Just what Auburn needs another layer of bureaucracy along with a new salary to pay for. This position was estimated to be $60-70,000 years ago, and now our leaders want to add this annual rising cost to our strained budgets?

What is there to oversee? Don’t we have a city engineer to oversee construction? I can already hear it, if we had a city administrator we wouldn’t have the problem on ‘S’ street. Really? Aren’t all projects designed or approved by our engineer? Isn’t it their job to verify they are built to specs? If not why does the city pay 10-15% of a project in engineering fees?

How many towns in Nebraska with populations under 3,500 have a ‘city administrator’?

If a city administrator is needed is Auburn trying to do to much for a town our size?

Please tell me the NEED for this or is this just another of the Mayor WANTS?

just thinking wrote:

Just what Auburn needs another layer of bureaucracy along with a new salary to pay for. This position was estimated to be $60-70,000 years ago, and now our leaders want to add this annual rising cost to our strained budgets?
What is there to oversee? Don’t we have a city engineer to oversee construction? I can already hear it, if we had a city administrator we wouldn’t have the problem on ‘S’ street. Really? Aren’t all projects designed or approved by our engineer? Isn’t it their job to verify they are built to specs? If not why does the city pay 10-15% of a project in engineering fees?
How many towns in Nebraska with populations under 3,500 have a ‘city administrator’?
If a city administrator is needed is Auburn trying to do to much for a town our size?
Please tell me the NEED for this or is this just another of the Mayor WANTS?

Do you understand how construction and engineering work? By reading your post I would assume you don't.

just thinking wrote:

Just what Auburn needs another layer of bureaucracy along with a new salary to pay for. This position was estimated to be $60-70,000 years ago, and now our leaders want to add this annual rising cost to our strained budgets?
What is there to oversee? Don’t we have a city engineer to oversee construction? I can already hear it, if we had a city administrator we wouldn’t have the problem on ‘S’ street. Really? Aren’t all projects designed or approved by our engineer? Isn’t it their job to verify they are built to specs? If not why does the city pay 10-15% of a project in engineering fees?
How many towns in Nebraska with populations under 3,500 have a ‘city administrator’?
If a city administrator is needed is Auburn trying to do to much for a town our size?
Please tell me the NEED for this or is this just another of the Mayor WANTS?

Why don't you wait and see what exactly the position will be for. Maybe they are going to replace a few positions and lump them into this new role. Let's see what they are planning to do.

I heard that the mayor has applied for the positiion.

If we had a City Administrator on a salary, why in the world would we need a Mayor as well?(Even though technically the Mayor draws no salary).

The Common Sense Doctor wrote:

If we had a City Administrator on a salary, why in the world would we need a Mayor as well?(Even though technically the Mayor draws no salary).

It is my belief that the mayor of Auburn is paid about $400 per month and the commissioners each receive about $200 a month.

Does anyone know for sure the amounts of their compensation?

A few years ago the mayor also received about $36,000 in a year from the ADC to be the City's Economic Development person.

Thank goodness Auburn is actually looking at hiring a City Administrator. Nebraska City has had a hired professional for years... including both a City Administrator and a paid Economic Developer. Auburn has always tried to take the cheap way out...with volunteers. Our volunteers are busy citizens who either have a job or are trying to run their own business. They do not have the time it takes to actually pursue true development efforts. I give the City officials a, "Thumbs Up" on this proposal. It's about time! This is a great investment in Auburn's future!

Supercharged wrote:

Thank goodness Auburn is actually looking at hiring a City Administrator. Nebraska City has had a hired professional for years... including both a City Administrator and a paid Economic Developer. Auburn has always tried to take the cheap way out...with volunteers. Our volunteers are busy citizens who either have a job or are trying to run their own business. They do not have the time it takes to actually pursue true development efforts. I give the City officials a, "Thumbs Up" on this proposal. It's about time! This is a great investment in Auburn's future!

Whatever. Nebraska City is twice the size of Auburn, and by Golly, they have a Walmart, so they can afford an ED from the extra sales tax money they are bringing in. Get a life.

UGH wrote:

<quoted text>
Whatever. Nebraska City is twice the size of Auburn, and by Golly, they have a Walmart, so they can afford an ED from the extra sales tax money they are bringing in. Get a life.

Way to play someone down for giving an opinion, you must be proud.

WOW!

Nebraska City had both a City Administrator and an Economic Developer way before Walmart. Their economic developer is not funded through sales tax revenue either.

It's folks like you that keep Auburn down. You need to move.

UGH wrote:

<quoted text>
Whatever. Nebraska City is twice the size of Auburn, and by Golly, they have a Walmart, so they can afford an ED from the extra sales tax money they are bringing in. Get a life.

yep, both "binder" and "supercharged" are right. I do need to move, since Armstrong is closing! You two should run for mayor; you could probably change the world, or at least this corner of it!

just thinking wrote:

This position was estimated to be $60-70,000 years ago,

Well, imagine what the inflation would be with $60 dollars over 70,000 years? Whoa!

yep wrote:

yep, both "binder" and "supercharged" are right. I do need to move, since Armstrong is closing! You two should run for mayor; you could probably change the world, or at least this corner of it!

Do you realize the thing you are bashing is one of the things that could bring jobs to our town? Nebraska City is a very progressive/aggressive City because they have paid individuals that do nothing but promote their City to potential businesses (it appears to be working). Auburn has always been behind the eight-ball because backwards thinking people can't stand the idea of spending tax dollars as an investment in their town. One thing is for sure, our corner of the world is changing. We can either sit back and watch it die a slow pitiful death or we can try and be proactive and make some wise decisions to help its future.

Supercharged wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you realize the thing you are bashing is one of the things that could bring jobs to our town? Nebraska City is a very progressive/aggressive City because they have paid individuals that do nothing but promote their City to potential businesses (it appears to be working). Auburn has always been behind the eight-ball because backwards thinking people can't stand the idea of spending tax dollars as an investment in their town. One thing is for sure, our corner of the world is changing. We can either sit back and watch it die a slow pitiful death or we can try and be proactive and make some wise decisions to help its future.

Actually, what you're saying is not entirely true. The Auburn Development Council and the Nemaha County Development Alliance have both, in their own ways, done a great deal to try and attract larger businesses here. Unfortunately, many of the projects they have sought have been somewhat misguided, and most of the people on these committees are not professionals in this area. Couple that with a populace which feels as if it is being taken advantage of at every turn, and you have a recipe for disaster. Many of the people who could be real movers and shakers in Auburn have withdrawn from public service because they have been over-powered by the people with money or position. I can only hope things will change soon in this town, or we will find ourselves at a distinct disadvantage as the world passes us by.

citizen wrote:

<quoted text>
It is my belief that the mayor of Auburn is paid about $400 per month and the commissioners each receive about $200 a month.
Does anyone know for sure the amounts of their compensation?
A few years ago the mayor also received about $36,000 in a year from the ADC to be the City's Economic Development person.

This is one problem that Auburn has experienced. The ED position that the Mayor "accepted" wasn't advertised, and it was essentially a payout to someone that--possibly inappropriately--had undue influence in the "hiring" process. I'm concerned that the Mayor (or council members, or relatives thereof) are creating this City Administrator position as a family jobs program for somebody.

I like the Mayor personally, but he's done quite well for himself by using his influence/connections for personal enrichment.

Yes, a city administrator can be beneficial--if the person hired is actually professional through training and education.

binder wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you understand how construction and engineering work? By reading your post I would assume you don't.

Actually I do. I’ve been involved with many RFP’s and construction projects. None have been as discombobulated as what I’ve seen in Auburn, the pool & S Street to actually put a name to them.

OK you suggest hiring an administrator will solve our woes? Do you even understand what that position would do to this town? First the long term financial commitment to our city budget, which would eat up resources that other wise could be used to improve Auburn. This person would be expected to deliver when some of the population will work against them and even the very people who hired them would leave them on an island without the resources needed to get the job done. Jed W. ring a bell? Auburn can’t even get LB840 passed, why in the world do you think adding another person to the city government payroll is the answer?

The best thing that could happen to this town is for City Hall to get its act together, and instill some trust back into local government. Spending like there is no tomorrow, adding layers of bureaucracy, demeaning those who provide another point of view is not how things should be done.

We are not a big town, I think we have city envy disease running rampant throughout city hall.

We are a small town, to be sure, but I have visited many, many towns the size of Auburn that are thriving, beautiful places. I don't think it's a matter of city envy, I think it's a simple matter of people wanting a better quality of life than Auburn is offering at this point. There is a lot of civic pride here, but it isn't enough to address the shoddy, blighted face we present to the rest of the world.

Yikes.

In the Auburn Paper 11-12-09. "It was reported that informal discussions have indicated that the city administrator positon could be handled with current staff and that the city or BPW isn't looking to add personnel for this."

So, what they are saying is pay somebody more money to do a job that they already have covered........or, someone who is working there already has too much time on their hands (or time on the phone, computer, etc?) that could do this job.

NONE of those ladies in the City office have any time on their hands, that's for sure. They're already doing the work of 2-3 people now - and yes, I do know, as I'm friends with all of them.

How normal this apparently has become in our country - just pile more work on those already blessed enough to have a job. Betcha there's no wage increase for the staff workers....maybe for the 'supervisor' whoever that may be, but betcha not for the staff. When you hear companies, wall street and the media crow about higher productivity in our GDP - that means you're now doing the job of 3-4 people instead of 2.

Hmmmm wrote:

NONE of those ladies in the City office have any time on their hands, that's for sure. They're already doing the work of 2-3 people now - and yes, I do know, as I'm friends with all of them.
How normal this apparently has become in our country - just pile more work on those already blessed enough to have a job. Betcha there's no wage increase for the staff workers....maybe for the 'supervisor' whoever that may be, but betcha not for the staff. When you hear companies, wall street and the media crow about higher productivity in our GDP - that means you're now doing the job of 3-4 people instead of 2.

You are so right about this.

Here are some other thoughts I have on this subject.

A City Administrator may be good in some circumstances. At the present time, I do not trust the Mayor and his appointees in writing the job description and filling the position. We might very well end up with one of them.

Also, the City Administrator will be working for the present administration. This will be a difficult position to be in -- if the powers that be don't like the administrator's actions, he will be out of a job.