Tuesday is the first day for collecting signatures for the various city Councils in East BoCo. Longmont has a Mayoral race with a few interested incumbents, Lafayette and Louisville have several seats open, and the County will throw in a few tax questions on top of the races.
Any early predictions or favorites?
As the bios of candidates come forward, it will be interesting to see the backgrounds and motivations of newcomers. It intrigues me when people who have been below the radar suddenly get all civic-minded. It sure makes things interesting because they're in such a different place from incumbents and citizen board members.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
Is it time for Lafayette to elect its mayor?
In light of the theatrics of the last election, where Frank made a valid defense for change and was practically ignore (or snubbed) by a new council that wasn't willing to even consider a change, I would say yes! Knowing the apathy surrounding local elections, I think this might add a more exciting component to get citizens involved in making a "bigger" decision. But what if they make a bad choice? Who has the power to boot the joker. Does it go back to a vote of the people. How do cities like Denver handle this?
Check your Charter everyone. Section 4.4. We've had a charter amendment process going for three years now, but there never seems to be much call from the public at large to get into this kind of popular reform.
This may be due to the fact that while the current system is far from perfect, it is the way a strong council (see Section 2.2) is supposed to work.
We've been drifting away from the strong council form for long enough that I'm not sure any assumptions based on Section 2.2 hold any water anymore. But I do know that if we're going to talk about changing fundamental provisions of the Charter, it is important to look at things systematically.
I voted for Frank Phillips as Mayor. I voted for needed change. Frank and I (besides the mayor) were the only incumbents after the last election. He and I had witnessed the performance of our current mayor for the previous two years. The mayor's neighboor who was elected nominated him.
If one believes citizens made a bad choice, there is always the recall process.
One has to ask are the voters apt to make a better choice than the internal cronyism that exists today? Who should the mayor be accountable to, the majority of those who vote or 3 council members plus him or her self? (Takes 4 to be elected.)
Regarding recall, check Section 3.17. That provision applies whether the mayor is elected directly or by the council.
When the council votes for mayor and mayor pro tem, there is no provision for a council member to make their vote public. I did and needless to say, the current mayor was not happy with me since then.
When voters are involved, they are more apt to monitor the mayor and vote the mayor out if they are unhappy as happened in Erie a few years ago. Yes, any council member can be recalled but voters would have more vested interest in the mayor for whom they voted.
Mayor elected by Lafayette voters instead of cronies on council? You bet! This change is past due.
Status quo on the mayoral process in Lafayette unless a council pushes for change. Voter apathy is the reason there is no public push for change.
Most residents couldn't name a single member of council. Most don't bother to vote. Only time there is a big turnout is if there is some kind of controversial issue on the ballot, and even then the turnout is poor.
Voters in Lafayette are similar to every other town it's size in the world. Their apathy is basically saying to local politicians - "Just don't screw it up."
It's not faith in the system that allows the system to continue, it's apathy. This election, unfortunately, is much more important to those of you who run than it is to eligible voters.
What are the benefits of a citizen-elected Mayor anyway? What additional sway does a Mayor have? I don't perceive any functional difference in the workings of a Council post-election one way or the other.
I tend to agree with Dan. If you don't change the Charter in more ways than just the manner of election of the mayor, what you get is just more variation in - and possibly weaker, on average - mayoral skills. You can have good and bad mayors no matter how they are put into office.
Shouldn't mayoral hopefuls need to convince the voting public rather than just four fellow councilors that they will be knowledgeable and effective leaders?
Would be interesting to see if the active eligible voters in Lafayette agree with the contention that elected mayors could be weaker - on average. I'm guessing this opinion varies, depending on whether you're inside or outside of city politics.
If you're outside the political arena, you tend to have a distrust of the political machine. If you're part of the machine, you tend to have a distrust of the voters ability to make intelligent decisions. Not pointing fingers, just pointing out a little human nature. Voters should know not all political dealings are underhanded, and politicians should know that an informed electorate makes good decisions. We may not all agree on the outcome, but we have to trust the methodology.
The impetus for change is not currently present. Will take either 1)a council interested in direct voter control (there's that trust thing again), or 2)a controversy caused by the cronyism of council-selected mayors.
I have been thinking about this ever since I got on council, and have come full circle. 'Weak' mayor basically means that he/she is elected by council, and the mayor's main job is to chair council meetings and be the public face of the council. He/she has no additional power, and his/her vote counts the same as every other council member. you tend to see this model in small towns where councils are not full time. Conversely large cities need a stronger mayor to run the city on a day-to-day basis (effectively taking the roll of the city manager). My big issue was that the mayor was assuming more power than he was granted either by charter or council, and the way to fix that was to have formal council procedures. Uphill battle, but we have them now. I don't see much point in having the citizens directly elect the Mayor unless they perceive the need for the Mayor to have more power than individual council members, and what would those powers need to be?
Frank, I don't think you meant to, but I think you just proved my point on changing opinions depending on whether your inside or outside the political machine.
Let's take Erie as an example of how an elected mayor can make a difference. Erie's mayor doesn't run the town on a daily basis. But, the voters really made a change in the town's direction when they voted out the former mayor and voted him in. Not sure that would've happened if the Board of Trustees made the choice.
Last night I moved that the city attorney draft ballot language to elect a mayor for the November ballot.
I could not get a second to even discuss the motion. No surprise.
With the current council and the way the seats become open, it can take a number of years to change major direction since it takes 4 of 7 to do so. Obviously the incumbents are not eager to have their track records examined by the voters. And of course, at least 2 or 3 what to be the next mayor. That is based on cronyism, something which no one can accuse me of these days.
What is lost in the discussion is that the mayor also represents the city at DRCOG, Metro Mayors, Northwest Parkway, etc. outside of Boulder County. Those elected by the voters can arguably carry more weight. Also would fit into the campaign issues.
Those who prefer a weak mayor believe they can work the system better than their peers and somehow seem threatened by a strong mayor. The result is essentially what we have today, a city administrator who is the mayor behind the curtain. Interesting.
Well, speaking for myself (and maybe myself alone), some of us support a Strong Council. The great thing about local government especially in the United States is all the variation in forms.
In addition to the direct mayoral election suggestion by Councilor Bensman, I also heard a suggestion by Councilor Phillips last night that the City take a more comprehensive look at the Charter, which in my estimation could include a broad discussion of Section 2.2 and all the conflicting directions the City of Lafayette is headed in this regard. While I understand a formal Home Rule Charter Committee may not be the way to go, it certainly is not beyond the pale to study some of these questions before the 2008 ballot is developed.
In my opinion, our first goal in Lafayette needs to be to find where we are, or where we should be, on the spectrum of Strong Council versus Council-Manager. Today, we are more or less a de facto Council-Manager government. Elevating the mayoral vote to this level at the moment is likely to only confuse the situation as far as I'm concerned. Then we'd have three conflicting forms of government in play.
While one can be concerned about cronyism playing a part in the election of the mayor, for now I have no grave concerns given the mayor's subordination to the vote of the council on any issue of substance.
No, Alex, today we are a manager-staff-council city government.
Search through the votes in the past two years and find an instance where the council as taken a position in opposition to the manager-staff.
Go back to four years and you'll find the origins of the new police station, ambulance service, dog park, White Tail Park, Simpson Mine Park, senior center remodeling, golf course improvements, rec center reduced subsidy, water rate restructuring, etc. Much of this was by the council exerting its will. Seldom today.
Like I said.
My first point is that despite the reality and conflicting Charter provisions, the Charter literally says Lafayette has a Strong Council form. My second point is that direct election of a mayor wouldn't do anything to address your issues. It really wouldn't.
Thats funny! LOL
One thing I have never been accused of before is being 'threatened' by anybody, considering my outspoken nature. As to 'working the system', if you mean working with staff and convincing at least three other members of council of the soundness of your arguement, be willing to compromise to get at least some of what you think is right included if the majority is moving in the other direction, than I plead guilty! But then, isn't that what the job is all about?
As to cronyism, funny thing, two of the members of the last council that you so fondly refer to were chosen by council to fill vacated seats. They happen to have been excellent choices, but you can't have it both ways, Mr. Bensman.
Having an elected Mayor is not going change how we are perceived at DRCOG, Metro Mayors, Northwest Parkway etc. City size and economic clout rule those forums. CML is the only forum where city size does not matter, and not being a Mayor has not diminished my ability to achieve in that forum for Lafayette's best interest.
Well, Frank. Help me interpret the term "weak mayor" and the comment you made to me last night after the council meeting. I trust you remember it.
It was also you who stood in front of the council after the last election and lambasted our current mayor for 15 minutes in a public forum. Something I have never done. (Gee, I voted for you by the way).
As for your success at CML, perhaps that bears some refreshing of my memory.
My approach is somewhat different. I spent a lot of time helping the PD action committee campaign for the new police station. Two years working on the ambulance service. Actively working with folks to get a dog park which plays a major role in our vicious dog ordinances. Restructing the water rates to help low income and fixed income residents. Getting the floor fixed at Sister Carmen. Working with Project Yes to get city help in maintaining vital youth programs. Working with LOTA to boot strap the first Home For the Holidays campaign. Moving the Simpson Park proposal forward that you opposed. (You and I worked on White Tail.) I have all of Indian Peaks involved in recycling, ten years before the city addressed waste management. And mentoring the department heads of the golf course and rec center.
And today, LN announced Target will not include a grocery store in its current plans. Yet a month ago I had to convince the city manager he could not include the most optimistic revenue projections of that store in the proposed paving bond repayment plan.
My approach is the hard way. But the results speak for themselves.
Gosh, Kerry, is this the forum for test running your election flyers?
We could go at this for days and not get anywhere, and if you want to start pulling in comments we have made to each other over the years be careful what you ask for, my memory is much better than yours. Yes I did vote against that park, and for the very reason you seem to use frequently, fiscal responsibility. If anyone else is seriously interested in knowing why I did I will be happy to explain.
But one thing I firmly agree with you on, our methods are very different, and I don't claim sole credit for things that others participated as much or more on then myself....
Since I haven't seen any Longmont predictions, I'll make one. For Mayor, unless someone else jumps in I suspect Roger Lange will win. The 3 council seats? Flip a coin, I'm not sure anyone really knows any of these people.
Post a Comment