Vote no on 1

To the editor:

As a past assemblyman (serving as a deputy mayor for two years) along with a past assemblyman who once served the borough as an assemblyman under a strong mayor system, together we are concerned about Proposition I and the move to change our form of government without a lot of information to the voter.

While the argument is citizens need a stronger voice, consider: Is your voice stronger with a mayor who represents 90,000 residents or is it stronger with your assemblyperson who represents 12,000 residents? We want an assembly who controls the manager to advocate for our concerns.

To us it seems a no-brainer. We need to vote no. As business people, we do not need another layer added to the bureaucracy. Who wants to pay more taxes for a mayor and a manager, each of whose salary could reach six figures?

With a strong mayor, you must pay that person enough to be full time. (This alone limits the possible candidates.) Do we want only someone who is retired — independently wealthy — unemployed or having a business they can vacate for three years without having a conflict of interest?

We need a professional manager chosen by the seven elected assemblymen, who can check the background and qualifications of a candidate to run a $300 million borough budget, not a mayor who can hire or fire people as he or she pleases this invites cronyism.

This is a non-partisan issue. This is a question about responsible government. Join us in voting No on Prop 1! No means less government. No means less taxes. No means no cronyism. Vote No on Oct. 5.

Janet Kincaid

Paul Huppert

Palmer