OGDEN — Six floors separate the offices of Mayor Matthew Godfrey and the city council inside the Municipal Building downtown, but cracks in their relationship often seem much wider.Yes, gentle readers. Our Emerald City government is composed of two co-equal branches of government, with distinctly separate roles. We've been trying to hammer that point since the early days of this blog. The council/legislature sets the general policy in our city. The Mayor's office executes this policy. This formal "separation of powers" is of course the foundation of a conflicts-based system, whereby each branch acts as a check and balance against the other.
Never mind being on the same page, it frequently seems that hardcharging Godfrey and the methodical city council aren’t even reading from the same book as they attempt to map out Ogden’s future.
So who’s to blame for helping set the stage for discord?
You.
That is if you voted in favor of a measure enacted in 1992 enabling Ogden to be governed by a full-time mayor and part-time city council.
Municipalities in Utah, other than Ogden, that use the “strong mayor” system include Salt Lake City, Provo, Logan, Sandy and Murray.
Patterned after state and federal government, the system gives Godfrey administrative and executive powers and the city council legislative responsibilities.
It has also been the catalyst for turf battles and public bickering between the
mayor and council.
All in all, Mr. Schwebke's effort is applaudable, for a journalist with no apparent training in political science. We'll nitpick a little bit over Mr. Schwebke's above query about who is to blame for council/mayor discord. No blame should be affixed, we believe. Conflict is a key feature in governments which operate with checks and balances, Even Boss Godfrey gives at least lip service to this principle:
Godfrey believes disagreements between him and the city council ultimately foster productive debate that leads to good government, which is the hallmark of the strong mayor system.And there's one other element of this otherwise excellent story with which we wish to take issue. Throughout the story, Mr. Schwebke and his interviewees repeatedly refer to our so-called "strong mayor" form of government. This is a misnomer.
“With everyone who has this form of government, there is a healthy tension,” he said.
In 1975 the Legislature repealed the Strong Mayor Form of Government Act and enacted what is now known as the Optional Forms of Municipal Government Act. The Act provided for optional forms of government known as council-mayor and council- manager forms and made them available to all municipalities, regardless of their classification.
Emerald City's government follows the council-mayor form of government. The archaic "strong mayor" appellation is an unfortunate mischaracterization. The persistent use of the phrase "strong mayor" is technically inaccurate, and a pet peeve of your ever-humble blogmeister. Frankly it drives him nuts.
For readers interested in a more scholarly and thorough discussion of the various traditional and optional forms of municipal government existing in Utah, we're linking to this excellent David L. Church article. Mr. Church is a prominent Utah lawyer, a recognized expert in the area of Utah municipal law and is also quoted briefly in today's Std-Ex article.
Even with the annoying "strong mayor" flaw, which we believe to glaring, we're going to give Ace Reporter Schwebke a Weber County Forum Tip O' the Hat this morning, for digging in and informing himself and his Std-Ex readers about the true conflict-oriented nature of Emerald City government.
The floor is open for your always-cogent comments.
