Regarding the Saturday article, “Snohomish mayor happy being ‘weak’ “: The current city manager, who claims almost 30 years of public sector employment (14 years at Snohomish), believes, along with the mayor and council, that he has given the citizens a stellar performance. I disagree. Here are some of the problems:

1. The city wasted $300,000 trying to build a senior center on top of a known abandoned pioneer/Indian cemetery at Cypress Avenue.

2. Utility rates and charges have risen significantly every year since 2002 (contrary to the mayor’s stated goal of “reducing” sewer and water rates.)

3. Documents show the city manager’s budget is almost a $1 million a year, including legal costs and fees. His salary and benefits are equivalent to Mill Creek’s city manager’s. Mill Creek has twice the population and per capita income, and its city manager supervises the police department. The Snohomish County Sheriff’s Office manages Snohomish’s police department.

4. The manager and city council have long had a symbiotic relationship. For example, in 2014, the manager and public works director pitched the concept of a $2.5 million council chamber/meeting room at First and Cedar, complete with an artist’s rendition. Not one council member questioned the cost or necessity and all members supported the concept. After an outcry of public opinion, the manager and mayor backed away from the project.

5. For most of 2014 and 2015 the manager convinced the council to almost double the city’s share of property taxes with his proposed Metropolitan Parks District. In August, 70 percent of the Snohomish electorate rejected the idea.

Snohomish citizens should be allowed to decide in November whether or not they can directly elect a “strong” mayor who by law lives in the city and who will manage city departments with or without the help of an administrator.

Morgan Davis

Snohomish