HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 05 Don Charter Review White
Charter Review Committee
City Government Structure
Date: January 2, 2005
Sub Committee Members : Hal Cloer, Donald Montgomery
Issue Statement:
Should the city council appoint a city manager to assume responsibility to the
council for the performance of the city's administrative functions, which
appointment is subject to termination by a majority of the council?
If so, should the elected mayor of the city have the unilateral authority to closely
supervise the city manager and those officers and employees of the city for which
the city manager is responsible to the council?
Background:
Section 2.28.040 of the present Ashland City charter sets forth the administrative
responsibilities of the City Administrator as follows "The City Administrator shall
have responsibility for the general administrative coordination of all City
departments except for those officers and employees of the Parks Department. The
City Administrator shall have the right to submit recommendations to the Mayor,
with confirmation by the City Council, as to the appointment or dismissal of any
principal officer or Department head. The Mayor and City Council, City
Administrator, or the appropriate Department head may directly appoint or dismiss
any subordinate employee." In addition, Section 2.28.030 of the City charter
indicates that "The City Administrator shall have the duties, responsibilities,
authorities and jurisdictions provided by the City Charter, the ordinances and
resolutions adopted by the Council … With City Council acknowledgment, the
City Administrator is hereby empowered to make such rules and regulations for the
conduct of the various administrative departments of the City as may be deemed
necessary from time to time." Under these provisions, the City Administrator,
while responsible for the general administrative coordination of all City
may make recommendations relative only to the appointment
departments,
and dismissal of any principal officer or Department head
. However, the City
Administrator may directly appoint or dismiss any subordinate employee of the
City.
1
In contrast, the Model Charter for Oregon Cities makes provision for a City
Manager, stating, in part, that "The office of city manager is established as the
administrative head of the city government. The City Manager is responsible to the
mayor and council for the proper administration of all city business". Moreover,
the Model Charter states that "The manager must appoint, supervise and remove
city employees …"
In the last decade, considerable research has been directed towards an analysis and
evaluation of forms of municipal government. This research has revealed that there
is a contemporary trend towards hybrid forms of government, drawing the strong
elements from each of the classical forms to create a more balanced and effective
government structure. Various researchers have found weaknesses in both a strong
mayor government and a strong manager government. For example, Nalbandian
(1) has noted that the criticism of a strong manager structure falls into three major
areas, namely, a) it gives too much power to the city manager and administrative
staff, b) it fails to promote political leadership and accountability, and c) it
frustrates political representation for minority citizens and viewpoints. Political
leadership is a key issue for all government forms, and is well addressed by
Protasel (2) who observes about a mayor's job description " strong leadership from
the mayor as at least a coordinator and preferably as a director, is no longer
optional in light of the increasing demands on city government. If these activities
are not undertaken by the mayor, a serious vacuum exists." Nalbandian succinctly
sums up the current view of government structure by noting that "the issue of
whether to have a strong mayor or strong manager structure is artificial because
You need
you need strong political leadership wherever you can possibly attain it.
both a strong mayor and professional management".
This view is particularly
pertinent in light of the fact that Ashland is no longer a village with few
employees, and a modest budget, but more an expanding corporation with a
$100 M, and likely increasing, budget. A government structure crafted to
effectively manage and lead the community for the future seems essential.
Pros and Cons:
Appoint a City Manager
Pros:
Provides city with opportunity to appoint a manager trained in the general
management field of public administration to direct the day-to-day
management of the municipal government.
Corrects the present limitations of the city administrator, including the inability
to hire and dismiss principal officers and department heads for which he/she is
2
responsible.
Frees the elected mayor from administrative duties and allows him/her to serve
as the political leader and policy developer for the city.
Provides for the city manager to be accountable to the entire city council for
the satisfactory implementation of council policy and day-to-day
administration of municipal affairs.
A city manager would be prone to use merit as the leading criterion for making
all hiring and personnel decisions.
Cons:
Under some circumstances, depending on personalities, a competitive and
contentious relationship could develop between the mayor and city manager.
Elected Mayor Supervises City Manager, City Officers and Employees?
Pros:
None.
Cons:
Would severely usurp the authority of the city manager.
Would put the mayor in the position of micromanaging the administration of
the city.
Would detract the mayor from serving as the political leader of the city,
responsible for developing policy, providing the long term vision and setting
the tone for the community.
Budget Implications:
A change from city administrator to a city manager may require additional
compensation commensurate with the education and experience of a professional
manager.
In contrast, overall city cost may be reduced with competent management,
providing reduced operating costs, increased efficiency and productivity, and
effective use of technology.
3
Summary:
Within the last decade, surveys and research results indicate that municipal
governments have moved to incorporate the best elements of the classical
government forms to create hybrid structures. These hybrid structures most often
have incorporated an elected mayor to serve as the political leader of the
community while engaging a council-appointed city manager to oversee the day-
to-day administration of the city, carry out council policy and handle the hiring and
personnel matters of the city. Most municipalities appoint a city manager who is
formally educated and trained in public administration. The current Ashland City
charter provides for an elected mayor and a city administrator with the
responsibility for the day-to-day administration of city operations but with no
authority to hire or dismiss principal officers of department heads. Such authority
rests with the council. With a professional city manager, council members can be
devoted to legislative matters while the mayor is free of administrative
responsibilities in order to devote attention to developing policy, establishing a
long range vision and setting the tone for the community. With a structure
involving an elected mayor and professional city manager (in contrast to a city
administrator), and depending upon personalities, it is possible for a contentious
and competitive relationship to develop between the mayor and manager. With
Ashland now a $100M corporation it may be prudent to consider the benefits of a
professional city manager.
Any municipal government structure that would provide the mayor with the
authority to closely supervise the council-appointed city manager, the principal
officers as well as city employees would be a gross and damaging departure from
accepted and efficient organizational practice. Such authority would usurp the
responsibilities of the city manager and most likely lead to the mayor's micro-
management of the city administration. As such, the mayor's attention would be
deflected from serving as the community's political leader. Under a government
structure with these attributes, it is unlikely that a qualified candidate could be
attracted to the city manager position.
4
Attachments/References:
(1) Nalbandian, John, "Professionalism In Local Government, Jossey-Bass, 1991.
(2) Protasel, Greg J., "Leadershiip in Council-Manager Cities, The Institutional
Implications".
5