Yes, we do need a city manager

I am amazed at Mayor Diebold's lack of cool when he was cornered by the Advocate on the matter of undone employee evaluations - evaluations specified in his own written management policies.

That only 60 percent of city employees have been evaluated was questioned in a really fine piece of reporting by Amy Picard. The mayor's defense for such sloppy administration? That Council president is gunning for a couple top administrators.

Bloggers such as Rhonda4thWard in her May 18th Advocate blog entry have already thrashed Diebold for such a response and Mr. Guthrie, council president, has yet to kick the mayor's public patootie over this matter. When this settles out, there won't be many parts of him left to pick on, so I'm going to pass, sort of.

By now City Hall's resident guitarist must no longer believe - as he seemed to believe when he strummed himself into the mayor's office - that his is an easy job. Managing 335 employees can't be an easy task. But abiding by and enforcing one's own written policies should be a no-brainer in that management process.

Because the Mayor doesn't get that, his thorough lack of management skills has again been laid bare for citizens. It is one more example of how Newark is being managed by folks who aren't qualified for such a complex, intricate, and difficult task. Most are merely citizens-turned-vote-getters, folks who've never had to make business-management decisions, even on the simple level of employee evaluations.

This seems to be a good time to reminisce about a couple Tea Party pronouncements. One was that early in his mayoral career, I predicted that Mr. Diebold was already looking like a one-term mayor. Bloggers have since hinted that he may not last one term.

The other is that I said earlier how Newark desperately needs a city manager to do professional-level work.

This latest fiasco adds to the evidence for both statements.