Monday, November 12, 2007

Wherefore Art Thou Council?

After years of successfully blaming our City Council for all that ails the City of Bainbridge Island, the Mayor and her administration are finally receiving a long overdue admonishment by the community. Island residents are becoming savvy to an imbalance of power and are finding that the agenda of a small group of private interests has supplanted the will of the community. As citizens call for a change to a Council-Manager form of government, or even to recall the Mayor, they are recognizing that what is needed is a structural change, not simply a change in personalities. However, at this pivotal moment it is critical that we not lose sight of the essential role our City Council has played in its own (and our own) undoing, and that we insist that our current and incoming Council Persons reestablish their roles as meaningful representatives of the entire Island community.

Change will not come easy, as the improper subordination of Council has been institutionalized on so many levels at City Hall. Our City Council has no dedicated staff, no office space, a meager meeting space and a $600 (why bother) monthly stipend for what is realistically a full-time job. For all appearances, members of Council are tolerated as occasional interlopers into the business of policy development and governance and as inconvenient obstacles that must be surmounted by City Staff as they drive the Mayor’s agenda forward. Council’s value appears to lie only in its ability to fund the projects brought before it. To this end, Council is generally left in the dark regarding complex policy proposals and projects, significant code changes are presented as minor housekeeping matters and agendas are often packed with substantive issues that demand far more than the allocated time or background data provided.


No One to Blame but Themselves

Council is neither without blame nor without authority to act against this marginalization of its legislative role. Under state laws RCW 35A11.020 and 35A12.90, Council “shall have all powers possible for a city or town to have under the Constitution of this state” including the powers to:

- Establish policy
- Adopt ordinances and resolutions
- Establish a budget
- Approve or amend the operating and capital budgets
- Define the functions, duties, and responsibilities of City officers and employees
- Enter into and approve contracts
- Regulate the acquisition, sale, ownership, and other disposition of real property
- Impose taxes
- Approve claims against the City
- Enact rules governing the City Council’s procedures and meetings

(excerpted from COBI City Council Legislative Protocol Manual)





By contrast, the duties and authority of the Mayor are largely limited to administration and enforcement of law and policy established by Council:

The mayor shall be the chief executive and administrative officer of the city, in charge of all departments and employees... (she) shall see that all laws and ordinances are faithfully enforced ... and shall have general supervision of the administration of city government and all city interests...the mayor shall be the official and ceremonial head of the city and shall represent the city on ceremonial occasions...
(RCW 35A.12.100)

The Mayor’s policymaking role is essentially limited to the submission of proposals for Council consideration, including a draft annual budget. Council may reject any and all projects, policies and ordinances proposed by the administration, and is expected to establish its own long-term policy platform.

Yet, not only has Council failed to establish a solid legislative agenda of its own, but it has allowed the Mayor’s agenda to drive City policy and drain City resources even as it has doubted community support for that agenda. Council has missed countless opportunities to question the need for more consultants, to probe into the role of special interests in creating policy or to refuse to approve successive funding requests to study and plan for projects it had not initiated or had not yet approved. While on occasion some Council Members have opposed or even voted against the Mayor’s agenda items, more often than not, every item presented has been funded or approved.

Examples of these inexplicable missed opportunities abound. Why did Council willingly abdicate its power to approve contracts up to $100,000? Why did Council grant the Mayor authority to settle litigation under $50,000 without regard to the subject matter of the action? Why did Council allow the virtual rewriting of the Winslow Master Plan to apparently reflect the recommendations of a few special interests? Why did Council approve nearly $1 million dollars in consultant fees for public outreach and the preliminary design of the Winslow Way Streetscape? Who but Council bears responsibility for allowing, by action or inaction, the commitment of untold resources (more than $3 million in known costs to date) to advance plans to completely redefine the character and landscape of our island, without any evidence of widespread community support?


Time to Just Say No

Council has at times reined in an overreaching administration and staff. For example, Council positively exerted its authority when it refused to approve unreasonable funding requests related to the 2025 Growth Advisory Committee earlier this year. When planning staff came forth in May seeking funding to begin the implementation of the recommendations of the Committee before its final report had been provided to Council, the Council stood firm. After expressing surprise at learning that the committee had even concluded its business, Council rightfully refused the request as premature. To the chagrin of staff, when the report was finally provided to Council in June, it was “accepted” as a document, but Council chose to neither adopt its recommendations as policy nor to fund projects flowing from them until it could find adequate time to study the details of the report.

In the coming weeks, the current City Council will have many opportunities to show the community, the administration and incoming Council Members this same resolve and independence as it considers the Mayor’s proposed budget, the Capital Facilities Plan and a series of significant proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Ordinances.

In light of the magnitude of the Mayor’s policy agenda, and the community’s increasing opposition to it, Council must insist on adequate briefing materials prior to Council Meetings and, even more importantly, the time to evaluate, research and discuss the issues. This may require Council to refuse to consider some agenda items or to delay their consideration – a small price to pay for informed and thoughtful decision-making. It would also seem appropriate for Council to take long overdue advantage of its authority to provide itself with dedicated staff. According to the City Council Legislative Protocol Manual, Council is authorized to create a “Legislative Department” including staff positions to provide “assistance on legislative research, drafting of City policies and laws, as well as providing clerical support.”

One thing is certain: regardless of which structural or organizational changes Council pursues, our Island will not stand a chance without a commitment by Council to assert its broad and substantial powers and to ensure that community priorities, not private financial interests, guide policymaking and spending decisions at City Hall.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Welcome back, McCoy. I was starting to wonder if you'd gone the way of so many of our local blogs.

I'd add to what you have here that the council should do something about the loss of committee meetings. That seems to be the only time provided for focused discussions. How can Council do it's job if those are shut down? What can the council do to stop the staff (or the administrator?) from refusing to hold committee meetings?

Put_WT_to_Vote@yahoo.com said...

This "Wherefore Art Thou Council?" editorial is brilliant, as is this entire site. A most sincere thank you to its host.

As always, these articles have brought to the surface a level of truth that has not only failed to appear in local media, but also speaks to specific dynamics and responsible parties many have lacked the courage to address.

RealMcCoy is to be applauded for speaking so forthrightly about the need and responsibility of this administration and council to bring far greater integrity to COBI operations than witnessed these past years - and certainly since the appearance of Winslow Tomorrow.

Had this integrity been in place, we'd in all likelihood not be looking today at an Island Crossings, Harbor Square, SeaBreeze, or a good number of the other condo craze developments we've been saddled with from this administration alone.

It appears on a smaller, yet nonetheless still critical local level, that we are dealing here with the same underlying challenge we face on a national level - i.e., redirecting government toward a steadfast to absolute integrity and a commitment to forsake greed and special interests in favor of whole community wellbeing.

It is long past time for this change in direction to occur. Thank God this is happening before BI is gentrified forever into yet another version of Carmel, Issaquah or Mercer Island.

Let's love Winslow and BI today and preserve, as Kat Gjovik so aptly puts it - "the [unique] character of 'classic' and 'funky'" - Winslow by bringing WT and its facelifting "streetscape" to a grinding halt. Let's admit that we "have enough" (actually more than we need), live responsibly within our means (vs in increasing debt) and return to a more cost effective, responsible repair of utilities - IF, in fact, this really needs to be done (Hmmm, are we indeed certain it does, or was this a ruse to start WT?).

Anonymous said...

Thunderbird says...the voters have spoken. Funding for any component of WT, including the streetscape, should not occur unless it is put up for a public vote. If the current city council cannot figure that out and remove the streetscape, ferry/gateway, waterfront park, and other WT components from the budget and capital facilities plan, then it is time for a new form of government because the mayor and silverbacks have bought all of the current votes. It's not a proud legacy. We all will be watching the remaining council meetings to see if the current council has heard the voters. If not, then an investigation is in order.

Anonymous said...

I hope everyone who reads this blog -- well, those who agree with what is written here anyway -- have signed or will sign the petition asking Council to put Community Priorities ahead of Winslow Tomorrow projects in drafting the 2008 budget.

It can be signed on-line at:

www.ipetitions.com/petition/CommunityPrioritiesFirst

Anonymous said...

First, I have such gratitude that this site exists. Secondly, I believe that we must attend as many council meetings as we possibly can. It boggles my mind that the ferry/gateway as well as the streetscape debacle have been sent out for consulting costing thousands of dollars. The sheer detail indicates that there is an intention to push this through without running this by the property owners who are going to bear the brunt of this unaffordable undertaking, losing yet more of our community who are on fixed incomes. I agree that we need to preserve our small town uniqueness,our locally owned businesses (I have visions of losing our beloved Eagle Harbor books to a Barnes and Noble in a Ferry/Gateway district!) and most importantly, our environmental integrity. It is clear that to go through with the outrageous gateway project, the law itself for buffers must be changed to 30 feet. What is galling is that both of these issues (streetscape and f/g have have been, disingenuously in my opinion, presented as part of WT....eternal vigilance and showing up at as many meetings as possible as a cohesive group is what will make all the difference, I am hopeful. Thank you, all. -Sue

Anonymous said...

Council members Tooloee, Scales, Llewellyn and Stoknes keep talking about changing to the Council/manager form of government but where is their resolution that would set this in motion? Is it just more of their same old posturing while doing nothing? It is up to the Council to vote for a resolution to set up a vote on the Council manager form of government for the citizens. Maybe we should be demanding that they do something right before they leave. Here is a link to the Municipal Research and Services Center that actually uses a former BI resolution that was in front of the voters years ago. From the looks of this, we could have a new Council-manager form of government by early next spring. mrsc.org/ords/b29r9309.aspx