| OCR Text |
Show The 1997 Moab City Election mmm ITS DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN By Jim Stiles Municipal elections always follow a presidential election year and it's difficult for some citizens to muster enough energy to get involved in them. Moab has usually been a notable exception. This year is no different Eighteen candidates have filed for the four open City Council seats and one two-yepositions. In addition to the office of Mayor, two four-yeCouncil seat are up for grabs. But what exactly is "up for grabs? That is the critical question in this election. Some of the candidates for Mayor are running for an office that doesn't, at this time, even exist And some of the City Council candidates, if elected, may want to change the structure of city government so that the office their mayoral candidate allies are pursuing, does exist Let me explain. In 1994, the Moab City Council voted to separate the office of Mayor from the administrative operation of the city and hired a professional city manager. Donna Metzler has held that position since her appointment by the Council more than three years ago. Incumbent mayor Tom Stocks does not like this arrangement and never has. Last year, Mayor Stocks attempted to put the issue on the ballot. With enough signatures on a petition, Moab citizens would have been able to decide themselves what form of government they wanted. But the deadline for submitting the petition came and went and, apparently, not enough signatures were collected to require a vote. As recently as August 12, the Mayor proposed that the City Council eliminate the position of city manager. At that meeting he said, "I feel that the mayor, whether it be me or any of you, should have more influence in running the city. The last four years hasn't been conducive to working cooperatively. I feel the community is better served by having a cooperative legislative body." f , August 14, 1997) The city council was unmoved by Stocks' proposal and tabled the motion until after the election. And the reason for that move is simple. If, after the election, three members of the city council support the idea of a mayoradministrator position, it can eliminate the position of city manager and administrative control would automatically return to the mayor. In fact, we've been through this before. ar day-to-d- ar ay Times-Independe- nt Full-tim- e mayor initiative was defeated An initiative eliminating the position of AdministratarJRecorder and making the office of (Ad e Moab City Mayor a position was defeated by city voters in Tuesday's general election. Citywide, 925 voters approved the initiative, while 1281 were opposed. If passed, the initiative e with an annual salary of $2 4fi00 a year. The issue, would have made the office of mayor which tuns initiated by Mayor Tan Stocks, was placed on the baUot after a petition was signed by the mjuisite number of voters. Defeat of the initiative means that Moab zuill continue to operate under the ordinances creating the position of administrator recorder, although some revision of ordinances will be needed to resolve a conflict which currently exists. The current administratorrecorder is Mark Holloway. full-tim- full-tim- In his editorial comments in the same issue, publisher Sam Taylor noted that the and that "it is now mayor's initiative was defeated "by a substantial margin" (58 to to the business of the with on time get municipal corporation as efficiently and running 42) inexpensively as possible." But the November 1982 election was not the end of the story. Rather than accept the vote of the people of Moab, the mayor approached the issue of mayor city manager consolidation from another angle. As Mayor Stocks explained it himself, when Bill McDougald was elected to the council in November 1983, he now had three council e members who supported his vision of a mayor. And in January 1984, despite the defeated initiative of 1982, the city manager position was eliminated arid the mayor "took over as he described it in the 42296 interview. He assumed the duties of the city full-tim- administrator. He continued to be a again in 1994. full-tim- e mayoradministrator until the council split the position Mayor Tom Stocks was first elected mayor in 1981. At that time, Moab City had a separate city manager, very similar to the way city government is run now. But Tom Stocks wanted to consolidate the two positions and in 1984, on his second attempt, he succeeded. For starters, it might be better if the mayor explains what happened in his own words. On April 22, 1996, Mayor Tom Stocks gave the Zephyr an interview (...presumably the last Zephyr interview. For an account of what happened the following day see: Zephyr, Volume 8 Number 2 "Why Moab's Mayor Has Me All Choked Up") in which he spoke freely of his political pasL I asked him about the issue of city manager in the 1980s and how he came to be mayoradministrator. Here is how he described it (and please note, I have edited from this conversation references to private individuals in the Moab community): "Sheldon Hefner, the mortician, and I and Ed Neal were elected that year (1981). We took over in January '82 we didn't take over. It took two years when the other three went out..(In '83) Bill McDougald was elected to the Council. "...Do you understand state statutes regarding cities as third class? Let me just say that there is a lot of misconception, because even the council today is saying things that are untrue. And that is that the traditional form of government as set up by the state was that the mayor is the chief executive officer to whom all the employees report. And I was told by the attorneys that was for the League and they got rid of the attorney, they got him to put in, in 1976, that you could create the office of city manager and appoint someone to be in that office. Well it says the legislative body, which is the mayor and five council members. And that's why the city council today is having difficulty saying that I don't have the right to appoint... "...The thing that happened in '76, they screwed it up some way because in '77 they did it again. But immediately, Bill McDougald was the mayor, and they immediately adopted a manager by ordinance in 1976, while Bill McDougald was mayor. And in '77 they changed the title because evidently it wasn't quite kosher... "So they hired five or six city managers, not understanding what a city manager is, including the Council today, is an impossible situation to work. Harold Jacobs was elected while they had a City Manager and I don't know how strong the ordinance was during his term of office, but he was down at somebody's office, probably Sam Taylor, and he said they wouldn't even let him open the mail.. "...When I was elected mayor, Ralph McClure (city manager at the time) said The ball is in your court now. Mayor; if you want me to stay. I'll stay.' and I said, 'I don't think we need you,' so he went back to Salt Lake...My job is to appoint I just didn't him. "...The manager by ordinance that they put in '76 and '77 was revoked by the City Council in January 1984 Bill McDougald and Sheldon Hefner and Ed NeaL.When you revoke it, see you can have a manager by ordinance and appoint someone to be there. If you don't have an ordinance, you don't have a manager. When I took office, I said I would do administration and the mayors job for what they were paying the administrator." Now, if I may be so bold as to interpret the mayor's comments and add a historical fact that he foiled to mention. Tom Stocks was elected mayor, as I've already mentioned, in November 1981. But one year later, the Mayor made his first attempt to consolidate power and failed. So that there is no doubt about the facts in this case, let me quote directly from the story that ran in the The headline read: November 4, 1982 edition of the Moab Times-Independe- Mayor Stocks asd the City Council in 1995. What we are experiencing here is a case of deja vu. We have been down this road before. The only difference between this year's scenario and the one Moab endured 15 years ago is that in 1982, the mayor was able to gather enough signatures on a petition to require a vote on mayoradministrator consolidation. He foiled to accomplish that goal last year. And so, as the voters of Moab prepare to vote in the October 7 primary and the general election on November 4, you have to ask yourselves several questions: Do you believe that separating the office of mayor from the position of city manager is the most efficient way of running city government? Do you think that by separating the two positions, the city has helped remove politics, and patronage, personalities from the operation of city gpvemment? If you believe that city government functions more efficiently with a separate city are sure that the manager, you share that city council and mayoral candidates day-to-d- ay you support view? If a candidate for mayor is elected (whether it be the incumbent or someone else) who wants to combine the two positions, and a city council is elected that wants to maintain the current status, are you prepared for four more years of bickering and quarreling between the mayor and council? The bottom line is this: If you believe that the position of a separate city manager should be eliminated, and that those responsibilities should be given to the mayor, you should vote for those candidates who support that idea. Likewise, if you want to retain a should seek out those candidates who share your view. separate administrator, you But you must know where ALL the candidates stand on that very important issue. You cannot cast an intelligent vote otherwise. |
