Every reporter who’s covered City Hall over the past four years has his or her favorite Linda Thompson story.
Some cite the mayor’s story of goats eating “poison ivory,” as told during a press conference for a cleanup on City Island. Another reporter told me that she’s always struck by the mayor’s repeated use of the word “onerous” instead of “onus.”
Mine? The time she seemed to believe that Harrisburg Young Professionals President Meron Yemane’s first name was Yemen (as in the country) and called him that repeatedly during a high-visibility press conference.
The mayor’s verbal gaffes and off-script wanderings may have elicited chuckles, but they’re actually not indicative of Thompson, who is a smart woman, can have a good sense of humor and, when she doesn’t stray too far afield, is an effective public speaker.
So then what went wrong with Thompson’s mayoralty, which caused her to lose so decisively in last month’s re-election primary, taking just 28 percent of the total vote? The answer to that question is important not just for those interested in Harrisburg history, but even more so, for our next mayor, who must not repeat her mistakes.
In my mind, Thompson failed in three major ways that diminished her effectiveness and ultimately doomed her administration.
Exercise of Power
Harrisburg may have a strong mayor form of government, but it doesn’t have a dictator form of government. Unfortunately, from day one, Thompson seemed intent on repeating former Mayor Steve Reed’s my-way-or-the-highway approach to exercising power.
As a councilwoman, Thompson often railed against the arrogance of power of the Reed administration. Therefore, it came as a shock to many that she took up where he left off, immediately disregarding City Council, belittling the legislative branch of government and trying to ram through ordinances via public denunciations and force of will.
The brawl over her first budget, which she lost, seemed to teach her little, serving scant purpose other than to solidify an emerging bloc against her, which insisted that the council no longer be dismissed or regarded as a rubber stamp. That summer, she went to war with council again, this time getting pulled into a useless, avoidable battle over appointees to the board of the Harrisburg Authority.
As a result, the well was already poisoned by early 2011, when the city’s financial crisis hit a critical stage. By then, she didn’t want to work with City Council and City Council didn’t want to work with her. The problem: she now needed the council as the city entered Act 47. Instead of cooperating, the council revolted, rejecting two financial recovery plans and ultimately filing for municipal bankruptcy, a waste of time and money that directly led to Harrisburg being put under state receivership.
Thompson eventually learned how to work somewhat better with council – and was quickly rewarded for it as council approved funding for her spokesman, ending yet another prolonged, pointless conflict. Still, it was amazing that the former council president had to learn this lesson at all. Meanwhile, the city suffered severely from government inertia and discord.
Job Performance
Above all else, a mayor is the chief deliverer of services to the people, using the municipal staff to accomplish that mission. That’s why a local government exists at all. The people of a city pool their money to do things collectively they can’t do well individually.
Harrisburg, in its current desperate financial state, cannot afford any frills. Nonetheless, $53 million in annual revenue should be able to buy the basics in a tiny city of 49,500 people. Not for the Thompson administration.
Among the fundamental things it failed to do: complete budget audits even remotely on time; disperse HUD grants; present accurate budget figures to council; file for flood emergency funding in a timely manner; complete demolitions of dangerously dilapidated buildings; maintain streetlights; provide a serviceable website; keep the city’s major roadways maintained and striped; update publicly disclosed financial information, a failure that recently led to sanction by the SEC.
Twice, holiday celebrations were nearly cancelled as the city said it could not raise the money to hold them. After the issue became public, private donors quickly stepped up to cover the costs.
Arguably, the administration’s greatest failing has been its inability to retain qualified staff. Tired of the dysfunction in City Hall, many of the city’s best managers and employees left, taking with them the knowledge of how to run a city competently.
Mayoral Style
Thompson has referred to herself as a strong woman with a strong personality, which sometimes works to her benefit. However, there’s a difference between being strong-willed and acting intemperately, which repeatedly has landed her in trouble.
Early in her administration, several key staffers – including highly respected professionals like Joyce Davis and Chuck Ardo – left after short tenures, citing an intolerant working environment. Ardo even claimed Thompson made an anti-gay slur against City Controller Dan Miller. An ensuing media frenzy and citywide furor led to a protest in front of City Hall, during which Thompson goaded the demonstrators.
I personally never heard Thompson make a biased comment, but she usually held nothing back when speaking of people she disliked, such as Miller and her opponents on council. To her, opposition was not a matter of policy, but personal and political.
So, in Thompson’s eyes, Miller had no case when he insisted on being able to review the city’s payroll as part of his job as controller; he merely wanted to encroach on her power while coveting her job. Likewise, council members didn’t legitimately have differing viewpoints and priorities; they wanted to ding her politically to benefit Miller. She was equally thin-skinned when criticized by the press.
Then, during what should have been an innocuous press event earlier this year, she again ignited controversy by impetuously (and wrongly) blaming “some scumbag” from Perry County for Harrisburg’s illegal dumping problems. The incident may have been blown out of proportion by the media, yet it affirmed her reputation for being intemperate and even mean-spirited.
Too Little, Too Late
During the recent mayoral debates, Mayor Thompson employed a classic incumbent strategy – that voters shouldn’t change horses in midstream – then backed up her argument with a mastery of facts that may have impressed audience members who know her only from her well-publicized verbal stumbles and impulsive remarks.
Linda Thompson
I wasn’t surprised. Over four years, I’ve seen her grow in office and get better at her job, putting in long hours to do so. And I’ve always thought her early embrace of the receiver’s plan was a smart move, at least politically.
However, it was too little, too late. Practically from the start of her administration, Thompson opted for confrontation over cooperation; arrogance over understanding; compliance over competence. She never courted her opponents and never really solidified her base, which gradually eroded until she was left with no one but her most ardent supporters.
After the dictatorial Reed years, Harrisburg needed another approach to governing, yet, for too long, Thompson offered more of the same. It’s tragic both for the city and for her that she didn’t—or couldn’t—bring Harrisburg more evolved, conscientious and professional leadership.
Let’s hope our next mayor can make a clean break from Harrisburg’s recent tragic history, bringing an honest, well-run, even humble, government that does what municipal governments are supposed to do—professionally deliver critical services to residents who are paying for them.
