| Proud Sponsor |
|
| News Sections |
|
|
| Membership |
|
|
| Features |
|
| Sponsored by |
|
| About the Smugtown Beacon |
|
|
| |
|
| Duffy Debuts Decade Ducking and Dodging |
By: Aaron E. Wicks
|
Posted: Sunday, January 3, 2010 8:13 pm
|
Rochester, NY (January 4, 2010) -- If you choose only the words Rochester Mayor Bob Duffy uses in his staged appearances, he comes across as honest, forthright and determined to further the best interests of the community he loves. Beneath the surface, however, the high principles give way to political expediency and an uneasy resentment of those who would criticize his policies and his actions. Two recent such challenges have received some media attention, but bear deeper consideration. They demonstrate a mayor who extols merit, but engages in political patronage and who praises debate, but avoids it and considers formal discussion of policy "a spectacle."
So You Wanna Be a Deputy Chief...
Mayor Duffy has often described his desire to employ only most qualified individuals in his administration. And even his critics agree, he has a savvy, politically-experienced team, headed by Deputy Mayor Patty Malgieri, advisor Darryl Porter and former NET administrator Molly Clifford. The latter is a well-traveled political operative, having played political puppetmaster as Monroe County Democratic Committee Chair and more recently as campaign manager for the prospective mayor in 2005. Clifford's most demonstrable skill is in the field of political machination, with a lengthy resume to prove it.
Yet when news surfaced that the city's fire marshal was set to retire, Clifford -- eyeing impending unemployment due to the mayor's reorganization of neighborhood services -- suddenly took an interest in the fire service. Donning her turnout gear, she appeared in a local training class, but was tight-lipped about her newfound interest. Insiders noted another intriguing coincidence: the job description for the fire marshal post had been expended to include not just code enforcement, education and outreach, but also budgeting and operational administration.
The new position carries a six-figure salary and a position comparable to the of Deputy Chief. For those unfamiliar with the structure of the Rochester Fire Department, is it governed by a Chief and an Executive Deputy Chief -- both of whom work largely in administrative functions, though one or the other is present for multiple alarm fires and occasionally assumes operational command. Beneath them are four "line deputies" (with the title Deputy Chief) who are the incident commanders for working fires within the city and also the highest-ranking officer on duty at virtually any fire scene. These deputies generally come up the ranks, accruing years of experience as line firefighters, becoming lieutenants, captains, battalion chiefs and then deputy chiefs.
One can imagine how it must feel for city firefighters, all of whom have passed civil service exams, thorough background checks, physical fitness exams and several weeks of intense academy drills and training, to find their budget, operational decisions and community events being spearheaded by a novice whose only experience with smoke is from the backrooms where Rochester's leaders are selected.
Interestingly, the mayor has had nothing o say about the issue. His Fire Chief, John Caufield, has attempted to remain diplomatic, observing that the newly open position has not yet been filled and that it is within his authority to appoint someone -- even someone outside the fire service -- to the job.
Is Clifford the best person for the job? Perhaps -- this author is not arguing that point. The question is this: why has such an important post not been opened to a broad range of applicants? Why has not every effort been made to identify the best possible candidate? If Clifford is indeed the candidate, how does the mayor make it clear that this appointment is merit-based and has nothing to do with the significant political favors Clifford has garnered for him? Duffy is loyal to his friends and supporters -- nothing wrong with that. But perhaps he can use this opportunity to come clean about it and finally drop the false claim that he is something other than just another politician rewarding his cronies.
The mayoral control "debate"
The mayor's hypocrisy is even more evident in his handling of the mayoral control issue. In the past couple of weeks, the mayor has claimed that a debate must be had on the issue of mayoral control and, more recently, that he is willing to stake his political fortunes on the issue. (An interesting side note: the mayor said that he is even willing to "lose friends" over this issue. A curious pronouncement, to say the least. If people abandon the mayor because of this issue, were they really his "friends"? It makes one wonder just how the mayor defines the word)
Several months ago, the community's most vocal opponent of mayoral control -- and someone elected by the voters to serve the community on the city's School Board -- sent the mayor a proposal to discuss greater collaboration between the city and schools. Commissioner Van White acknowledged that the city and the school board have mutual interests, particularly in areas of budgets and finance. His wait for a reply to this overture continues. To date, the mayor has pointedly refused to acknowledge the offer with any substantive response.
Commissioner White has offered to debate the mayor, one-on-one, on the subject of mayoral control. Such debates have been common means to focus attention on important issues (as the Lincoln-Douglass debates focused on the issues of slavery and states' rights) and have also served to engage the public on controversial issues (such as the recent debates between Christopher Hitchens and religious leaders on the existence of God and the benefits/evils of religion). Although the public obviously needs more involvement during the course of such a discussion, a one-on-one debate would focus the attention of the community on this issue, giving both sides an opportunity to field their best arguments and reach the audience that will be affected by this weighty issue.
Alas, the mayor -- through his spokesman Gary Walker -- has called such proposals political in motivation and nothing more than tending towards creating a "spectacle."
Talking to White, one can sense that he too has picked the hill he will die on. He has seen record improvements in the district be dismissed by the media and the mayor, he has read condescending editorials by limousine liberals who believe "those people" in the city simply cannot be trusted to oversee their own education and he has witnessed spin and outright lies from City Hall on the subject of mayoral control.
It is clear that the mayor and others have identified clear and unbending positions on the issue of mayoral control. But were people like Van White stand ready to debate, to take the issue to the public and to put his beliefs on the line, the mayor has, thus far, dodged such opportunities. Will the mayor continue to stonewall his opponents? Will he continue to insist his position is a new one, and not one that he has been pursuing behind the scenes for at least a year? Will Rochester's media be able to expose some of these half-truths before the legislature passes the enabling legislation required to make the mayor's goal a reality?
One thing is clear: the answers to these questions will never pass the lips of Mayor Duffy.
We'd like to hear from you!
If you'd like to share your opinion on this article, please login (or create a membership login) and enter your comments in the "What's your opinion?" field. We ask that underneath your opinion, you provide your first and last name and the city and state in which you live. Only opinions that include full attribution will be approved by our authors. Thanks very much!
Click here to get email updates! |
|
Printer-friendly format
|
Member Opinions:
By: CityResident on 1/8/10
The Mayor already has everything he needs from Albany to take control of the RCSD. When members of the school board and the mayor met last year, the mayor firmly denied having any plans to take over the RCSD. What he meant to say was that all of his Albany ducks were not in a row. This is not a hill that Bob Duffy has chosen to die on, it is a hill that he knows he will be victorious in conquering. Annmarie Van Son Rochester, New York
Login and voice your opinion!
|
|
|
