July 20, 2021 - Proposition One Voter Guide Arguments

Per Idaho Statue Vote Guide arguments for proponents and opponents of Proposition One are due on July 20th.  Below are these arguments

Argument in Opposition (Vote "NO" to Elect a "Strong Mayor")

By Lewiston SMART

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OF RETAINING THE COUNCIL-MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT IN LEWISTON

Vote “No” on Proposition One to replace Lewiston’s UNELECTED city manager with an ELECTED “Strong Mayor”.    Proposition One is asking the voters if they want Lewiston to “retain its organization under the ‘council-manager’ plan”, or in other words continue to have Lewiston managed by an UNELECTED city manager.  Vote “No” on Proposition One if you want to ELECT a “Strong Mayor” to manage the City of Lewiston who is directly accountable to the voters.   

Most Lewiston residents are surprised to learn that an ELECTED city councilor must get permission from an UNELECTED city manager to obtain information about the city if getting that information requires assistance from city staff. This power gives Lewiston’s UNELECTED city manager enormous control over the information seen by the city council.  Because of this, one member of the Lewiston City Council has resorted to filing “Public Record Requests” with the city in order to obtain the information he requires for oversight. By voting “No” on Proposition One, an ELECTED “Strong Mayor” will have unencumbered access to all of the city’s information. 

We believe an UNELECTED city manager not directly accountable to the voters has led to the City of Lewiston having some of the highest taxes and fees in the State of Idaho.  Voting “No” on Proposition One will place an ELECTED “Strong Mayor” in charge of developing the city’s budget who will have to answer directly to us about how our money
is spent. By voting “No” on Proposition One, Lewiston will join the overwhelming majority of Idaho cities that have a “Strong Mayor” form of government.

Submitted by:

Lewiston SMART

Joseph Gish, Chairman, 20341 Red Bird Rd, Lewiston

Maureen Anderson, Treasurer, 3510 11th ST C, Lewiston 



Argument in Favor (Vote "YES" to continue with an Unelected City Manager)

By John Pernsteiner (Lewiston City Councilor)

The proposal is to change Lewiston's form of government from the current Council-Manager format to a Mayor-Council format, or what the opposition is calling a "Strong-Mayor" form of government.

Retaining the current Council-Manager form keeps Lewiston less susceptible to corruption, is economical and efficient for taxpayers, and provides the professionalism and accountability that Lewiston residents deserve.

The key question to be answered by this proposal is whether changing Lewiston's form of government to Mayor-Council from Council-Manager is best for our City:

1. The proposed change in government is being conveyed as a way to increase accountability in governance. This idea is simply untrue. Currently every decision, check written and e-mail sent is open for scrutiny by the City Council, and at a moment's notice, the City Manager could be removed. Under a Mayor-Council form of government, the Council would be left with little recourse to reign in a mayor's abuse of power aside from an expensive and cumbersome recall or waiting for an election that is only permitted at certain times of the year.

2. A Mayor, under the Mayor-Council form of government, would control the City Council agenda, hiring and firing of City personnel, and preparation of the budget. Currently the City Manager performs these same duties, but has been selected based on education, defined qualifications and extensive City management experience. He/she is appointed by, works under the direction of, and is held accountable by the City Council. Under the proposal, the only qualifications a mayoral candidate must possess include being a U.S. citizen, a resident for 30 days, 18 years of age and a registered voter. Lewiston deserves guaranteed experience when dealing with a multi-million-dollar budget.

3. The increased costs under the proposal are substantial. Not only would the Mayor be paid $80,000 per year, plus approximately 40 percent in benefits, but would likely require a City Administrator who would receive an advanced salary and a second set of benefits. Amending the entire City Code, policies and plans would also be required and would be extremely expensive and time-consuming. The upheaval and learning curve of the proposed transition would cost the City greatly in the efficiency of its processes and would be repeated again after the next mayoral election and every four years thereafter. A City Manager, however, brings long-term stability.

4. A study performed by Kimberly L. Nelson and Whitney B. Afonso, Public Administration Review, states that local governments led by City Managers are 57 percent less likely to have corruption. When power is concentrated into one role it can be prone to abuse. The current form of government equally disperses power across seven elected councilors which makes it harder for any one councilor to engage in activities that endanger Lewiston residents.

Retaining a Council-Manager form of government saves valuable taxpayer money, provides efficiency in operations, increases accountability, ensures the city is managed by an experienced individual, and reduces the chance of corruption. Vote YES to retain the current form of government and KEEP Lewiston moving forward.

Submitted by:

John Pernsteiner, 1905 Ridgeway Drive, Lewiston, Idaho

Advantages of Lewiston Going to a “Strong Mayor” City Government

In short, a Strong Mayor will make Lewiston more transparent and accountable to the voters.

Many residents may be surprised to learn that Lewiston does not have an elected Mayor with the vast powers usually assigned to an ELECTED Mayor being exercised by a hired City Manager.  In Lewiston’s case the hired City Manager has much more power than the elected members of the City Council.  The City Manager currently controls City Council meeting agendas, City Council members access to city staff and records, and the information City Council members are supplied on the city.  The City Manager is also given vast powers in the event of a public disaster or public health emergency.

Below is a short list of changes a “Strong Mayor” will bring to the City of Lewiston:

- An ELECTED Strong Mayor will have access to all city staff and city records – Currently an UNELECTED City Manager controls individual elected city councilors access to city staff.

- An ELECTED Strong Mayor will determine City Council Meeting agendas – Currently an UNELECTED City Manager controls whether an individual elected City Councilor is allowed to have items on the council meeting agendas.

- An ELECTED Strong Mayor will have power to call special meetings of the council – Currently an UNELECTED City Manager has the power to call a special meeting, or it requires an unanimous decision of the City Council.

- An ELECTED Strong Mayor will have the power to at any time demand a department head exhibit accounts and financial reports – Currently Elected City Council members do not have this power.

- An ELECTED Strong Mayor will have emergency powers including those powers over health emergencies – Currently an UNELECTED City Manager has vast powers to order social distancing, mask mandates, social distancing, gathering limits, quarantining, etc. usually reserved for an elected official.

Authored by Joseph Gish

Lewiston

S – Strong

M – Mayor

A – Accountable to the Voters!

R – Responsive to the People!

T – Tax Payers have a VOICE!

A Strong Mayor Will Have Access to City Staff that our City Councilors Don’t

Lewiston residents are usually shocked when they learn that an ELECTED City Councilor must ask permission from the UNELECTED City Manager to talk to city staff.  This restriction on a City Councilor’s oversight duties is codified in the Lewiston City Code:

Chapter 2, Article II, Sec. 2-28 – “A councilor may request assistance from city staff in accordance with this section. If a request for staff assistance is estimated to require less than one (1) hour of time, such request may be approved by the city manager without council action. If a request for staff assistance is estimated to require one (1) hour or more of time, such request must be approved by a majority of the councilors present at the meeting in which the request is made prior to staff time being utilized. (Ord. No. 4720, § 2, 7-23-18)”

Note that this ordinance was placed on the City Council Meeting’s agenda by the current city manager and passed by the City Council less than three years ago indicating that the city council itself voted to place this encumbrance on their oversight abilities.  The minutes of the July 23rd, 2018 meeting record the vote as follows:

“VOTING AYE: Collins; Schroeder; Blakey; Miller; Randall. VOTING NAY: Pernsteiner.”

The Councilors who voted for Ord. 4720 would likely point out that a majority of the Council can approve access to city staff if the request is over an hour.  However, it is clear from Councilor Bradbury’s recent efforts at oversight that Sec 2-23 of the Lewiston City Code is a formidable barrier to oversight that requires him to submit Public Record Requests to the City of Lewiston in order to perform his oversight role.  It can be argued that ordinary citizens have more access to city staff than our ELECTED City Councilors.

An ELECTED Strong Mayor becomes the “Administrative Official” of the City of Lewiston eliminating the City Manager position.  By virtue of this position the Mayor manages and has access to all city staff.  Elimination of the City Manager position will also require the entire Lewiston City Code to be examined and updated to remove references to the City Manager.  During this process the City Council should eliminate any city code that limits their access to city staff and the information they need to provide oversight.

Modification of the city code will also give the new City Council the opportunity make other desired changes like City Council elections based on districts and in turn requiring City Councilor’s to be elected by majority vote.

Moving Lewiston to a “Strong Mayor” form of government will bring transparency and accountability to Lewiston voters. 

Authored by Joseph Gish

Lewiston

S – Strong

M – Mayor

A – Accountable to the Voters!

R – Responsive to the People!

T – Tax Payers have a VOICE!

A Strong Mayor Will Answer to the Voters for City Council Meeting Agendas

Currently an UNELECTED City Manager has almost total control of the Lewiston City Council meeting agendas and by virtue of this, controls the information ELECTED City Councilors have access to as they perform their oversight role. 

State Statute does not list finalizing City Council meeting agendas as one of the duties of a City Manager, however, this power was assigned to the City Manager less than three years ago in the same Ordinance 4720 that requires City Councilors to get the permission from the City Manager in order to contact city staff.  The relevant Lewiston City Code is below:

Chapter 2, Article II, Sec 2-20, Para (d)(1) – “The city manager shall review and finalize the agenda. Councilors may place items on the agenda either by approval of the city manager or upon a majority vote of the council.”

This ordinance was placed on the City Council Meeting’s agenda on July 23rd, 2018 by the current City Manager and passed by the City Council on the following roll call vote:

“VOTING AYE: Collins; Schroeder; Blakey; Miller; Randall. VOTING NAY: Pernsteiner.”

Note that should one City Councilor or a minority of the City Councilors request an agenda item, the City Manager is incentivized to deny the request since he answers to the majority of the City Council and not to the voters.  A Strong Mayor will answer to the voters should he deny any agenda item on a topic the citizens want their City Council to address.

A recent example of how Lewiston’s Council-Manager plan denies transparency and encumbers City Councilor’s oversight role is Councilor Bradbury discovering what he believes to be $7.1 million dollars illegally transferred out of the city’s utility funds.  Councilor Bradbury spoke up about the illegal transfers at one of the city’s annual budget hearings and requested approval of the budget be delayed until the City Council could look into the transfers.  Although Councilor Bradbury is a retired Idaho District Judge and had previously won a lawsuit against the City of Lewiston, he received no support from his fellow City Council members.  He is now left with no alternative but to file a lawsuit against the City of Lewiston in order to publicly expose to Lewiston utility rate payers how their money is being spent.  Instead of the remaining City Council members showing leadership and holding public hearings on Bradbury’s evidence, they and the City Manager are holding multiple private “Executive Sessions” to “prepare” for the upcoming litigation.  Every citizen should be outraged at the secrecy and conduct of these City Councilors and the City Manager.

In the example above, an ELECTED Strong Mayor would answer to the voters should he deny a City Council meeting agenda item that would publicly examine Councilor Bradbury’s evidence of illegal transfers.  This is just one of many reasons changing Lewiston to a “Strong Mayor” form of government will make the City of Lewiston transparent and accountable to Lewiston voters. 

Authored by Joseph Gish

Lewiston

S – Strong

M – Mayor

A – Accountable to the Voters!

R – Responsive to the People!

T – Tax Payers have a VOICE!