First Prev
of 2
Next Last
EASY

Riverside, IL

#22 Jan 22, 2013
thoughts or ideas wrote:
<quoted text>
Point taken, what is view on living in the city and paying the taxes they recomend.
I believe this is required by the city if I'm not mistaken. Tim was given a break on this for the time being because the housing market crashed upon his hiring. This is understandable.
Chamber Member

Lockport, IL

#23 Jan 22, 2013
I understand the argument of saying that any Administrator or other City employee should have to live in the city. It's good for people in those positions to have 'skin in the game' and to be affected by their decisions. At the end of the day, though, I think it is most important to get the most qualified candidate regardless of where they live. You can say that Lockport residents will be given preferential treatment in the hiring process, but I want the best candidate - not the most local. You really limit your candidate pool in a town our size and asking someone to make the commitment to move here would be tough when that person knows their job is only good for as long as politicians want them there.

Do you think any business in Lockport or around the area limits its hiring to only those who live in their town? Private hiring vs. public hiring is not exactly apples to apples, but I think it is important to keep your options open to all candidates.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#24 Jan 22, 2013
EASY wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe this is required by the city if I'm not mistaken. Tim was given a break on this for the time being because the housing market crashed upon his hiring. This is understandable.
Yes he was given special treatment, but he was still supposed to move here. If you take a job in the private sector and they ask you to move to that city for the job, you move live there all knowing that it could end at any given time. That is why it is so important to not ever again give special treatment, you want the job live in the same community you want to raise taxes in. Secondly lets make sure to not take other communties throwouts either. Lemont did not fight to keep him for a reason.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#25 Jan 22, 2013
Chamber Member wrote:
I understand the argument of saying that any Administrator or other City employee should have to live in the city. It's good for people in those positions to have 'skin in the game' and to be affected by their decisions. At the end of the day, though, I think it is most important to get the most qualified candidate regardless of where they live. You can say that Lockport residents will be given preferential treatment in the hiring process, but I want the best candidate - not the most local. You really limit your candidate pool in a town our size and asking someone to make the commitment to move here would be tough when that person knows their job is only good for as long as politicians want them there.
Do you think any business in Lockport or around the area limits its hiring to only those who live in their town? Private hiring vs. public hiring is not exactly apples to apples, but I think it is important to keep your options open to all candidates.
What I meant was, was that once the individual has been hired the individual needs to move into town. I have worked for three municipalities and each department head was required to move into town upon hire. In fact the city I currently work for hired a new city manager from south of I80. He was required to move into town and because of the housing market was given a low interest loan to help offset the cost of the move
Some other thoughts

Saint Charles, IL

#26 Jan 22, 2013
I think the staff can be more impartial in performing their jobs if they don't live in town. They don't have to worry about pressure from their neighbors, parents of the kids at school, some idiot down the street, etc. As for skin in the game, if they don't do a good job they get fired. How much more skin do you need?
Some One

Lemont, IL

#27 Jan 22, 2013
Some other thoughts wrote:
I think the staff can be more impartial in performing their jobs if they don't live in town. They don't have to worry about pressure from their neighbors, parents of the kids at school, some idiot down the street, etc. As for skin in the game, if they don't do a good job they get fired. How much more skin do you need?
Don't we require this of our police officers? They deal with the public the most. I think the requirements should at least be the same. The city administrator makes more money then our officers.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#28 Jan 22, 2013
Some other thoughts wrote:
I think the staff can be more impartial in performing their jobs if they don't live in town. They don't have to worry about pressure from their neighbors, parents of the kids at school, some idiot down the street, etc. As for skin in the game, if they don't do a good job they get fired. How much more skin do you need?
Yes staff members I have no problem with not living in town. Department heads though the buck stops with them and as such need to be available when needed.
Lockport local

Lockport, IL

#29 Jan 22, 2013
Some One wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't we require this of our police officers? They deal with the public the most. I think the requirements should at least be the same. The city administrator makes more money then our officers.
Our officers make less money and have less fellow officers to back them up. This has been very evident the last 20 months. We paid Bert and Ernie $50,000.00 to lose and arbitration case on police salaries. Tom, Dick and Mary voted against giving them any salary increase. I am sure that the three of them would be screaming in they didn't get proper police protection. Now Tom and Dick with Mary lying her "you know what off", want us to re-elect these "Slimys".

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#30 Jan 23, 2013
Some other thoughts wrote:
I think the staff can be more impartial in performing their jobs if they don't live in town. They don't have to worry about pressure from their neighbors, parents of the kids at school, some idiot down the street, etc. As for skin in the game, if they don't do a good job they get fired. How much more skin do you need?
We are discusing dept heads, and appointed positions. Staff is another story, although first consideration should always go to local residents who qualify for the job.
Far as just be fired is not enough skin in the game, case in point look at how long it took Fentress to resign (not man enough), unlike the police chief who announces resignation then resigns period. Then for Fentress to return after months just to vote on another give away to Robinson for his last hurrah, is why you need to live in the city. If months go by after you vote on something or drag out your resignation, alot of financial, and other damages can happen that might not be changeable. Far as housing markets and other excuses, I don't but that, for in the private sector some companies, again tell you here is the job, you want you live here. Look at all the recomondations put thru, yes voted on by council, but again they are following recomondations (just like recomondations from Robinson), that have cost the taxpayers money and for what.
Lockport Opinion

Lockport, IL

#31 Jan 23, 2013
EJCDad wrote:
<quoted text>
What I meant was, was that once the individual has been hired the individual needs to move into town. I have worked for three municipalities and each department head was required to move into town upon hire. In fact the city I currently work for hired a new city manager from south of I80. He was required to move into town and because of the housing market was given a low interest loan to help offset the cost of the move
If this practice would limit our prospects, I don't think it is a good move.

The best candidate should be chosen, regardless of their current or future location. If you tell them they have to move here, with our revolving door and backwards city council - minority and majority, no one will want the job.
Jim

Lockport, IL

#32 Feb 12, 2013
Good Luck in your new position.
Mike Lockport

Lockport, IL

#33 Feb 13, 2013
Best of luck Tim you have a long successful future ahead of yourself

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#34 Feb 13, 2013
Lockport Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>If this practice would limit our prospects, I don't think it is a good move.
The best candidate should be chosen, regardless of their current or future location. If you tell them they have to move here, with our revolving door and backwards city council - minority and majority, no one will want the job.
I would have to disagree with that. The revolving door nature, is just that it's politics. Once you decide to take that type of job and make it your career choice, then you must be prepared to go from city to city constantly moving. OTherwise Chicago would have this type of policy either, you live in Chicago if you want to be fireman for crying out loud. In order to make good decisions for that job, you must have some personal stake in that decision as well. OTherwise next thing you know will let the mayor won't have to live here, your alderman won't have to live here (oh waits they just tried to pull that off and lost as well), bottom line you should not have any influence or decision making authority unless it directly effects you and your family also. If this doesn't meet your criteria in running cities and always having to move, then possibly that is not your career choice to have taken.

In Tim's case though, this will be the best thing for the city, remember Lemont, did not loose any sleep either when he left. I know I will not loose any sleep with him gone to. Neither will the next town and the town after that.

Do I wish him ill feelings in the next town, no, just thank god he is gone. One step in moving forward, next is April 9th.
lockport

Lockport, IL

#35 Feb 13, 2013
if someone is going to run the day to day ops of this city, mabey they should live in this town 40-50 years. same as mayor, alderman etc!

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#36 Feb 13, 2013
lockport wrote:
if someone is going to run the day to day ops of this city, mabey they should live in this town 40-50 years. same as mayor, alderman etc!
You don't have live here 40-50 yrs, but actually live here is a start

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Shorewood Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Mailman who delivers to downtown businesses? (Oct '16) 14 hr Justin86 3
News Will County hears plan for 2,200-acre business ... 20 hr Robert Thomas 1
News Midlothian woman accused of hate crime at marga... Tue Midlo sucks balls 1
another one bites the dust in Lockport Sep 18 illinois 3
Investors never invest their own money (Apr '11) Sep 17 Halloween 10,911
News Do you find this sign offensive? Sep 17 Pope Ben Out To P... 23
Mayor Streit Doing Great Job (Jun '14) Sep 14 Semismoke 19

Shorewood Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Shorewood Mortgages