Click on image to enlarge. Yesterday was the last day to apply. I have in front of me a spread sheet which list the names, cities of residence, professional certifications, bachelor's degrees, master's degrees, and current/latest positions. So as not to reveal the identities of the applicants at this stage of the process, I've cut off all but the columns you see. Note that a "CEcD" is a professional designation meaning "Certified Economic Developer." Here is a link to the certifying organization's website. http://www.iedconline.org/?p=Certification. Obviously, the compiler of this spreadsheet is fully cognizant of the political realities facing the CCBOC, as witnessed by the fact that the 8 local applicants are listed first. Note that NONE of the locals have the professional designation CEcD. Moreover, only 3 of the eight have a bachelor's degree. Two of those also have master's degrees. Trust me on this - in the "Current Position" column, only one has a position directly related to recruitment of businesses and one just tangentially. The remaining seven are not even remotely related. Now, lets look at the "damned outsiders" who have applied for the job. Of the 29, all but 2 have bachelor's degrees. Moreover, 17 have master's degrees. A cursory review will quickly show you that the vast majority of said degrees are in fields that are clearly germane to the field of economic development. The three candidates with degrees which arguably are not have ALL earned the CEcD designation AND are currently in economic development positions. Here's the employment picture for the D.O. applicants.
County economic development directors: 3. Municipal director of economic development: 4.
Economic development consultants: 4. County managers: 1. City managers: 1. Directors or associates of economic development companies: 13. Port authority strategic planner: 1.
If this job search were likened to a naval battle, the locals have arrived in rowboats armed with air rifles: the "damned outsiders" are more like heavy cruisers and battle wagons. Please communicate to both our county commissioners and the JDA board that we, the long suffering citizens of the county, have had enough of good ol' boyism. Let them know that you would take a very dim view of any but the most highly qualified applicants being in the final selection process and that the local applicants are clearly not nearly so qualified as the others.
Moreover, I would encourage the county commission to tell the JDA board (who, unfortunately, have the final say so in who they hire) that IF they hire an unqualified local, their funding will be cut off immediately.
To e-mail county commissioners, click here:
To find out who the JDA directors are, click here:
Unfortunately, their e-mail addresses are not listed. Sending an e-mail to their web site would be a complete waste of time. It probably has not been checked for messages in years. If anyone has good e-mail addresses for any of the board members, please send them to me.
This would be a good time to acquaint any of your unaware friends of the existence of this blog.
Remember, you don't need to memorize the URL. Just tell them to Google "Camden Commentary." It's there.
13 comments:
We all know that this will be a waste of time for all the applicants. This county will not hire a qualified person, it will be the good ole boy system. In my opinion the county just needs to DO AWAY WITH THE JDA. The JDA only cost us money and they do nothing for the good of the taxpayers.
What is sad is the expense they will cost applicants that applied to come for an interview and knowing (JDA) that they are not going to hire that person.
Given the past history of the JDA as the black hole of rat holes down which we have poured millikons with no return, I can appreciate your pessimism, but please don't give up. We can turn the tide in this county and drive a stake through the heart of good ol' boyism, eventually. It may well take turning out a helluva more elected officials, but the massive threat of doing so by enough people who have had enough may just obviate the need to do so.
If this curent JDA board screws this one up, if I were on the CCBOC, I would damned sure vote to cut off their funding, dissolve the suckers (if we could do that?), then bring the economic development effort back in-house and pursue it with a vengeance.
I agree with you Jay. BUT I think the JDA will either hire a local that they have been assured will go along to get along or they will hire the uneducated person from Amelia Island that someone is plugging for.
At first glance I would give the candidate from Alexandria, Va consideration.
God knows a person with PR experience is going to be needed to overcome the tremendous burdens of the existing JDA board. This person is also certified which is a definite plus.
Camden County REALLY needs a effective person in this position, the future of the County depends on it.
And would'nt it be a ginat leap backwards if it turns out that the CCBOC and the JDA board have truly gotten the message, hire a competent go getter, then saddle him with a county where ignorant, anti-progress, anti-education, anti-intellectual, football crazed yahoos vote down the ESPLOST. A citizenry which eschews the benefits of education: wouldn't that be a great industry recruiting plus for the county!
Have you seen who is in the board? What do you think will happen?
IF the ESPLOST is voted down, I don't think it will have as much to do with not wanting the best for childreas but wanting better stewards of taxpayers money.
Jay, I am all for education, BUT I will vote NO on the ESPLOST. I feel there is alot of wasted money in that for the landscaping, etc, and items that are not needed at this time with the economy the way it is. This county is only gouging the tax payers for luxury instead of needs.
"Have you seen who is in the board? What do you think will happen?"
Of course. Just go back to my blog. Click on the JDA website link. There you will find all of the names.
I think that the CCBC will not muster up the political cajones to make the JDA board an offer thay can't refuse (i.e., threaten to cut off their funding - and mean it) and the JDA board will put whomever they damned well please, credentials and experience be damned.
But honestly, would you have voted for it if the plans had ben to habe bare earth around the schools with NO landscaping? Be honest. By the way, I just voted yes about an hour ago.
I will counter that vote with a NO in the morning!
"But honestly, would you have voted for it if the plans had ben to habe bare earth around the schools with NO landscaping?"
No, because as it has been laid out they did NOT need the excess to begin with. They should have allowed the exploratory team to look at every ITEM listed. The exploratory committee saved the taxpayers 2.1 million dollars in the area they were allowed to LOOK in.
So, to be honest, there is no conceivable circumstance under which you would vote yes on an ESPLOST, right? How about SPLOST? You vote no on those too, right.
There are three conceivable ways that I would vote YES. Yes, I voted for SPLOST. As stated on topix how did Proctor achieve so much all while eliminating ESPLOST.
1. If the exploratory team were allowed to look at all line items.
2. If they refrained from playing politics with vote buying.
3. If the County were not facing the financial diffuculties that they are.
Who were/are these "exploratory team" people you refer to? Qualifications tio decide what is / is not needed?
Can you cite some concrete examples of the assertion of vote buying in your number 2? Who bought whom and how?
Does the need for new capital expenditures on schools END because of the state of the economy? Perhaps we could put the kids into suspended animation until things get better.
I don't know why opponents can't seem to grasp - especially when it is stated in black and white - with quantified details - that the new facilities are needed NOW, not just in the future. The kids to fill them are in classes NOW, in portables, converted storage rooms, etc.
Post a Comment