Opinion: The role of Boulder’s mayor


The role of the mayor in Boulder’s government has undergone some significant changes over the 30 years I’ve been involved in local politics, even though the basic form of government has remained the same — the weak mayor-strong city manager system. Although the structure generally works well, sometimes it needs a few fixes.
Many of the current concerns over the selection of the mayor stem from people thinking that the mayor has a strong (or sometimes excessive) influence over what the council works on and the outcomes of the meetings. Similar concerns existed when I was elected to the council. Our solution was to create the three-member Council Agenda Committee (CAC) to work with the city manager on the agenda, a job previously relegated to the mayor, with help from the deputy mayor. You might not think that simply adding one more person would make any difference, but at least for a number of years the CAC worked very well.
The reasons our CAC worked were multiple: First, the third council member was permanent, not rotating every few months as currently done, so the mayor, deputy mayor and third member had to function as a team. Second, with three permanent members, the process was more balanced and the mayor’s influence was reduced, because he or she could easily end up in the minority. Third, the responsibility of the CAC to the other council members was clearly defined — it was our job to ensure that each meeting’s agenda addressed the council’s goals, and that questions that other council members were likely to ask were answered — many times in the CAC meeting, we’d ask each other, “What questions would council member X have, and does the material answer them?” And finally, we made sure that the appropriate informed citizens were invited to testify, so that their input would be available.
The mayor also represents the City of Boulder in regional or nationwide forums. Just so it’s clear, this role is shared by other council members, for example at the Denver Regional Council of Governments. But sometimes the mayor is the only appropriate person to represent the city, and in these situations, the mayor’s views must reflect the wishes of the citizens as expressed at the ballot box over the years. So picking a mayor does involve more than who can run a meeting — the mayor needs to be an articulate, well-informed advocate for Boulder’s policy direction.

The current council might consider going back to having three permanent CAC members. Given that both the mayor and deputy mayor support further examination of the creation of a municipal electric utility, it would be appropriate to pick one of the council members who has already expressed the willingness to serve the next two years as mayor or deputy mayor, but did not support further study of municipalization.
Directly electing the mayor is not a solution. Even with the current weak mayor system, some past mayors have had undue influence, and direct election would inevitably give the mayor far more political power than the other council members. Also, with direct election, the race would unnecessarily polarize, and lead to huge sums of money being spent to gain extra clout. And besides, just a few years ago, the citizens resoundingly turned down direct mayoral election along with districting.
Appointing the most senior council member almost certainly won’t work. That person might not want the role. Or he or she might not have the necessary level of acceptance from the rest of the council, which is essential if they are to successfully run the meetings and represent the city.
The council also needs to take more responsibility. They need to hold the mayor, deputy mayor and third CAC member responsible for fulfilling their roles. Agendas must be well prepared with all issues addressed, and the mayor and deputy mayor must not use their positions to unduly influence outcomes. Publicly criticizing other council members (including the mayor) may sound a bit unfriendly at times, but it is a lot better than allowing undercurrents to build up and poison the whole system.


Popular Posts

Opinion: Opportunity for the new Boulder City Council

Congratulations to the four new Boulder City Council members! You have a great opportunity to make a contribution to the Boulder community, but it will take a lot of work to do it responsibly; the learning curve is pretty steep. Here are some suggestions for you (and other Council members) that may help improve the process. Read the Charter. It is the document that governs how you, city staff, and board and commission members operate, and how you relate to each other. It defines the limits of your and their power, and can only be amended by a citizen vote. You don’t have to remember every word. But just knowing what’s there makes you more self reliant and less at the mercy of others’ opinions. For example, relative to the recent meeting discussion over diversity, the council does  not  have the power to suspend the rules as to when the mayor is selected. Charter Section 14 specifies, “The mayor shall be chosen by the council from its own number, upon the convening of t...
Read more

Opinion: Is this the end of Boulder as we know it?

Much of what has made Boulder such a great place to live has been the work of people half a century ago. These people recognized what I call the “ ratchet effect ,” that bad development decisions cannot be undone, so policies needed to be put in place to prevent, or at least limit, the damage that a growth-at-all-costs majority of the council could do. These policies include charter limits, like the Blue Line that prevents city water for development from being supplied above a certain altitude, the 55-foot height limit that has prevented high-rise development from cutting off our views, and the open space referendum process that allows a 60-day window for citizens to challenge disposals of open space. Other constraints include the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan’s requirement for Planning Board agreement for land-use changes in the area inside the city limits (Area I) and additional agreement by the county commissioners and county Planning Commission for urban development further...
Read more

Policy Documents: Impact Fees and Adequate Public Facilities

I am writing this to correct some of the apparent inaccuracies put forward at the 10/14 CC/PB study session about charging growth for its costs. I do not claim to be an expert in the field, but I have studied it long enough and consulted with enough supposed experts and legal types to understand most of the basics. In addition, I have found that the experts don’t necessarily know everything and won’t necessarily put forward the most appropriate solutions. The fundamental rule, both legal and equitable, is that growth should pay to address its impacts so as to maintain existing levels of service (LOS) for existing residents and businesses. But growth cannot be required to improve levels of service. LOS is measured in all sorts of ways depending on the facility and/or service being measured. For transportation, it could be total VMT, travel time, intersection waits, access to transit, etc. For schools, it might be square footage per pupil, etc. For water, it could be water righ...
Read more