Government practice at stake during election

By Bill Erin (contact)

Tuesday, Dec. 30, 2008 | 3:01 p.m.

Bill Erin

Looking at the major problems facing the Boulder City Council this coming year is almost like looking into a mirror. Most of the same major problems are facing us that we had on the agenda last year.

There's the Boulder Creek Golf Course (which drags in with it the old Muni course), our share of the third straw into Lake Mead, the looming traffic threat if they ever open the Hoover Dam bypass bridge, our own Boulder City Bypass, the landfill and a shrinking budget.

There are other problems, of course, and new ones will undoubtedly develop, but those seem to be the biggies. We'll also get a better picture of what's ahead in 2009 when Mayor Roger Tobler makes his State of City address later this month.

The caveat to Tobler's picture, however, is that it's questionable just how unified a council he represents this year. Council members Linda Strickland and Travis Chandler have their own ideas on how the city should be run and what course it should take.

That brings up probably the most important event on the 2009 calendar in regard to the future of Boulder City: The municipal elections this spring, both primary and final.

Not only are there important ballot questions to be decided by the voters, but they must also decide whether they want a bona fide city manager-type government in Boulder City or a strong City Council-type government that uses the city manager more as a tool than an innovator and leader.

The city manager theory does not require full-time council members or a mayor who devote themselves to the administrative details and personnel problems of running the city. The council sets policies and a budget, and meets regularly to discuss and approve or not approve legislation, resolutions and actions proposed by the city manager to carry out the policies and directions of the council.

How this evolves over years of practice in each government entity depends a great deal on the people involved, although there are state laws and safeguards to keep it within certain boundaries.

Over the years the Boulder City government evolved pretty much as a council-directed, city manager-run process. Then a major catalyst for voter discontent arose when the Boulder Creek golf course was built. This led to increased bad feeling and discontent with other actions of the City Council.

The voters spoke, and Strickland and Chandler were elected. They have shown themselves to be leaning toward a stronger role by council members. They have both initiated actions that previously were the purview of the city manager as developed by previous councils. They have disagreed with rulings and the advice of both the city manager and city attorney and argue for the right to direct city staff without going through the city manager.

In other words, they have shown a marked tendency to being quasi-administrators and have turned council meetings into a debating society with frequent lectures to the audience as to their thinking, motivation and legal opinions. Some of these opinions are in opposition to established practice, law and attorney general opinions.

Whether this is good for the city or an impediment is up to the voters. That's what makes the upcoming municipal elections so important. It appears two more seats will be open for newcomers to the council. Do the voters want a stronger city council or do they want a strong city manager as in the past? Will council members have time and inclination to continue digging into city affairs on a full-time basis?

I believe folks supporting both ideas will put up candidates. I just hope both sides conduct the campaigns in a straightforward and honest manner without personal attacks and misleading claims.

Bill Erin is a Boulder City News columnist.