As Mayor, I have the sole city power to veto council actions; here's some background and my philosophy about vetoing.
The power comes from state law, which I'm still studying. As I understand it, I can overrule the City Council's decisions as long as I give my reasons (in writing) no later than 14 days after a Council vote is taken. The council could then seek to override my veto with a supermajority vote within 30 days after my veto.
The veto power is a very important tool in the mayor's arsenal, but it's not one to be used lightly. As I understand from the City Administrator, the last time the veto was used was around 2000.
I'm very reserved exercising my veto power; I believe that City Council members are charged with having the 'pulse' of the community, to best represent their constituents. And that the council is the community's best and ultimate "decider" for the conduct of City Government. So as a Mayor, I believe I must resist the temptation to intercede on matters of preference or opinion (i.e. "Which way is the best way to do a thing?") and instead focus on the effective execution of those decisions, and ensuring the council is provided with the best information possible for making those decisions (including facilitating council meetings in a way that encourages dialogue and learning).
That said, there are certain circumstances where a mayoral veto is not just allowed, but demanded; here are a sampling of instances where, as Mayor, I believe I would have vetoed council action:
- If 2119 College Street site plan had been approved in early in 2018, based on the reasoning that a five-story building with four floors of residences and one floor of retail was a "commercial building".. Fortunately, we were instead able to approve a code change for a Mixed Use Building that then allowed this kind of construction.
- The Public Works Director position from this past year -- I would have vetoed this council action because all council members had not been granted access to equal information for the hiring decision, and the council would not change the effective date of the hire to "today". Because the City Council was responsible for hiring this director, it was imperative the whole council be part of that decisionmaking process, which required access to necessary information. I thought that council was not following the spirit (and possibly the letter) of the law.
- KwikStar. Yes, I probably would have vetoed the KwikStar site plan as mayor. The scale of the site plan, as provided, did not conform to the requirement for "Neighborhood Commercial" level projects in the Mixed Use Zoning District, plain and simple. A smaller facility, rather something scaled to travel-plaza size, would have been fine.
In each of the above cases, it's not a matter of whether I personally was in favor of a project or action. I really liked the original 2119 College Street design...I was confident that Chase Schrage would be a great Public Works Director....and I like that the larger & newer gas stations have great coffee and amenities. The problem was -- in my humble opinion- - the actions above were not in compliance with the law. I firmly believe that City Council members must tightly respect the law as written, not with a loose interpretation. A continual loose interpretation of the law runs the risk of arbitrary rule, which is Kryptonite to the principles of good government (particularly the Rule of Law).
So, if you find yourself scratching your head about why I'm not jumping to veto any action which seems to be unpopular or unwise, just know that -- agree or disagree -- I'm working to see if the action is counter to the law or has grossly violated the principles of good government. If not, I'm very likely to allow the council action to take its course, and to leave the political remedy in place -- council elections.
Since this is a pretty new power for me to exercise, my opinion may change about it over time. But as of January 2020, at the start of my mayor service, this is my current thinking. Some (or many!) of you will disagree with my philosophy, and I respect that. I'll be interested to hear your thoughts and perspective on why I should approach the veto power differently.
Thanks for reading to the end --- and for doing the work to be an informed and engaged resident!