Directly Elected Mayor

Max Powers · 14-05-2019 2:50pm

I'm still not made up mind, one hand thinking could be some populist idiot or else it could be a start of something good, a focal force for good, also, is it worth a try because what we have at the moment is not working out great for Waterford is it.

Max Powers · 14-05-2019 2:50pm

I'm still not made up mind, one hand thinking could be some populist idiot or else it could be a start of something good, a focal force for good, also, is it worth a try because what we have at the moment is not working out great for Waterford is it. Be good to get along to info evening tomorrow

Deiseen · 14-05-2019 3:26pm

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Rob Cass playing the FOMO card on the media today trouble is I hear nothing in his words to back up the claim. It feels like hit and hope.

I'd rather hit and hope than what we have now which is "just nope"

fricatus · 14-05-2019 4:10pm

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Rob Cass playing the FOMO card...

You're really trivialising it with that comment. What do we give out about incessantly on here other than missing out?

We're forever complaining (and rightly so) about having no university, no 24/7 cardiac care, and no support for our airport, all of which are things that Cork and Limerick have.

Yet when we're presented with an opportunity to move up a step from just being another county town and join the same club as Cork and Limerick, we're going to do what, throw away the chance? Why?

Deise Vu · 14-05-2019 5:02pm

fricatus wrote: »

You're really trivialising it with that comment. What do we give out about incessantly on here other than missing out?

We're forever complaining (and rightly so) about having no university, no 24/7 cardiac care, and no support for our airport, all of which are things that Cork and Limerick have.

Yet when we're presented with an opportunity to move up a step from just being another county town and join the same club as Cork and Limerick, we're going to do what, throw away the chance? Why?

As stated above I am in the undecided camp, leaning towards no. My reason for that is we are buying a pig in poke here. Other posters have pointed out that Michael Walsh has done a great job as Manager. He is a Civil Engineer and a very experienced administrator completely on top of his job. We will end up paying an extra €500K to put Mr or Mrs X above him. There's no extra budget and we don't know if Mr(s) X will have any qualifications or experience but we do know, as is the nature of these things, he/she will have to sell his vision to the electorate. Or put another way, promise goodies. We know Sinn Fein and PPP think water is a human right that costs nothing and that everyone is "entitled" to a house. Where is the revenue going to come from to pay for all the existing freebies plus the election goodies?

I am at a loss to see the gain to be honest.

Harry Palmr · 14-05-2019 5:06pm

Which is why I'm a sceptic. It's all promises with very little backing it.

The idea posited above that it's like a permanent minister is balderdash

hardybuck · 14-05-2019 5:14pm

Deise Vu wrote: »

As stated above I am in the undecided camp, leaning towards no. My reason for that is we are buying a pig in poke here. Other posters have pointed out that Michael Walsh has done a great job as Manager. He is a Civil Engineer and a very experienced administrator completely on top of his job. We will end up paying an extra €500K to put Mr or Mrs X above him. There's no extra budget and we don't know if Mr(s) X will have any qualifications or experience but we do know, as is the nature of these things, he/she will have to sell his vision to the electorate. Or put another way, promise goodies. We know Sinn Fein and PPP think water is a human right that costs nothing and that everyone is "entitled" to a house. Where is the revenue going to come from to pay for all the existing freebies plus the election goodies?

I am at a loss to see the gain to be honest.

In addition to what you've said, this person needs to go in for a 5 year term. Can you imagine what the people of Waterford would do to the local person, living in Waterford all the week and available to them, who promised them goodies but then couldn't deliver on the promises?

You diminish the role of potentially highly qualified administrators and replace them with who knows what.

Harry Palmr · 14-05-2019 6:06pm

hardybuck wrote: »

You diminish the role of potentially highly qualified administrators and replace them with who knows what.

I'd expect the most prominent candidates to be ex TD's, senators, would-be TD's, senators and MEP's, with a scattering "personality" figures and maybe the odd retired business mogul or entrepreneur.

Max Powers · 14-05-2019 10:05pm

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/views/ourview/directly-elected-mayors-the-case-has-not-been-made-922248.html

Good article above, it didnt work in England, see hartlepool example as an extreme sample of what can go wrong.
Take a punt on something that has not been defined and what specifics there are indicate no major advantages (taking from CEO or just another layer).some I think are hoping that it could all be great in the end but you would not take such a chance with your own personal important stuff. Some of the quotes in article from government... 'unclear', etc are worrying.the cost..no faith that govt would maintain any extra money after first mayor, 2.5m over 5 years we don't have. If say limerick went for it and it actually worked, maybe we could then go for it, who knows.one thing that could be a positive is (not sure) is that any policy this mayor tried to introduce might need councillors approval, I don't think he/she could dictate, that begs question though, what the f will they do.

robtri · 14-05-2019 10:38pm

I dont see what a directly elected Mayor will do for the city
the new mayor is just assuming powers from the city Manager and such, powers that already exist here in the City.

As the role will elected on a four year cycle it will be a very populous run office, a lot of the hard decisions will be pushed out as the new mayor wont want to upset his voters and loose his job come next election.

where will the money come from? probably from the city coffers, so what services will be cut to pay for this role?

just not sure the benefit to the city is..

and doing it because the other cities are ... is the most ridiculous argument yet

Cabaal · 15-05-2019 8:00am

robtri wrote: »

I dont see what a directly elected Mayor will do for the city
the new mayor is just assuming powers from the city Manager and such, powers that already exist here in the City.

As the role will elected on a four year cycle it will be a very populous run office, a lot of the hard decisions will be pushed out as the new mayor wont want to upset his voters and loose his job come next election.

where will the money come from? probably from the city coffers, so what services will be cut to pay for this role?

just not sure the benefit to the city is..

and doing it because the other cities are ... is the most ridiculous argument yet

but.but....they'll have a gold chain and stuff

It seems shiny things distract some people easily.
I'd certainly agree with your points,

Max Powers · 15-05-2019 10:59am

A new mayors policies I think would need to be approved by existing councillors, I suppose this is a bit of fail safe on a nutter trying to introduce crazy stuff.

hardybuck · 15-05-2019 12:02pm

I'm really surprised, and slightly worried, with the lack of national debate about this topic, along with the divorce question.

I wonder if this is a result of:

- Reform fatigue - think of the massive job involved in the recent referenda

- Brexit - this has absorbed so much time and energy that these issues would have taken much more prominence in other years

91wx763 · 16-05-2019 1:04am

Max Powers wrote: »

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/views/ourview/directly-elected-mayors-the-case-has-not-been-made-922248.html

Good article above, it didnt work in England, see hartlepool example as an extreme sample of what can go wrong.
Take a punt on something that has not been defined and what specifics there are indicate no major advantages (taking from CEO or just another layer).some I think are hoping that it could all be great in the end but you would not take such a chance with your own personal important stuff. Some of the quotes in article from government... 'unclear', etc are worrying.the cost..no faith that govt would maintain any extra money after first mayor, 2.5m over 5 years we don't have. If say limerick went for it and it actually worked, maybe we could then go for it, who knows.one thing that could be a positive is (not sure) is that any policy this mayor tried to introduce might need councillors approval, I don't think he/she could dictate, that begs question though, what the f will they do.

I'm disappointed that the Cork Examiner picked that one instance that turned into farce. Google Hartlepool and monkey. I've been there and it is decrepit, no future for people after the coal and industry finished.

Where in Waterford (despite what some here think and I am a Wexford man) there is a big future. Do it. It's a pity that the incumbent councillors who are feeling the heat can't man/woman up and make a compromise. Place has had feck all since that big bridge and Martina Cullen. Get a grip. My bridge to New Ross is nearly finished, Waterford has had feck all for ages. Now there's a chance.

Wanderer78 · 16-05-2019 6:48am

91wx763 wrote:

Where in Waterford (despite what some here think and I am a Wexford man) there is a big future. Do it. It's a pity that the incumbent councillors who are feeling the heat can't man/woman up and make a compromise. Place has had feck all since that big bridge and Martina Cullen. Get a grip. My bridge to New Ross is nearly finished, Waterford has had feck all for ages. Now there's a chance.

Will you be charging much for the use of your bridge?

Cabaal · 16-05-2019 7:40am

hardybuck wrote: »

I'm really surprised, and slightly worried, with the lack of national debate about this topic, along with the divorce question.

Re divorce, nobody is hard lobbying about divorce for two reasons

1. They know it'll pass and rightly so
2. Even the religious fruitloops know they would be fighting a battle they can't win if they publically oppose it, they've already wasted tonnes of money on marriage and repeal refs

Max Powers · 16-05-2019 9:07am

hardybuck wrote: »

I'm really surprised, and slightly worried, with the lack of national debate about this topic, along with the divorce question.

I wonder if this is a result of:

- Reform fatigue - think of the massive job involved in the recent referenda

- Brexit - this has absorbed so much time and energy that these issues would have taken much more prominence in other years

Public info and questions event on last night in tower hotel. It was poorly enough attended which is a sign of public engagement. it was advertised. I'm slightly more positive on it now, the cost is still a big issue for me, anything from 1.3 to 2.5m for five years of mayor.
Mayor program would need to be approved by councillors.
Councillors can and public can with 20% of county signatures eject the mayor.
There was no real big and clear thing that says, the elected mayor could do X which would be of massive benefit to Waterford, its kind of a leap of faith that it could be.
It would mean removal of silly season stuff we have now of two mayors and deputy. However, the elected mayor could appoint a deputy, not sure, don't think there will be increased salary for deputy.
Like a lot of this, there are grey areas where certain things have not been considered yet.

Harry Palmr · 16-05-2019 9:25am

There was no real big and clear thing that says, the elected mayor could do X which would be of massive benefit to Waterford, its kind of a leap of faith that it could be.

As I expected to be honest. I can't find a compelling argument for the role. Was there a Q & A and if so what was the tone, positive or sceptical?

Wanderer78 · 16-05-2019 9:32am

Max Powers wrote: »

Public info and questions event on last night in tower hotel. It was poorly enough attended which is a sign of public engagement. it was advertised. I'm slightly more positive on it now, the cost is still a big issue for me, anything from 1.3 to 2.5m for five years of mayor.
Mayor program would need to be approved by councillors.
Councillors can and public can with 20% of county signatures eject the mayor.
There was no real big and clear thing that says, the elected mayor could do X which would be of massive benefit to Waterford, its kind of a leap of faith that it could be.
It would mean removal of silly season stuff we have now of two mayors and deputy. However, the elected mayor could appoint a deputy, not sure, don't think there will be increased salary for deputy.
Like a lot of this, there are grey areas where certain things have not been considered yet.

would have liked to have attended myself

hardybuck · 16-05-2019 9:35am

Cabaal wrote: »

Re divorce, nobody is hard lobbying about divorce for two reasons

1. They know it'll pass and rightly so
2. Even the religious fruitloops know they would be fighting a battle they can't win if they publically oppose it, they've already wasted tonnes of money on marriage and repeal refs

While I think there is probably fairly broad agreement within society that four years is too long, the referendum doesn't give the public an opportunity to have their say on how long might be appropriate.

A Yes outcome will give the Oireachtas full automony to decide how long on the public's behalf. As long as people are aware of that and are happy with that - no problems whatsoever. Are people aware of that, or are they thinking a vote for yes equals two years?

Poor awareness equals poor decision making.

Max Powers · 16-05-2019 9:45am

Harry Palmr wrote: »

As I expected to be honest. I can't find a compelling argument for the role. Was there a Q & A and if so what was the tone, positive or sceptical?

Was questions yes. I suppose like all these things some people are there to give out, including one nutter who had a problem with being asked to put his phone on silent, unbelievable.in general, tone was a bit sceptical, what else would you expect, no one would go if they were 100% made up behind it. It was respectable though in the main. Sad to see very few younger people at it, I mean people under say 40 years old.

Harry Palmr · 16-05-2019 10:08am

There's always one nutter! I take your point about the self-selecting cohort, I probably should have added something about constructive engagement with the idea or not

Max Powers · 16-05-2019 11:09am

Harry Palmr wrote: »

There's always one nutter! I take your point about the self-selecting cohort, I probably should have added something about constructive engagement with the idea or not

Yeah, to be fair, people were engaged, I'd say most went along to learn a bit more, like myself

Gillman1998 · 18-05-2019 11:26pm

Max Powers wrote: »

Public info and questions event on last night in tower hotel. It was poorly enough attended which is a sign of public engagement. it was advertised. I'm slightly more positive on it now, the cost is still a big issue for me, anything from 1.3 to 2.5m for five years of mayor.
Mayor program would need to be approved by councillors.
Councillors can and public can with 20% of county signatures eject the mayor.
There was no real big and clear thing that says, the elected mayor could do X which would be of massive benefit to Waterford, its kind of a leap of faith that it could be.
It would mean removal of silly season stuff we have now of two mayors and deputy. However, the elected mayor could appoint a deputy, not sure, don't think there will be increased salary for deputy.
Like a lot of this, there are grey areas where certain things have not been considered yet.

Thanks Max, I couldn’t be there but perhaps you picked up on one point. My understanding is that the elected Mayor would not need a majority to pass budgets etc, was this mentioned at all?

91wx763 · 18-05-2019 11:37pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

91wx763 wrote:

Where in Waterford (despite what some here think and I am a Wexford man) there is a big future. Do it. It's a pity that the incumbent councillors who are feeling the heat can't man/woman up and make a compromise. Place has had feck all since that big bridge and Martina Cullen. Get a grip. My bridge to New Ross is nearly finished, Waterford has had feck all for ages. Now there's a chance.

Will you be charging much for the use of your bridge?

"The road will be toll free, as will the Enniscorthy to Gorey bypass."

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi5hpSFkabiAhWQA2MBHWNsA5EQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https://www.independent.ie/regionals/newrossstandard/news/new-barrow-bridge-will-be-a-tourist-attraction-36672570.html&psig=AOvVaw2W_nCOWjgVEFNdOnOqopkE&ust=1558305109218000

91wx763 · 18-05-2019 11:40pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

91wx763 wrote:

Where in Waterford (despite what some here think and I am a Wexford man) there is a big future. Do it. It's a pity that the incumbent councillors who are feeling the heat can't man/woman up and make a compromise. Place has had feck all since that big bridge and Martina Cullen. Get a grip. My bridge to New Ross is nearly finished, Waterford has had feck all for ages. Now there's a chance.

Will you be charging much for the use of your bridge?

"The road will be toll free, as will the Enniscorthy to Gorey bypass"
https://www.independent.ie/regionals/newrossstandard/news/new-barrow-bridge-will-be-a-tourist-attraction-36672570.html

Harry Palmr · 21-05-2019 10:24am

Being discussed on WLR right now with Paudy Coffee, plenty of scepticism about the role on the text feed - essentially reflecting the view here - why split powers from the county manager.

IspeakcozIcan · 23-05-2019 7:50pm

Discussion with Mary Roche and Dr. Michael Tiernan discussing directly elected mayors on Morning Ireland this morning in Waterford.

I really like Mary Roche I have to say. It's such a pity she is not running again.

https://soundcloud.com/morning-ireland/a-debate-from-waterford-on-directly-elected-mayors

Hoping this passes, but I'm feeling it won't. A lot of my friends feel very strongly about the money, which to me is a non-issue.

Gillman1998 · 23-05-2019 7:56pm

IspeakcozIcan wrote: »

Discussion with Mary Roche and Dr. Michael Tiernan discussing directly elected mayors on Morning Ireland this morning in Waterford.

I really like Mary Roche I have to say. It's such a pity she is not running again.

https://soundcloud.com/morning-ireland/a-debate-from-waterford-on-directly-elected-mayors

Hoping this passes, but I'm feeling it won't. A lot of my friends feel very strongly about the money, which to me is a non-issue.

Dermot Keyes was saying today on Twitter that the extra costs are being covered by central government, who knows anymore? I’ll vote in favour of it.

coastwatch · 23-05-2019 8:38pm

The estimated cost of a directly elected Mayor for Waterford is €450k per annum,
(Cork €345k, Limerick €430k).

The cost to be met by Waterford City and County Council's resources
(Page 5 of Guide to Plebiscite.. delivered to households).
How is the additional income to pay for it to be raised, commercial rates, property tax, parking charges?

See FAQ in link for breakdown of costs
https://www.housing.gov.ie/local-government/voting/plebiscites-directly-elected-mayors-frequently-asked-questions

It's a luxury Waterford can do without for now.

It's a No from me.

invara · 23-05-2019 9:14pm

coastwatch wrote: »

The estimated cost of a directly elected Mayor for Waterford is €450k per annum,
(Cork €345k, Limerick €430k).

The cost to be met by Waterford City and County Council's resources
(Page 5 of Guide to Plebiscite.. delivered to households).
How is the additional income to pay for it to be raised, commercial rates, property tax, parking charges?

See FAQ in link for breakdown of costs
https://www.housing.gov.ie/local-government/voting/plebiscites-directly-elected-mayors-frequently-asked-questions

It's a luxury Waterford can do without for now.

It's a No from me.

Today, on Deise Fm WLR Simon Convey said explicitly that no additional cost would fall on the council as the extra costs would be covered by the €10m Local Govt Reform Fund. If money is your only concern he could not be clearer. The plebiscite is not binding, and if it goes through we will have a mayor to push urban services (hospital, higher education, airport, ports, roads etc....), to push for the things we need and current politics cannot deliver.

kuang1 · 23-05-2019 10:07pm

invara wrote: »

... to push for the things we need and current politics cannot deliver.

Yeah, see, this part I don't buy.
I've seen/heard/read nothing to persuade me that a publicly elected mayor will have any worthwhile NEW political clout.
It's frequently implied, but almost like a nod or a wink.

It's a no for me.

Captain Red Beard · 24-05-2019 1:50am

So keep things the same but expect different results? The definition of insanity as Einstein posters say.

Wanderer78 · 24-05-2019 5:59am

Captain Red Beard wrote:

So keep things the same but expect different results? The definition of insanity as Einstein posters say.

I completely agree with this statement, radical change is needed for things to change, but its important to realise such changes may also have negative effects, but sometimes they're worth it, its a yes for me, but I suspect the outcome will be a no. Get out voting folks

kuang1 · 24-05-2019 7:38am

Captain Red Beard wrote: »

So keep things the same but expect different results? The definition of insanity as Einstein posters say.

And you'd be content to waste our resources by loading our guns with blanks?

Please.

Wanderer78 · 24-05-2019 7:40am

kuang1 wrote: »

And you'd be content to waste our resources by loading our guns with blanks?

Please.

what resources are being wasted?

Bards · 24-05-2019 8:53am

kuang1 wrote: »

Captain Red Beard wrote: »

So keep things the same but expect different results? The definition of insanity as Einstein posters say.

And you'd be content to waste our resources by loading our guns with blanks?

Please.

Suggest something else then

kuang1 · 24-05-2019 9:01am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

what resources are being wasted?

I'll save us both some time: let's pretend there's no new cost financially to having a mayor.

The resources that would still be wasted would be:
Posters and pamphlets printed in their thousands, radio air time, newspaper column inches, canvassing (the immeasurable human effort by candidates and their teams time-wise and energy-wise, the petrol/diesel of ferrying these people around)...

All of these resources (especially the human ones) could be applied to other endeavours in the political scene that would be more fruitful.(e.g. A general election.)

kuang1 · 24-05-2019 9:02am

Bards wrote: »

Suggest something else then

Done.

Wanderer78 · 24-05-2019 9:03am

kuang1 wrote: »

I'll save us both some time: let's pretend there's no new cost financially to having a mayor.

The resources that would still be wasted would be:
Posters and pamphlets printed in their thousands, radio air time, newspaper column inches, canvassing (the immeasurable human effort by candidates and their teams time-wise and energy-wise, the petrol/diesel of ferrying these people around)...

All of these resources (especially the human ones) could be applied to other endeavours in the political scene that would be more fruitful.(e.g. A general election.)

fair points, but if we had a democratically elected mayor, would that not make our political system more democratic?

kuang1 · 24-05-2019 9:23am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

fair points, but if we had a democratically elected mayor, would that not make our political system more democratic?

Sure. But that's not nearly enough of a reason for me to vote yes on this.
I would vote yes had I been convinced that actual change will be effected.

This has not happened in this instance.

Wanderer78 · 24-05-2019 9:27am

kuang1 wrote: »

Sure. But that's not nearly enough of a reason for me to vote yes on this.
I would vote yes had I been convinced that actual change will be effected.

This has not happened in this instance.

i guess it depends on what you define as change, and how does one guarantee change?

kuang1 · 24-05-2019 9:32am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

i guess it depends on what you define as change, and how does one guarantee change?

Simply put, you can't guarantee it.
But you could clearly outline the mayor's role and who he might "have access to". i.e. Will he have quarterly sit downs with the minister for x, y or z to discuss a, b & c.

Wanderer78 · 24-05-2019 9:35am

kuang1 wrote: »

Simply put, you can't guarantee it.
But you could clearly outline the mayor's role and who he might "have access to". i.e. Will he have quarterly sit downs with the minister for x, y or z to discuss a, b & c.

completely agree, change can never be guaranteed, but as others have said, by changing nothing, you more than likely guarantee no change, this would be a significant change in approach, it 'might' just succeed

kuang1 · 24-05-2019 9:53am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

completely agree, change can never be guaranteed, but as others have said, by changing nothing, you more than likely guarantee no change, this would be a significant change in approach, it 'might' just succeed

Yes I completely accept that perspective.

I guess it comes down to personal preference for where we all would prefer our political resources distributed.
I'd rather keep our powder dry on this one, in the hope that we can get things right with our candidates in the next GE.

Wanderer78 · 24-05-2019 9:58am

kuang1 wrote: »

Yes I completely accept that perspective.

I guess it comes down to personal preference for where we all would prefer our political resources distributed.
I'd rather keep our powder dry on this one, in the hope that we can get things right with our candidates in the next GE.

the next ge will be interesting, but i suspect not much will really change, something is going wrong with western political systems, i personally believe we have allowed these systems to be de-powered, effectively creating political systems that cant really change much

fricatus · 24-05-2019 11:24am

If you disagree with this proposal, fine, vote against it, but if your only reason for opposing it is the cost, then you really need to stand back and look at that cost in the overall context of public spending. It is absolute peanuts when compared to literally anything else that we spend money on, such as the National Broadband Plan.

The money will be coming from a Local Government Reform fund according to Simon Coveney the other day, so we don't have to cut back here or raise property taxes, rates, etc. Even if we did have to fund it ourselves, then assuming the post costs half a million a year, that's less than the cost of a pint per capita. And for that, you get someone whose job it is to promote Waterford, understand our concerns, and represent those concerns at national level, in a way that is not happening now.

What have we got to lose?

hardybuck · 24-05-2019 11:39am

I think the funding aspect has been cleared up.

Now it's a case of do you want a CEO like Michael Walsh to retain his current scope to do things, or would you prefer a politician, probably one of or local Councillors, to assume a number of his responsibilities.

kuang1 · 24-05-2019 11:54am

fricatus wrote: »

... whose job it is to promote Waterford, understand our concerns, and represent those concerns at national level, in a way that is not happening now.

Your post is sound except for this part. And it's the crux of it for me.

How exactly are our concerns going to be represented at a National level?
I haven't seen this answered clearly at all.

fricatus · 24-05-2019 12:03pm

hardybuck wrote: »

I think the funding aspect has been cleared up.

Now it's a case of do you want a CEO like Michael Walsh to retain his current scope to do things, or would you prefer a politician, probably one of or local Councillors, to assume a number of his responsibilities.

If that politician is chosen by all of us (not just by one area or through a pact), then I'm in favour of it. I don't think we'll elect a dope, or a monkey, or whatever you're having yourself, contrary to what some people think.

Michael Walsh does a great job, but the next guy or gal mightn't, so a democratic counter-balance is worthwhile. Also, a city manager is not a public figure who can stand up and complain about stuff on TV or at some national conference, in the way that a mayor with an individual democratic mandate can.

Disappointing BTW to see that this plebiscite will be the last of the four counts - apparently the boxes won't be opened until Monday morning!

Directly Elected Mayor

Comments