Yonkers Insider: Letter to the Editor from Frank Spotorno.

 

In the first years of a new administration, it ‘may seem’ counterproductive appointing new officials that serve in the best interest of the voting public. Serving on the board of a start-up administration, some say having the experience is prestigious and outweighs typically labor-intensive finding appointee candidates to replace the outgoing administration staff when a new administration is installed. Others would say It can be difficult to find qualified appointee’s who possess the requisite passion for the cause, understanding of the mission, and willingness to work. But that has never been a valid cause why we shouldn’t elect a new top executive who will appoint qualified individuals that may offer better leadership skills when appointing new individuals with the qualified skills that may better comprehend our interest, concerns, but more importantly understand our hardships. Sometimes staying in office far too long one may believe there is more to do……even so when our budget and fiscal responsibility to residents has increased while our services has declined, especially when it comes to our quality of life issues. Without change, it leaves the voters any new visionary ideas, broadening our horizon thus non focusing on developing new concepts. There are many positive aspects of term limits that outweigh the negative aspects to non-term limits. For example, when a new administration is elected with term limits, a new mayor is better able to attract active and involved members of the community who are willing to make a long-term commitment, working longer hours to ensure the new administration will succeed on its campain promises. While the incumbent administration will lead us to believe It can be difficult to find qualified candidates who possess the requisite passion for the cause, understanding of the job, rather than the mission, and willingness to work. That’s not so, especially when individuals and appointees are imbedded in an administration that have been there for three (3) terms, 12 years. Having been there so long, these individuals no longer sees their positions as a mission but rather a job, thus becoming complacent. I seen it for myself. And that’s why I believe it’s not a valid issue why we shouldn’t look for new leadership at the executive branch, the mayorship. Appointing new candidates to various positions may have equal to better leadership skills. They have a better comprehension when it comes to our interest, concerns, but more importantly understanding our hardships. With new leadership, It now become a mission to explore every opportunity rather a job to better serve the public. After working for any administration for twelve years, most become imbedded in their positions that leads them to complacency. Sometimes staying in office far too long one may believe there is more to do……even so when our budget and fiscal responsibility to residents has increased, while our quality of life has lessoned, it leaves the voters without any new visionary ideas, broadening our horizon thus focusing on developing new ideas. There are many positive aspects of term limits that outweigh the negative aspects. For example, an organization with term limits may be better able to attract active and involved members of the community who are able to make a long-term commitment to a new administration, many working longer hours. Term limits allow busy executives and community leaders to serve the organization and bring fresh new ideas. This is something that they may not otherwise have been able to share had they been required to make a longer-term commitment. Boards with term limits are rated by chief executives as more effective than those without term limits. This could be due to the fact that there is no perpetual concentration of power within a small group. The group dynamic is constantly changing and new people and ideas are constantly being introduced. This prevents stagnation resulting from a lack of board turnover. Also, recruiting new members may become easier with a board that is fresh and new. New members will feel less threatened by the long-standing members who may be less open to new people and ideas. Moreover, it will be easier to remove passive, ineffective, or troublesome board members. This enables the organization to replace them with active and motivated new members. Finally, term limits allow for an enlargement of the circle of followers. Old directors will be replaced by new ones but will be able to stay active in the organization. As a result, it creates a balance of continuity and turnover. Frank J Spotorno Yonkers, NY