This means that decisions are consistent with relevant legislation or common law and are within the powers of City Council.
- ENSURE ITEMS BEFORE COUNCIL FOLLOW THE SPIRIT & LETTER OF THE LAW: Typically, our council meetings are just matters of opinion -- should we allow chickens? Should we have fireworks? Or they're a matter of administrative approval -- Do we buy that dump truck? Do we approve this new sign downtown? In those kinds of decisions, it's up to the wisdom of the majority. Sometimes I'm in the minority (or alone!) and that's OK, and we move on. But once in a while, an item comes up where the process is was inherently flawed, and Council failed to follow the spirit of the law. As mayor, I'll be highly vigilant in addressing these kinds of issues before they reach council to begin with. Case in point, the hiring of the new Public Works Director in July. That decision is clearly, by law, the responsibility of the City Council. Instead, the city administrator put the selected person (an existing staff member) into the role -- with all the responsibilities and pay that goes along with it. Council was then expected to approve this appointment after the fact - it the appointment was backdated 15 days. The Administrator was required by law to simply recommend an appointment, and for the City Council to hire if we agreed. Failure to follow the correct process made council approval a mere formality - a 'rubber stamp'. I was the lone vote against it. As Mayor, I will not put the City Council in this position again.
- SEEK CLARITY IN THE LAW: Where city code is vague, I will work with staff and council to clarify and revise if necessary. The zoning ordinances surrounding Mixed-Use Buildings is a perfect example. When the College Hill 5 Story Building came before Council in early 2018, I opposed it because it didn't fit within the existing ordinances. P&Z and city staff recommended approval based on a very, very liberal interpretation of the existing code, and I was pressured to vote in favor of it. I didn't -- even though I had no issues with the building itself. Fortunately, we did the right thing and clarified/changed our ordinances, which allowed for these kinds of mixed-use buildings to be constructed. The city council should set the clearest guidance possible for developers and other stakeholders -- limiting the risk that a seemingly-compliant project will be turned through councilor caprice. Developers are not threatened by extensive zoning ordinances...they generally welcome it, because it gives them confidence that a compliant project will sail smoothly through the approval process. It's the vagueness of the law that worries them. Let's fix that, whenever possible.