The Balance of Power Rests on the Dais

This Thursday's City Council meeting carries three momentous measures from Mike Martinez and Lee Leffingwell which look to fundamentally realign powers between the City Council and the City Manager. They've been in the ether around City Hall for some time now, and were drug into the open by the Statesman's Rich Oppel this summer. (Luckily, in his zeal, he didn't give them the kiss of death.) Let's take a look.

Item 58 "provide(s) the City Council with more frequent budget reports for vacant full-time equivalent positions, budget stabilization reserve expenditures, and administrative expenditures exceeding $5,000." Martinez emailed Chronic to provide some more context: "Anything over $5K has to go through the state bidding process, but it is still within the administrative authority and not reported to council. We just want to see those expenditure items as they are occurring throughout the year. Under the state bidding process, even though there is true bidding, you are still allowed to select one of the top three bidders for specific reasons within the statute. So that allows a lot of flexibility in choosing. We just believe council should be made aware of those expenditures on a regular basis."

Item 59 would allow council, rather than the city manager, to appoint the city attorney (after successfully amending the city charter via a May election.) Martinez: "The city attorney will be hired and appointed by council, like the auditor, clerk, municipal court and City Manager."

Item 60 would give the city auditor a set term (also through charter election.) Martinez: "The city auditor will be given a set term to allow for security and stability in doing their work, and not have to worry about being used as a political football. They can still be removed as auditor, but it would take a super majority of the council."

Beside the Point will have more on the measures and what they mean in this Thursday's print edition.