Notable, given the headline, is that the city manager also quit, likely due to the mayor mixing personal funds and city business while not consulting with the city’s legal counsel. While I applaud the mayor’s willingness to apply Flock methodology to Flock’s constituency, I’m not celebrating this one like I would be if it wasn’t under such defective circumstances.
You need 4 officers for 24/7 coverage; one spare, and one manager seems reasonable, iff having a PD is reasonable. Probably makes more sense to make use of the county sherrif rather than having a PD if there's not some issue with the sherrif.
City manager would be in charge of city business (building and occupancy permits, inspections, billing for services, etc), whereas the Mayor (and/or city council) makes the political decisions (setting the policies the manager executes, etc)
It seems a bit silly to be incorporated with less than a thousand people, but I don't know the local history. If there's not that much to do, the city manager is likely part time, and the mayor probably does mayoral stuff a couple times a month. (Quick monthly meeting + maybe show up to a community event or three)
The "city" structure is an administrative choice and it's super common down south to have tiny towns that run as a city.
A 6-person department is just about the minimum for 24/7 coverage. IDK why they have a department at all though. Just let the state police or sheriff deal with it IMO.
Notable, given the headline, is that the city manager also quit, likely due to the mayor mixing personal funds and city business while not consulting with the city’s legal counsel. While I applaud the mayor’s willingness to apply Flock methodology to Flock’s constituency, I’m not celebrating this one like I would be if it wasn’t under such defective circumstances.
Why does a village of 772 people need a mayor, a "city" manager, a police chief and 5 police officers?
You need 4 officers for 24/7 coverage; one spare, and one manager seems reasonable, iff having a PD is reasonable. Probably makes more sense to make use of the county sherrif rather than having a PD if there's not some issue with the sherrif.
City manager would be in charge of city business (building and occupancy permits, inspections, billing for services, etc), whereas the Mayor (and/or city council) makes the political decisions (setting the policies the manager executes, etc)
It seems a bit silly to be incorporated with less than a thousand people, but I don't know the local history. If there's not that much to do, the city manager is likely part time, and the mayor probably does mayoral stuff a couple times a month. (Quick monthly meeting + maybe show up to a community event or three)
You dont need extra manager to 5 cops force in a city with 700 people. You dont need 24/7 coverage of active duty cop either.
The "city" structure is an administrative choice and it's super common down south to have tiny towns that run as a city.
A 6-person department is just about the minimum for 24/7 coverage. IDK why they have a department at all though. Just let the state police or sheriff deal with it IMO.
I'm from a town like this and the reason they have a PD is to provide a sinecure for a half dozen former school bullies.
>Just let the state police or sheriff deal with it IMO.
One guess: response times that measure in minutes not hours.
It is also worth noting that county governments have limited powers for things like building codes (at least in Texas).