BY ALLEN HOWARD
The Cincinnati Enquirer
When Silverton resident Linda Rosa looks at a charter revision in Silverton calling for a municipal administrator, she finds herself between a rock and a hard place.
She believes the city needs a full-time administrator because she has complained about uncut grass across the street all year long, but nothing has been done.
"Maybe we need someone working full time, taking care of the day-to-day affairs of the city, but can we afford it?" she asks. "We are still under a fiscal watch because of financial problems. How can we afford the salary of a full-time administrator and all the benefits if we are having trouble making ends meet now?"
The city shaved $350,000 from its budget this year, having been placed under a fiscal watch by the state auditor's office. Its status will be reviewed at the end of the year.
Provision for hiring a full-time administrator is part of Issue 19, a charter revision on the November ballot.
If approved, the municipal administrator will become chief financial officer and manage daily operations.
With the mayor only a part-timer, he is unable to handle a lot of day-to-day issues, said Michael Hagen, a member of the charter review committee.
"The committee thinks we should have a full-time person in City Hall," Mr. Hagen said.
But Mrs. Rosa hasn't made up her mind. "It becomes a question of whether that person will do the job. We don't have the money to waste to find out," Mrs. Rosa said.
The charter proposal describes the municipal administrator's position as similar to that of a city manager.
Duties will include contract negotiations and seeking grant money. Department heads report to the municipal administrator and the administrator reports to city council.
Silverton Clerk Robert Fredericks said the administrator may be able to pay his own way by securing grants the city is entitled to but doesn't have the staff now to pursue.
No salary has been discussed.
The charter revision also calls for:
- Combining clerk and treasurer jobs.
- Changing terms of office so they begin Dec. 1 after the election, instead of Jan. 1. The change "would eliminate the long two-month "lame duck' period if someone loses," Mr. Hagen said.
