Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 09-16-08 workshop agenda — reading text

the combination of separated and shared powers between the mayor and the council found in most mayor- council cities. Some modifications will need to be made to the Model City Charter by charter drafters to accommodate this approach. The mayor is the chief executive officer who oversees the work of the CAO. The CAO is nominated by the mayor and approved by the council ( a corresponding change to §§ 2. 03 and 3. 01 of the Model City Charter should be made). The mayor may remove the CAO ( change §§ 2. 03 and 3. 01). The charter should provide for the CAO to have the same professional qualifications as the city manager ( as described in § 3. 01) The CAO formulates the budget and the capital program for the mayor ( change §§ 2. 03, 3. 04( 5), 5. 02, 5. 03, 5. 04, 5. 05( c), and 5. 09), and the mayor presents the budget and capital program to the council with his or her own recommendations added to those of the CAO ( change §§ 2. 03, 5. 02, 5. 03, 5. 04, 5. 05( c), and 5. 09). The CAO recommends major personnel appointments to the mayor who presents them to the council for approval ( change §§ 2. 03 and 3. 04( 1)). The mayor may 5 remove department heads ( change § 2. 03). Other changes should be made in accordance with the General Provisions, see below. When appointed in this way, the CAO helps to link the mayor and council and promotes communication between them. The CAO serves as a bridge to span the separation of powers 5 Some cities, particularly smaller ones, prefer to have even greater shared authority with the mayor and the council acting together on most decisions. Under this approach, the mayor and council jointly appoint the CAO. The council approves the removal of the CAO. The CAO formulates the budget for the mayor and council as a whole, and recommends major personnel appointments to the mayor and council for approval. Governments operating in this way share many characteristics with the council -manager form. 65  i between the mayor and the council. The CAO provides professional advice and detached assessment regarding key decisions to both the mayor and the council. The CAO can promote a higher level of performance and shared information by both sets of officials. The CAO assists the mayor in preparing policy recommendations to the council but is cognizant of his or her 6 responsibility to provide information that the council needs to make policy decisions . The CAO is responsible directly to the mayor for administrative matters and to the council for providing information to support their oversight function, i. e., the assessment of how well policies are working and how well services are being delivered. It should be acknowledged that the position occupied by the CAO can be difficult if there is conflict between the mayor and council. The CAO can get caught in the middle. Still, the presence of a CAO who feels a sense of accountability to both the mayor and the council can reduce the level of conflict compared to conditions in mayor- council cities without a CAO. The mayor -council -CAO government is not a " weak" mayor structure but rather one in which the mayor and council share authority in a number of areas. On the other hand, this option is also not a " strong" mayor structure. That approach is described in the next option. Option 2: Strong Mayor- Council or Strong Mayor -CAO- Council government This is the approach recommended in the first Model City Charter, and it is the basis for the commentary that appeared in the seventh edition. Under this option the city government is organized around the mayor as the central force. As stated in the seventh edition, " in the strong mayor and council form, the mayor must have sufficient authority to operate as a genuinely responsible executive." There are no provisions for having major appointments be subject to the advice and consent" of the council. In this view, it is important that the mayor be left relatively free to provide leadership subject to the final approval of the city council. Essentially, the mayor in this type of mayor -council city assumes the authority assigned to the city manager in the model charter. It is possible to change the word " city manager" to " mayor" throughout the charter, except in Article III, which must be substantially altered to provide for election of the mayor. ( See General Provisions below.) There is value to having a CAO in the strong mayor -council form. Consistent with the principle of promoting a strong central executive in this option, the CAO should serve the mayor and be appointed and removed by the mayor alone. The seventh edition recommends, " The mayor should be solely responsible for the appointment and removal of the administrator without any 6 A survey of CAOs indicates that with nomination by the mayor and approval by the council, the CAO is likely to simultaneously see himself or herself as the agent of the mayor and also as being accountable to both the mayor and the council. Seven in ten CAOs agree with these positions. If the mayor does not nominate the CAO, only thirty- seven percent of the CAOs see themselves as the mayor' s agent. If the council does not approve the appointment, only twenty -eight percent of the CAOs see themselves as accountable to the council. See James H. Svara, " Do We Still Need Model Charters? The Meaning and Relevance of Reform in the Twenty -First Century," National Civic Review. 90 ( Spring, 2001), pp. 19 -33. It should be noted that giving the mayor the same powers as the city manager ( plus the veto power as well) does not make the offices comparable as to the centralized executives. The strong mayor is not accountable to the council in the exercise of his or her powers. The mayor is not selected by the council and subject to removal by the council as the city manager is. requirement of approval by the council." A CAO appointed under this option would be strictly accountable to the mayor. The mayor has maximum flexibility in making the appointment and deciding what tasks to delegate to the CAO. Consistent with the strong -mayor principle of undiluted mayoral power, the CAO' s duties under this option are not specified in the charter. Assessment of the two mayor- council options The first option of mayor- council -CAO government combines separation of powers with shared powers, particularly " advice and consent" provisions for top appointments or joint authority for appointments. The mayor and top administrators are made more accountable to the council by shared powers, and the council has a greater opportunity to shape mayoral decisions and oversee administrative performance. Shared power provisions may serve to knit the separate branches more serves both sets of closely together. The CAO, although ultimately accountable to the mayor, officials and can promote closer interaction between them. The option promotes leadership by both the mayor and council and provides for both political and professional leadership. This approach to appointing the CAO makes this official responsive to both the mayor and the council, since both are involved in the hiring decision. Furthermore, the CAO is given a formal role in budget preparation and appointment of department heads. This approach is advantageous for several reasons. First, accountability is broadened to include the council. Second, the professional the choice. The qualifications of the person selected may be higher if the council has to approve mayor is not free to simply choose a person to advance his or her electoral interests. Third, the professional contributions of the CAO to both the mayor and the council are assured when the CAO fills specified duties. The CAO is involved in important administrative matters. The pure strong -mayor approach concentrates a substantial amount of authority in one office. The approach also limits the contribution of the council to accepting or rejecting policy and budget proposals from the mayor and overriding the mayor' s veto. Although the council has a general oversight role, the fact that the mayor appoints all top administrators may limit the flow of information to the council to support its exercise of this role. There is concentrated power with limited checks on the exercise of the power. The case for the strong mayor option is based on the need for strong centralized leadership. The mayor -council -CAO option with more shared powers can be criticized on the grounds that it creates confusion over who is responsible for exercise of powers between the mayor and the council when they are both involved in certain key areas of decision -making. Additionally, the mayor' s ability to recruit administrative staff may be reduced if the appointees have to be approved by the council.In view of the tendency for separation of powers to generate conflict between branches, having more actions that must be carried out by the mayor and council simply creates additional opportunities for conflict. General Provisions There are certain provisions that would be common to all mayor -council cities. Election of the mayor and veto are found in both options of the mayor -council form. 67  Election of the mayor and chair of the council The provisions in the Model City Charter for direct election of the mayor should be used in mayor- council cities (§ The council chair and presiding officer should be 2. 03, Alternative I). 8 elected by the council from among its members. Veto One basic difference between the mayor-council and council -manager forms of government is the " veto" power for the mayor. This power is not consistent with the basic principle of the council -manager form that all powers are assigned to the council. In the mayor -council form, the mayor has an assigned role in the legislative process and must make a decision on each ordinance to F sign it, veto it, or let it become law without signature. The veto should be included in the legislative article of a mayor- council charter and listed among the mayor' s powers in the executive article Article II of the Model City Charter, § 2. 03). The council may override the veto by a two -thirds vote of its members.° This would not be the case in cities where the mayor and council jointly exercise authority. In these cities, the mayor presides in the council. CHANGE WITH CONTINUITY IN THE VALUES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFORM Participants in the urban reform movement seek to promote certain values in local government. From its inception in 1899, the Model City Charter has been distinguished from other local government reform efforts by the conviction that structure matters. Advocates of this view argue that the legal arrangements for cities and the features included in