Twin City Times- Thursday, June 11th, 2009
Mayor's Corner #90
In my May 21, 2009 column headline; “Is it time for a Lewiston City Charter review? You tell me!” I did receive responses and as a result of my appearance on the Sun Journal’s Live Chat, a Sun Journal editorial was generated. I offer a response to that editorial later in this column.
I first wish to share a truly unbiased response from a former Lewiston resident from many years ago who reads both newspaper publications regularly online and is looking to come back to his home perhaps as early as next year.
I now wish to share an exchange I had with this gentleman who is a retired high ranking military officer and is a gentleman with a doctorates degree and lives in a far western state. I received his permission to share with you our e-mail exchange. He offers a poignant and most unbiased response from his professional experience as well as his research of the Lewiston City Charter in order to provide his opinion.
His first e-mail on May 30 read “Mr. Mayor: I’ve been trying to email you regarding the Lewiston City Charter but cannot seem to have the right address. This is a test message. If it appears that it gets sent, I will send you my thoughts on the matter.”
I responded to him on the same day by writing “It was a successful test. I look forward to your thoughts. Best wishes, Larry Gilbert, Sr.”
The second e-mail dated May 31 reads as follows:
“Dear Mayor Gilbert: I was born and raised in Lewiston and, though now living in (far western state); I am considering returning to my home town on retiring next year. With that in mind, I read the Sun Journal and the Twin City Times online regularly.
In the TCT May 21 edition, you indicated that it may be time to review the Lewiston City Charter and, so, I submit my thoughts on the matter.
Being interested in what the Charter contained, I went to it online and was surprised at the almost "dictatorial" powers the Charter affords the city administrator. Having been extensively involved in the management of various organizations, I have to wonder how such power could have been delegated to any one man. The city council should have a veto power if it feels the city administrator is using his authority inappropriately. Based on the phrasing of Section 3.02, the city administrator position might as well be renamed "city dictator."
True, in a Republic such as ours, we afford the President significant powers regarding the management of many aspects of our society. However, Congress and the Supreme Court usually are involved in making certain that the President does not overstep his/her authority. Certainly, the City Council should be allowed to overrule certain actions taken by the City Administrator, who is not elected by the people.
This particular section of the Charter should be scrutinized and revised to include more involvement of the city council in crucial decisions, particularly whenever it is apparent that the voters are not in agreement with the decisions of the city administrator.
Respectfully submitted, an interested possible future resident.”
On the same day, I responded as follows:
“I would be interested in your thoughts on the City Administrator’s appointment of department heads without confirmation from the city council. Also, I would be interested in your thoughts on the mayor having a vote other than to simply break a tie, or perhaps even having the mayor have veto power over a vote of the council requiring a super majority to override such a veto?
I thank you for your input. Being from away without any personal knowledge of the players, I believe you have offered a very objective and critical view of the city charter. I concur with you fully.
Please continue to provide your thoughts as we look forward to your return home. Best wishes, Larry Gilbert, Sr., Mayor, City of Lewiston, Maine.”
His response on June 1, 2009 reads as follows: “Dear Mayor Gilbert:
I appreciate your willingness to listen to my opinions. I truly agree with you regarding the need for city council confirmation of department heads as selected by the city administrator. This action can be likened to the US Senate's confirmation of the President's selection of the Supreme Court justices who, in most cases, serve for life and contribute greatly to society.
I also agree with you regarding the mayor's veto power. It seems to me that, as the charter is presently written, the mayor is merely a figurehead with very little, if any, authority. The electorate should have the final vote when it comes to selecting their representative(s). The city administrator is not elected and thus not directly responsible to the people.
City managers/administrators should report to the city council as CEO's report to their boards of directors. The stockholders like the electorate, vote for the board members. The city charter seems to bypass the role of the mayor, leaving him/her without the power of the board of directors, much less that of the CEO. The city administrator's role should be that of the COO with the mayor being the CEO, having oversight power.
In reality, much of the successes or failures of government is based on many factors, such as the length of the term of office, the innate management talents of the individuals, their experience and integrity, etc...
In a democracy, the people should hold the reins of power. Having an appointed official control too much of government takes away from the intent of democracy.
Good luck to you, sir, in your attempt to revise the charter.
Again, on the same day I responded to him by saying:
“I sincerely appreciate your thoughtful input without any prejudice of knowing the players here in Lewiston. I find your objective review of the charter to be very commonsensical and most thoughtful.”
The Sun Journal’s title of its editorial dated May 28, 2009 reads as follows: “Why does City Charter need changes? I believe the response from the gentleman above offers perhaps the best reason why the charter needs to be reviewed and changes made where appropriate.
I would venture to say that even the Sun Journal has changed its operation and hierarchical structure over the past 30 years. That newspaper proclaims itself as the activist and champions of transparency and openness in government. Then perhaps it should object to government behind closed doors of a city administrators office who has a long term contract and perhaps seek more transparency afforded to it by a mayor and city council, the elected representatives of the citizens of the city in a government of the people, for the people and by the people and not by a city administrator who can operate with little to no oversight by the elected representatives of the people.
As more and more opinions of the city attorney come forward in his interpretation of the charter, if they are correct, then I have come to the conclusion that the Lewiston City Charter truly does need review.
Now, for those who may believe that I am advocating for this because I seek more power as mayor, the fact is that should I choose to seek another term, the end result of a charter review would truly come after I am term limited out of office. I now advocate for the review in light of improved government for the City of Lewiston!
