Nonsense leads to turnover
Re: City council, mayor
The current standoff between the mayor and city council needs the full attention of voters this election season. It is both stunning and infuriating that the mayor is in a position to have questions over his duties and responsibilities.
The response from the council has failed to instill any confidence in their handling of the matter. Many of us in the real world have worked under policies or directives that specifically outline our work duties and expectations.
Doing so is typically known to be necessary and responsible. It increases productivity and can be used to hold someone accountable who is not performing their duties.
The fact that a councilman holds a job in which his duties are not prescribed in writing is irrelevant. In addition, using former Gillette Mayor Mike Enzi as an example of a man who didn’t need written directives is utter nonsense.
The Gillette resolution dictating the duties of a city administrator was passed in 1981. Enzi had already been mayor of Gillette since 1975 and was probably instrumental in drafting and passing the resolution.
So, yes, Enzi knew what he was doing. However, the circumstances surrounding our current mayor are completely different since our city administrator ordinance was just passed prior to him becoming mayor.
Since the mayor is in a position of setting the agenda and leading the direction the city council goes in, perhaps it would be prudent to actually listen to him and set his duties and responsibilities in stone.
If some of those duties are already outlined by either state law or city ordinance, then that should make the task that much easier.
Make this a priority and get it done so everyone involved can move on to the business of making Sheridan an even better place to live.
If this nonsense continues, it is probably going to result in a massive turnover in those serving on the council, and deservedly so.
Families separated here, too
Re: Immigrants and Sheridan
We have been watching with great interest about the children and families at the border. We have heard the reactions of Congress men and women, and experts about the long-term damage of the severe trauma being imposed on children by being taken from their parents.
What about all the children in the United States that are traumatized by being taken from their families by DFS/CPS? It happens here, in Sheridan, Wyoming, and we are speaking from experience.
We think of all the families here, and wish there was the same outrage by the injustice and damage done to thousands of children kept from their families. The irreversible damage to these children is outrageous in our country.
We will always believe there are children who need to be protected from harm, but we believe the money spent to keep families apart should be spent on keeping families together.
Julie and Parke Mitchell