed without
restriction, the elective franchisee of
thosedeawho voted (inrinthe
v
election for the office would be It is the mandatory
Foster, 45 NY2d 287, 292-293 [19783 ) - preserves the
referendum requirement of section manda(ing a1referendum for a• -
sanctity of the right to vote, by transfer or curtail a •
proposed local law which would abolish,
power of an elective officer.
f adThe
Cenira orof
a local, lamest -be
. establishing the position
scrutinized in this context to determine whether a referendum
is required. .
In setting criteria for deteLminingswhenpfuloa cal elawi ns.
is 'subject to mandatory referendum,
it i' - other provisions of law establishingcif adminisic trative
officers_
A county by local law may assign _
tive
powers and duties to the chairman of the board of
su. eriso, erformed on behalf of the board and with .
= ' suppervvisors to be p
e
al
provision for periodic reports to the board. Ther land law -
must not divest the board of10 [13 [113 [b] [33 ) .sit?- p It appears that
ties
• (Municipal Home Rule Law, §
this provision was.-drafted to authorize assignmenfer of t
requiring
of
administrative fun.ctionsshort 2of
(f)-trAnsimilar assignment of
a referendum under section
administrative functions, powers and duties to an administrative
assistant to the chairman of the RulebLawC, §f10 (1) (ii) (b) (4)
supervisors is .
authorized by Municipal Home
• 3 .
•
•
If a local law permits the town administrator or .
•
manager to act only with the approval. of the town board, .
there is no transfer of powers. The town board could approve
or disapprove any action proposed by the administrator, thus
retaining ultimate decision-making authority. Such a local law
would not be subject to mandatory referendum under Municipal
Home Rule Law, 5 23 (2) (f) . . •
Another possibility is a local law which assigns or .
delegates but does not transfer administrative powers to
a town administrator or manager. The local law could be
enacted under section 10. of the Municipal Home Rule Law or
un_der 'Article 3-B of the To=an Law. To have the characteristics
of a delegation rather than a transfer, the local law should .
provide for the officer to perform assigned duties on behalf .
Of the town board and to be subject to its supervision and
control. The local law might provide that the town board by. .
resolution could assign, modify or revoke administrative powers .
from time to time and might require the officer to report •
periodically to the board. If the local law delegates but
does not transfer powers of an elective officer, no referendum
is required.
• *If a local law confers upon the town administrator Or
manager sufficient powers to establish an independent executive
branch of government, this would be a transfer of powers .
requiring a referendum under section 23 (2) (f) . A local law
transferring the administrative powers of the town board is a
•
transfer of the powers of an elective officer.
We conclude that a local law establishing the position of
town administrator or manager as the head of an independent
executive branch of town government is subject to mandatory
• 2 referendum. If the local law establishes the position but . . -
provides that the administrator or manager is subject to the
town board' s supervision and control, no referendum is .required.-
.
The Attorney-General renders formal opinions only to
officers and departments of the State government. This perforce
is an informal and unofficial expression of views of this office.
Very truly yours, .
ROBERT ABRAMS
Attorney General
BY: (1,kmi!% L) . (1A
• •
JAMES D. COLE
Assistant Attorney General
• of Chapter 367 , Laws. of 1976 (Town Law, Article 3-B)
TOWN OF M A M Ak e-W G4 aiD _ ! /
Local Law No . of the year 198
. A LOCAL LAW ESTABLISHING THE OFFICE OF TOWN ADMIklis-reAtaz-
K:.:i2".-CER AND PRESCRIBING THE POWERS AND DUTIES
OF THE APPOINTEE TO ADMINISTER SAID OFFICE
Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of MAktA2a-04..c..e.-
as follows :
Section 1 . Creation of office. The Office of Town 1 r
is hereby created. dmintsfeadr
dMat
,� ^ adMintsf eei
Section 2 . Appointort of town fii.e.aa,crer • Such office shall
be administered by a town _a aGQr who shall be the chief executive
and administrative head of the town government . He/she shall be
appointed by.the majority vote of. the full membership of the town tamcul
board for an4ndefinite term and shall hold office at the pleasure
of mid `4. He/she shall be chosen by said board without
regard to his/her political beliefs and solely on the basis of
his/her executive and administrative qualifications with special
reference to his/her actual experience in or knowledge of accepted
' practice in respect to the duties of the office hereinafter set
forth. At the time of his/her appointment he/she need not be a
resident of the town or state but shall become a resident within
a reasonable time after appointment and qualification and so -remain
during his/her tenure . No town board member shall receive such
appointment during the term for which he/she shall have been
elected; nor .within 1 year after the expiration of such
-c-h term.
c�htct t aA Am i n'stror�"
Section 3 . Powers a d duties . The town lai26Fgeter shall be
responsible to the town for the administration of all
property and affairs of the town. He shall have the authority
and it shall be his/her duty to :
A . See that all laws, . ordinances, resolutions and by-laws
• of the town board are faithfully and impartially enforced.
4.1.0.,., o‘p ravo.1cf• t*.&_ co vi 41 a ctircdf -
B. A.ppoint, ,,subject to applicable civil service regulations,
such officers and employees as the town board shall determine
and authorize as necessary fp.T..zt.414proper administration of the
affairs of the town with the der to discipline, suspend or propos-45.2
remove any such officer or employee . He/she shall report each
appointment of any of facer having supervisory or administrative .
authority to said �� at the next public meeting thereof
?lu„nag such appointment .
gyp=-=CSLA cto
C . Attend, unless excused , all meetings of the town
with the right to take part in any discussion but having no vote .
He/she shall receive notice of all regular and special meetings
of said 4e COk,►fccl
e,.
' .*:'h:-.:L: .
7 •
irk+'P a—a- . cocull a t
D . .J eco::mend to said -eDa:'G for adoption such measures as
he/she may deem necessary or expedient for the health , safety or
welfare of the town residents or for the improvement of
administrative services . .
titkeri , .
E . Make reports to saidCA.
upon the property and affairs
' of said town and to keep the > fully advised as to the town' s
financial condition and its future financial needs .
t444101 dtrtr634 6j Cine(. .
F. Prepare and submit 'Ft said board a tentative budget,
together with a message describing its important features, for
the next fiscal year as provided by general law. •
w , gim
G . Execute a�c acts on behalf of the town pursuant to
a resolution, ordinance or local law and have control and super-
vision of all purchasing of supplies, materials and equipment.
morthar
. H. Supervise and i all encumbrances, expenditures . -
and disbursements to insure that budget appropriations are not
exceeded.
. bt er+irtA b Wi
K 1" est'IA. p -
I . Cause all vouchers to be audited andAcountersign all
checks issued by the chief fiscal officer •
J. Recommend to said =r 4 a classification and pay plan for .
each appointive office and position in the town service and , where
r , negotiate such pay rates with organized employee groups . •
a.0ill eel
K. Perform such other duties as may be required by resolution
of the town b� cmcA ' . . � .
Section . Town not to interfere with appointments or
removals. Neither the town board nor any of its members shall •
direct or request the appointment of any person to , or his/her
removal from, office by the town manager or any of his/her
subordinates or in any manner take part in the appointment or
n• _ removal of officers and employees in the administrative services
�.,- of the town. Except for the purposes of inquiry, the town board
and its members shall deal with the administrative service solely
through the town manager and neither the town board or any
member thereof shall give orders or instructions to any .
subordinates of the town manager either publicly or privately.
Section . Compensation. The town r shall receive
such compensation, which shall not be diminished during his/her
tenure, as the town -c shall fix.
can,u
• adN S-1704
Section ‘ Vacancy in the office of town r . In the case
,;,o vacancy or d, 1xig the absence or disability of the town
f r, the town .• '-` shall designate some properly qualified
person to, perform the duties of the office on an acting basis
_ for a period not to exceed ninety days . Said .i ing manager
shall possess all the powersIrr the towns- - c� ` curing the period
of his/her appointment but s all not exercise any powers cry
e,.- o ' , = 1 • re's . "1 - ,,,,r 7*i-�- - unless such a ence or
disablity of the town " 1. • r shall have continu d for a period
exceeding sixty days • Qti „/
Q4✓ r°`P`'
c.
Section 4. moval of town manager . The town -rd may
remove the town r from office in accorance with the
following procedure : II
1 . The town vuG-i1 shall adopt, by the affirmative vote of the
majority of its membership, a preliminary resolution which muss
state the reasons for removal and may suspend the town m .s. ram'
from duty for a period not to exceed thirty days with pay but
without reimburseable expo ses A copy of the resolution shall
be delivered to the town .,.� . rsonally or by registered
mail to his/her home address within five days after adoption.
2 . Within five days after receipt of the resolution the town c liwo m
..-Reznattrr may. file with the town clerk a written request for a
public hearing. Such hearing shall be held at an advertised •
meeting not earlier than twenty days or later than thirty days
after the request has been filed with the said clerk.
3. The town Vata may adopt a final resolution of removal,
which may be made effective immediate aiy affirmative vote of .
the majority of the membership of the4 any time after ten
days from the date when a copy of the preliminary resolution
was delivered to the town if he/she has not requested
a public hearing- or at at time after the public hearing if
such was requested . altr iAtz{ „ •
4. The town shall continue to receive his/her full
salary until the effective date of the final resolution of
removal and for a period of sixty days thereafter.
iJ5. The action of the town in suspending or removing
the town r shall not be subject to review by any court or .
agency. adntinisi-tr�far
Section 1 . SavinEs clause . If any section, subsection or
sentence of this Local Law is for any reason held invalid it
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this "
Local Law. All existing local laws or ordinances of the town ona
the duties of heads of departments shall remain in full force and
effect except insofar as they conflict with the provisions of
this Local Law, in which case the provisions of this Local Law
shall prevail. All ordinances or parts of ordinances , all
resolutions or parts of.,�resolutions) heretofore adopted or •
passed by the town SE conflicting or inconsistent with this
Local Law or any part thereof are hereby annulled or repealed .
Section . Effective date ; This Local Law shall take
effect 19
_3_
Copy of the original report of
the Town Manager Study Committee,
August 1979
Honorable Joseph Vandernoot
Supervisor of the Town
of Mamaroneck
and the Members of the Town
Council
Gentlemen :
You have charged this committee with the
consideration of whether it would be advisable for the
Town of Mamaroneck to adopt a Manager Form of government
and , thereafter, to hire a Town Manager to carry out the
functions of such as permitted by the laws of the State
of New York. As a result of numerous discussions with the
Supervisor and members of the Council, we have interpreted
our functions to include contemplation of modifications of
the Manager Form of Government, or the adoption of steps -
leading to such form. As a result , we have not limited
ourselves to reporting back to you with a mere "yes" or
"no" .
The majority report of this Committee suggests,
with certain reservations that will be expressed later in
the report , that an "Administrator" be retained ati the
present time and that there- be entered into a trial period
during which the effectiveness of a Manager Form might be
tested. Permit us to share with you the manner in which
the majority members of the Committee reached their
conclusion.
-4-
It
.-It is our understanding that , within the limits of
applicable statutes and policies , the position of Manager
would be established to provide an administrative and
executive officer through whom the Supervisor and Town
Council would delegate certain of their functions in
connection with the administrative and executive components
of the Town Government. The Town Manager would, if appointed,
function as chief administrative and executive officer of
the town government, responsible, however, to the Supervisor
and to The Council. He would be responsible for the
execution and enforcement of ordinances and other enactments
of the board and for the operation and administration of all
services and departments, except as specifically excluded.
He would, normally, exercise the power to appoint and dismiss
all appointed administrative officers and employees , except
the appointed counsel, clerk and treasurer. He would conduct,
manage and supervise the operation and administration of all
departments , offices and agencies and would issue instructions
and directions to department heads and assure compliance there-
with. He would exercise disciplinary powers. He would
propose annual budgets and improvements and have general
supervisory power over financial matters , subject to the
jurisdiction of the Town Council. He would he responsible
for collective bargaining and purchasing. In general, he
would exercise all administrative functions involved in the
operation of the town, except to the exten that the Council
would see fit specifically to exclude certain functions.
-0-
In pursuance of the obligation delegated to us ,
; e followed various avenues . We studied the legal pos-
sibilities. We held discussions with Municipal Managers,
with officers of the Municipal Ma:=a`ement Association,
with public officials who have had experience with Managers
and with the Manager Form of Government.
Unfortunately, the more we studied the question
entrusted to us and the more we engaged in discussion among
ourselves and with others who have had experience in relation
to the question, the more we recognized the nebulousness
of definite yardsticks by which benefits could be measured
and the more each of us was forced to discard certain pre-
• conceived ideas with which he or she had entered upon the
study. In general, the questions that we asked ourselves
were the following:
1. Would the Manager Form of Government
provide the citizens of the community with some-
thing better than they now have, at the same or
comparable cost.
2. Would expenses be reduced by virtue
of the Manager Form of Government.
3. Would efficiencies be enhanced by
tbe Manager Form of Government.
Part of our problem arose from the fact that it
has been impossible for us to separate theory from the
personalities presently involved in local government. The
Town of Mamaroneck has been unusually fortunate in the
persons who have served both as Supervisor and as Council
members. Each of the long line of distinguished Supervisors
could be mentioned individually in laudatory terms , but we
need only think of the present Supervisor Ind his immediate
predecessor to be conscious of the Town's good fortune.
Both Mr. Vandernoot and Mrs. Helwig have been able to give
their full time to their municipal obligations and we think
it safe to say that, were we to be assured for the future of
having people of their character and ability and the time to
spend on municipal affairs, no manager would be required.
However, such expectation is unrealistic and this committee
recognized that it must plan for and think of other eventualities-
Therefore, we asked ourselves what would happen if, for
example, Mr. Vandernoot were taken ill and, for an extended
period of time, were unable to carry out his duties. Further-
more, we were and are acutely conscious - of the increasing -
complexity of municipal operations and of the .growing demands __
upon the time of the cheif administrative officer. Each
Council Member undertook his work on behalf of the community
upon the understanding that such community effort would, of
necessity, play a role secondary to his main source of income.
This is to be expected. However, this could , very conceivably,
present a serious problem with respect to the ever-increasing
complexity of Town operation.
Up to this point, there was complete concensus by
members of this committee. At this juncture, however, the
differences in preconceived notions began to make themselves
evident. Background and experience began to play an important
role in outlook. Certain members of the cor ittee
who had spent all or most of their lives in- Mamaroneck
approached the problem as follows :
"We agree that things have ,
gradually, become more complex and we
further agree that we have been fortunate
in our past Supervisors . However , we do
not think that this is a matter of luck.
Mamaroneck is a community with a great
reservoir of personal talent . Just as we
have found good people in the past, we will
continue to find them in the future . Other
communities work well under the present
system and without a Manager . We have at
least the talent that the other communities
have and certainly no less dedication on the
part of the people with such talent . We
have always made out well and there is no '
reason to suppose that we will not do so
in the future . "
Almost diametrically opposed to the foregoing view,
there emerged the following approach :
"We share the opinion that there
is increasing complexity in- Municipal operation.
Costs are increasing , so that the taxpayer is
looking toward an unbearable burden which must
be alleviated . No one who cannot devote his
entire tire to the- running of the community can
keep up with the various programs and benefits
that are available from the state and from
the Federal Government; nor can
he or she hope to keep so close
to daily operations that proper
and beneficial economies can be
effected. Not only can a Man-
ager do this , but also his training
and his close association with
other Managers, with whom he can
coordinate activities ,. make for
greater efficiency. A Manager
provides greater continuity".
Starting with the foregoing basic differences , the committee
sought not only to reconcile the approaches themselves ,_ but
also to determine the answers to certain specific questions.
The . following are a few of these questions:
1. Does a Manager provide greater
continuity, or is there less continuity by reason of
his generally coming anew to the community and then,
possibly, going on to another job?
2. Is a Manager more or less subject
to political influence?
3 . Does a community feel more remote
from its officials if there i s a Manager?
4. Is the effect upon elected officials
and their performance good or bad as a result of the
appointment of a Manager?
-/-
5. Does a Manager truly cause financial
savings?
6. Does a Manager really promote greater
efficiency?
7. If there are financial savings as a
result of having a Manager, are they sufficient to
offset the additional expenses of a Manager and his
office?
At first , it would seem that the foregoing
•
questions are susceptible of definitive answers . Upon
greater study , however , such questions seem less and less
capable of accurate response. • For example, discussions
with various responsible Managers result in numerous
examples of savings . However , we would do less than
justice to our elected officials were we not to realize
that they are, constantly, seeking and bringing about
various economies on their own and it is not unlikely
that certain ones to which the Managers have pointed,
have been ones that would have been accomplished by the
elected officials themselves . However , to be quite
honest , there is just no way to tell. Logic would seem
to indicate that a professional is more likely to bring
about more efficient operating procedures , but , on the
other side , there is a question as to whether this works
in practice when the Manager must put these procedures
into operation and when they would directly affect the
colleagues with whom he works. •
After considerable discussion, a possible "medium
ground attitude" began to emerge. This was not because
of a desire to compromise as a way out. It was a genuine
new attitude, resulting from a recognition by each person
that each of the other persons on the committee Thad a
defensible viewpoint. The new attitude said the following:
1. We are not at all sure that a
Manager would be beneficial to the Town of Mamaroneck.
However, we recognize that there is substantial evidence
of such benefit. We further recognize that, much as we
may theorize, there is no way that we can tell whether
a Manager Form would be beneficial unless we, ourselves ,
actually adopt such form or something similar to it, in -
order, ourselves , .to test the benefits- that . may be •
attained. We will never know unless we try. - On the
other hand, we do not wish to cross a bridge that we
cannot recross , or even one that would be difficult to
recross. Therefore, the following has emerged as a
recommendation of this committee:
"Let us retain a person with the
qualifications of a 'Manager , a
person who would be chosen by
us to be a Manager if we were
retaining one . Let him serve ,
however, as andministrator.
Give him the functions of a
Manager , but condition the
authority that would ordinarily
attend the Manager' s position
by- the words ' subject to the
approval of the Town Council' .
At the end of whatever period
the then sitting Council would
deem proper, it could make a
decision as to the effectiveness
of the individual and of the
structure. If it has worked
Fell , the transition to full
Manager status would be theoret-
ical and simple. If it has not
worked , it could be modified or
terminated.
It must, of course, be realized
that, for the above suggestion to
receive a fair test , the Supervisor
and Council must establish, as far
as may be practical , a Council-
Administrator
ouncil-7dministrafor relationship that
will approximate that which would
exist _between Council and Manager.
This would require considerable
- 10-
tact and restraint on both sides ,
but we are confident that it could
be accomplished.
We said in opening that there
were certain reservations that would
be expressed. The fact that they
are left to the end of our report is
no indication of lesser importance.
They reflect_ very practical problems. -
Although, in our opinion, they do not
detract from the theoretical advis- . •
ability of the plan that we have
suggested , they require certain solutions _
before the plan can, with fairness to
all,- be put- into effectWe mean the
following:
Before our plan is adopted , there should
be determined by referendum whether those
affected by the plan would desire its.
adoption. We suggest that this would
be in order whether or not such referendum
is required by law. If the cost of the
Administrator-Manager would be a General
Town Charge . the two villages would be
included in the referendum and their
local governing bodies should have the
opportunity Of .input in connection with
•
-11-
•
any consideration given to the plan.
If, on the other hard , the cost is
not to be a General Town Charge, but
is to be levied only upon the Unincor-
porated Area , then a further plan must
be developed whereby the duties of the
Administrator-Manager are confined to
the Unincorporated Area. We are not
• at all sure that, from an administrative
standpoint, this is practical, if indeed,
it is possible at all.
Once again, let us emphasize that the foregoing _
recommendation is not a compromise. It is a recognition
of the possibilities of benefit, the need to determine
such benefits and , at the same time, an awareness that
the possible benefits may be illusory. .
In making our recommendation, we are cognizant
of the fact that the recent changes in law now give
Towns wide authority to restructure their governments
to fit local needs and, accordingly, to adopt a Town
Manager form of government. The first, Chapter 3.65
amends the ;•,unicipal Home Rule law and authorizes Towns
-12-
to amend or supersede any provision of the Town Law
relating to its property , affairs or government. . The
exceptions to such restructuring are taxation, finance,
referenda and the creation of special improvement dis-
tricts. Towns are given flexibility to restructure and .
reorganize their government virtually as they deem fit.
For example a Town could create an elective Town execu-
tive independent of the Town Board or could restructure
its departmental organization.
The second , Chapter 367 is a specific grant of .
authority to establish the office of Town Manager. A
Town Manager' s powers and duties are determined by the
Torn Board. The Manager is the chief administrative
officer of the Town; however, the powers of legisla-
tion. and appropriation are reserved to the Town Board. .
Before closing, we must call to your atten-
tion that the foregoing is a majority report. A •
minority report has been submitted by Mr. C. Benjamin
Brush, Jr. and Mr. Gerald S. Page. A copy of their
report is annexed hereto.
Respectfully submitted,
Town of Ma arcn_c.k
Town i',anacer Study Cc:,-:ittee - Minority Report
Due to the fact that the status of the Village of Mamaro-
neck is undecided at this time, but seems to be nearing
an independent governmental unit,
and because a Tcwn Manager's salary would be a ceneral
town charge includinc the Village of Larchmont and the
Village of Mararoneck ( if not independent) ,
and due to the fact that the Village of Larchmont Com-
mittee which studied a Village Manager plan voted down
such a Village Manager,
and due to the fact that a Town Manager would be adminis-
strating only to the Tcwn of Mamaroneck unincorporated
area with 12,000 residents,
and because the Supervisor is the Administrative Head of
the Town and for the past several decades has been the
Chief Executive Officer,
we do not feel that a Town Manager is needed by the Town
of Mamaroneck at this time.
C. Benjamin Brush, Jr.
Gerald S. Page
August 8, 1978
•
TO: Members of the Town Manager Study Committee and Councilmen Bloom
and DeMaio
FROM: Lauren M. Miralia
SUBJECT: Final draft report, third part of the study.
•
As time is nigh for our final report I have rewritten and condensed
the January 11, 1978 preliminary draft. Since you all have had ample opportunity
to review that draft, I have incorporated your suggestions into this report. While
I welcome any additional changes, I believe we can move ahead with this report as
the third part, or background part, of our final recommendation with a minimum of
change or delay.
•
•
•
•
-2-
Persistent inflation and recent "tax-revolt" voter action have
intensified public concern with the cost and performance of government and
have threatened the ability of even the most affluent jurisdictions to continue
to function and fulfill their obligations. Yet, neither drastic cuts in
spending in response to simplistic attacks on big government nor wholesale .
enlargements of public programs will meet the tough c1:.11ange of making
government more productive and more responsive to genuine public needs.
We are mindful of the political impediments to many of the
approaches we suggest. However, most of the important changes in state and
local government, such as use of a town manager, had to overcome formidable
resistance where they have been adopted.
State and local governments are a fundamental and integral part of
our nation's overall economic well-being. Few realize that states and
localities, not the federal government, are now primarily responsible for
administering most of the tax dollars used to deliver public services. State and
local spending accounts for over SO percent of all nondefense government purchases
of goods and services and almost 15 percent of the gross national product;
together, these governments employ one of every seven non-agricultural workers.
With 50 states and some 39,000 general-purpose governments, it-
would have been impossible to outline specific actions that would apply equally
to a Los Angeles and a Larchmont. Therefore, ,we identify the principal
deficiencies and opportunities for improvement that are common to most state
and local jurisdictions, and we suggest general approaches that they can
adapt to their particular circumstances. Our specific recommendations show how
states and the federal government can encourage and assist jurisdictions within
their purview to adopt methods of operation that will lead to productivity
improvement.
In states and communities across the nation, elected officials
are telling their constituents that soaring costs confront government .
with two alternatives: either increase taxes or cut back services. Many governments
today are doing both. Only a few farsighted leaders have broken away from this
conventional response to pose a third option: that more intelligent use be
made of existing resources to achieve desired goals; that is, increase government
productivity.
Improving government productivity is not a quick solution to
imminent financial problems or an antidote to a weak tax base. It is a long-term
task that requires continuing attention to every phase of government operations.
There is no single correct approach. Efforts to improve government productivity
must recognize the interplay between political forces and agency operations,
between broad policy considerations and detailed administrative matters, between
technology and people, between. prerogatives and national responsibilities.
-3-
Numerous factors, individually and in relation to one another,
affect productivity: strengthening management, motivating the work force,
improving technology, increasing capital investment and measuring of both
immediate results and the full impact of governmental programs. Although we
recognize the unique character of government, we nevertheless believe that
many of the principles used in private enterprise can be applied in the
•
public sector.
A National Dilemma
Local government is a public business. It consumes resources,
provides vital services, and is managed by elected and appointed officials.
Like private corporations, it can and should be managed for performance.
The critical problem facing local governments is not, as many claim, a
lack of resources; it isan inability to use existing resources efficiently
and effectively in meeting legitimate demands for public services.
In addition, local governments consist of many different and
complex businesses: these range from sewer construction, fire protection,
and garbage collection to housing management, health care, and transportation.
Local governments provide essential services, many of them (fire protection •
and water supply) in response to immediate and urgent needs. Local governments
are monopolistic: they need not compete to provide public goods and services.
Citizens are taxed regardless of their judgment about the quality and quantity
of municipal services they receive.
Many counties, cities, and other local governments are not working
well. The garbage is rarely collected on schedule, citizens are mugged in
broad daylight, schools are not teaching children to read, potholes in the
streets seem to multiply, striking policemen break the law they are sworn to
enforce, legislators admit to rigging zoning cases, traffic congestion makes
driving an ordeal, no one at city hall will answer a simple question - the _
list goes on and on. Underlying this record of inadequate performance
is a growing fiscal perversity: as local-government performance decreases,
taxes increase. Taxpayers are demanding to know what their tax dollars
are buying, but few local-government officials have answers for them.
Increasingly, the media, as well as individual citizens, are attributing poor
performance to poor management.
•
Although local-government officials can learn much from their
private-sector counterparts, a local government cannot be managed exactly
as a private business is managed. Many individuals, working within and outside
a local government, affect its performance: these individuals and the institutions
they represent must be considered and involved in taking actions to improve
performance. There are no quick solutions or easy answers to the challenge
of making local governments work better. It is a long-term undertaking that
must recognize the interplay between political and bureaucratic forces, between.
citizen demands and financial realities, between management responsibilities
and employee rights, and between local prerogatives and national priorities.
Improving Productivity: The First Step is Improved Management.
•
Productivity must be first concerned with what government should. or
should not be doing to meet citizens' needs ,and desires. In theory, such •
determinations are made by collective choice through the elected representatives
of the people. In practice, however, the political process rarely works so neatly.
Even in small towns with homogeneous populations, differences may .exist between
yonger newcomers who opt for higher standards of education and older residents
who may prefer more convenient transportation or better police protection.
In most towns, small but effective citizens' groups actively
appeal to elected officials and government agencies for new programs or increased
budget allocations for existing programs (e.g., a swimming pool or a new
library) . Because they do not pay directly or totally for those services, which
are financed mainly by taxes, such groups are rarely concerned about the cost
of what they request.
In the absence of :more objective criteria elected officials are
likely to establish or modify goals on the basis of demands from pressure groups,
levels of complaints, their own political ambitions, and views expressed through
the media, which both reflect and create public attitudes. Few public officials
consider what their respective governments ought to be doing, focusing instead
on the more immediate problems associated with what they are doing.
Policy guidance from top officials is often so broad and ambiguous
(in some cases necessarily so) that it places great responsibility for policy
making in the hands of lower-level administrators. In turn, policy implementation
in key functions rests heavily with the individual employee (the policeman, teacher,
social worker, and others) who actually delivers the service or .otherwise represents
government to the public. Management in many government operations is less a
matter of issuing directives from central command posts and more a process of
communication and persuasion among top management, middle-level supervisors,
employees and citizen-consumers.
The greatest opportunity for improved government productivity
lies in strengthened management. Deficiencies in management derive
largely from the absence of political pressure for productivity on top elected
officials (governors, mayors, county executives, legislatures and councils)
and from the failure to link the performance of agencies directly to the salaries
and promotions of responsible managers. •
Different Types of Town Governments
There has been a tremendous amount of experiment with local
government in the United States, especially in recent years, for the awesome
challenges resulting from increasing urbanization have emphasized as never
before the need for competent, responsive and understanding handling of these
challenges. _
Although it is sometimes claimed that there are as many as
seven identifiable different forms of local government in use in United States
Communities, the practical truth is that only two appear to have what it takes
•
-5-
•
to cope with the crushing challenges of the last quarter of the Twentieth
Century.
These are the Strong Supervisor and Council Manager forms.
Both provide for broad council control over city finances, ordinances and
policy, and both concentrate in the hands of one person's responsibil-lty
for supervising and directing the heads of the city's principal
administrative departments.
•
Cities seeking to improve their governments inevitably turn to
one or the other of these two forms. It would serve no useful purpose, therefore,
to discuss in detail the Commission, Weak Mayor and Town Meeting f orms,• none
of which receives much attention these days from charter revision commissions.
The remaining two: Mayor-administrator and Chief Administrative Officer (CAO)
are really only variations of the Strong Supervisor and Council-Manager forms,
respectively.
Strong Supervisor
It is impossible to draw up an accurate list of Strong Mayercities
or Strong Supervisor Towns because relatively few conform fully to the accepted standar
Cities with mayor-council forms range all the way from those where the mayor is
little more than a figurehead to those where the mayor is the responsible head
of the whole city administration.
A Strong Mayor or Supervisor should have power:
1. To hire and fire department heads.
2. To prepare the budget for council consideration.
3. To administer the budget after its adoption.
4. To veto acts of the town council, which can override
the veto only by an extraordinary majority.
With these powers, added to the leadership qualities usually
possessed by successful candidates for office, a Supervisor is at least ostensibly
equipped to provide political (policy) leadership, advocate programs, obtain
a consensus on issues, and supervise the city's departments.
A mayor is obviously weakened if there are separately elected
department heads or separate boards or commissions or if he must have the
"advice and consent" of the town council to make appointments.
It requires considerable skill and diplomacy for a supervisor to
have the town council working harmoniously with him. It is not unusual for
councilmen to have higher ambitions which tempt them to indulge in chronic
heckling.
•
-6-
To compensate for some of these weaknesses there is a growing
tendency in mayor-council cities, both "strong" and
"weak"
wthat aappoint chief
n
administrators to serve under the mayor in hope demand •
promises professional management or at least helps to pacify popular
•
for greater efficiency in government.
Not a New Form of Town Government
But the appointment of an assistant to the mayor, no matter what his title, does not constitute an immediate new form of government. Top
officers in government, industry, unions and other activities who have
won their positions because of their principles, policies, leadership talents
or charisma have for many generations enlisted the help of capable assistants
to relieve them of day-to-day detail.
It is important, and increasing so, that supervisors as well as other
top public officials have qualified administrative help, whether in the
. form of' a single assistant or several.
Supervisor-Administrator
• Although the growing trend toward appointment of administrative
assistants to mayors is encouraging, this often seems less a new form of
government than a device to pacify the growing public demand for
efficiency and economy. There is great variety not only in the professional
.qualifications of these administrators but also in their titles, powers-
and
owersand terms.
The City Administrator of the City of New York does not administer
that city's government. But the City Consultant of Louisville has,
due to the intelligence and good will of a series of mayors, administered
that city's government for years.
•
In San Francisco and New Orleans the administrator is called
Chief Administrative Officer; in Philadelphia, Managing Director; in
Newark, Business Manager.
•
In New Orleans, the mayor may remove him at will but in Los
Angeles the assent of the City Council is required. In Philadelphia,
the mayor must prefer charges. The charges may be appealed to the Civil
Service Commission, which may award compensation but not prevent removal.
In San Francisco, this officer is actually subject to recall in an election
or the legislative body may remove him, but only by an unlikely two-thirds
vote. In Los Angeles and New Orleans, the City Council may also remove the
mayor's administrative aide .- in Los Angeles by a two-thirds vote and in New
Orleans by a majority of all the members.
•
-7-
Council-Manager
The Council-Manager plan is the fastest growing form of municipal .
government because, among a number of sound reasons, it is specifically designed
to remedy the weaknesses of other forms.
Use of it has grown steadily at the expense of other forms. By
1973 it had become, in little more than half a century since the first adoption
the prevailing form; that is, the most popular, used in 47 percent
of all United States cities over 5,000 population, as compared with 44 percent .
with Mayor-council ("strong" and "weak" combined) , 6 percent with Commission,
and, perhaps, 2 percent with Town Meeting *.
Chief characteristics of the plan are:
1. A town council, usually but not necessarily small, and
usually but not necessarily elected at large on a non-
partisan ballot.
2. A supervisor, chosen by the council or elected at large, in
the case of the Town of Mamaroneck.
3. A town manager, appointed and removable by the town council.
Its most distinctive feature is its abandonment of the traditional
,separation of powers doctrine which has so often been nullified anyway by
la cozy partisan arrangements.
The Council-manager form of government uniquely and dramatically
provides for a genuinely powentown council which not only determines policy
but also appoints and may remove the chief executive, the town manager.
•
The manager shall be chosen by the council solely on the basis
of his executive and administrative qualifications with special reference to
his actual experience in, or his knowledge of, accepted practice in
respect to the duties of his office as hereinafter set forth. At the time
of his appointment, he need not be a resident of the town, but during his
tenure of office he shall reside within the town.
Since he is responsible for carrying out the council's policies
and for the administration of the town, the manager has unabridged authority
to appoint department heads.
*International City Management Association, Municipal Year Book, 1972 page 15.
-8-
Although, theoretically and traditionally, the plan has often
been described as neatly dividing policy determination and administration,
the practical fact is that the town manager is not only the professional
administrator but also and especially the advisor and consultant to the
members of the council. Inevitably, he has the chief responsibility to
develop plans and programs for council approval.
•
The appointment of trained. public administrators to manage
cities is often likened to the practice of choosing superintendents for
•
school boards, but this is valid only in part. School superintendents
almost invariably have contracts but city managers almost invariablly do
not. Indeed, professional city managers have repeatedly rejected the
contract idea in favor of continuing to be subject to removal at any time
they are no longer in accord with the policies of their city councils,
thus emphasizing the truly democratic nature of the plan as well as the
dominance of the popularly elected council.
Most cities choose. managers from out of town, especially the
first manager after adoption of the plan. He is unlikely, therefore, to
have local political entanglements, but may also be ignorant of the
local attitudes, spirit and pride in the community, which can cause him_
to ride rough - shod over many local practices in the name of efficiency.
While municipal town managers and employees usually serve simply' at
the pleasure of the council most, in fact, have always enjoyed reasonable
security of tenure. This security does not rest on any legal guarantees
but on a fairly long tradition that the continuity of employment in the
public service should not be subject to termination every time elective
• officeholders change. This does not mean that employment cannot be
terminated by a town council but there would be genuine political difficulties
if such termination was not for "justifiable cause." Security of employment
is strengthened even further for the bulk of municipal employees who belong •
to unions and, generally speaking, enjoy virtually the same collective •
bargaining rights -- including, with few exceptions, the right to strike --
as do employees in the private sector.
•
There is also an emerging awareness that municipal management
requires more staff support positions to provide the kind of analytical
capability necessary to furnish a response to multi-functional problems
and the mounting complexity of urban policies and local and federal govern-
ments. And in attempting to establish such positions the traditional
rigidities of the organizational structure and the personnel classification
system often constitute what appear to be formidable barriers. But they
are also obstacles that can, with effort and persuasion, be overcome.
-9-
The Chief Administrative Officer
A derivation of the Council-Manager form is the Chief Administrative
Officer, if it can properly be identified as a distinct form of government_
It is actually a variation of the Council-Manager form in that the
administrator is appointed by the Town Council to carry out its policies
and act as its chief consultant and adviser. A major and serious difference,
however, is the fact that the town council usually reserves the right to
appoint or "consent" to the appointment of department heads who, as the
CAO,s subordinates, should, of course, have no divided loyalty. In •:
practice, however, this confirmation of the CAO's appointments frequently
involves mere formality, as indicated by the number of CAO cities and counties
recognized by the International City Management Association as having the
equivalent of the Council-Manager plan.
-10-
•
Summary and Conclusions
All of the foregoing lends to one inescapable conclusion -- local
governmentmust actively seek and consciously develop the management
fthe
capability needed now and in the future. And a substantial part
responsibility for this undertaking Conow comitanttwi hs tthisois theirnequallyin the
ranks of municipal management.
compelling requirement to provide leadership in furthering the administrative
reform and innovation needed to meet the changing role of local government.
The necessary municipal managerial response to the conditions
described will require a rethinking of the administrative mechanisms of
local government. At least four new elements will need to be developed
if a concept of positive, objectives-oriented management is to evolve.
These.are:
(a) A flexible concept of general municipal
management that transcends the limitations
of narrow functional or professional expertise.
This will require an executive structure that can
not only provide coordination of the delivery of
services but can raise questions about the
assumptions underlying existing policies and programs;
develop the human resources necessary to provide the
basis for evaluating programs and policies; and
recognize the need for involving the civic service
in the development of administrative goals that
are capable of attainment.
(b) A budgeting process that is more than an accounting
document. This will mean the development of a process
through which the town' s responsible political body,
the council, and its principal administrators can achieve
a focus on the alternatives and possibilities,
both short and long-term. This will also mean developing
a continuing capability for evaluating and
• reviewing not just the financial outlays involved
but the objectives achieved through civic policies,
programs and services. While the chief municipal
finance officer would continue to have an important
role in such a budgeting process, it is unlikely that
it can continue to be his virtually exclusive re-
sponsibility as has been the case in the past.
-11-
(c) A policy planning capability, with the trend toward
a continuing emphasis on what may be termed "quality
of life" issues, e.g. transportation alternatives,
redevelopment, neighborhood rejuvenation, housing,
•
social sciences, zoning, imaginative development
control, etc. , there will need to be a recognition
that emphasis on narrow technical skills alone are
inadequate tools for the analysis of these issues.
These will increasingly require analysis through a
broader analytical framework that is based on at
least informed insights of human and social awareness
coupled with a realistic appreciation of the possibilities
of adr.►instrative innovation, and the acquisition of
broad-based political support from both parties.
Municipal adminstrators have little in the way of
staff resources to provide the kind of analysis that is •
clearly necessary. As a consequence they will need to
build into the administrative structure a small policy
planning unit that can furnish the staff capability
necessary for continuing policy analysis.
(d) The imaginative utilization and development of municipal
manpower. This simply means that the current objectives
of municipal personnel administration need to be
geared to meet more adequately the requirements of the
present and the future rather than those of the past.
Thus, the personnel function will need to be more
concerned with breaking down the rigidity of existing
classification schemes and providing opportunities for
newer skills and talents to flourish and meet opportunity
and challenge in the civic service.
We are mindful of the political impediments to many of the
approaches we suggest. However, most the important changes in state and local
government, such as use of a town manager, had to overcome formidable
resistance where they have been adopted.