Does the mayor have too much power?

[Modernliberal]

Easy one, yes, no.

[rapuda]

I think the mayor has as much power as the town council allows him to have.
What I mean by that is that if the council allows him to do whatever he wants, (like our congress allows Bush free reign) then he has too much power. If the council does their job and keeps him in check, (unlike congress with Bush) then the mayor has only the power allowed by his position. Also, unlike our president, the mayor gets voted for every two years. If the people feel he is abusing his power, they can vote him out at the next election in two years, rather than four.

[Modernliberal]

Quick question does anyone know how many votes it takes to overturn the mayor?

[rapuda]

According to an article in yesterdays Record-Journal, it's 7.

[Modernliberal]

So that means with 9 total members on the board, and 5 being democrat, that they need to persuade 2 Republicans to side with them. Otherwise whatever the mayor says goes. Hmm... I don't see the Democrats persuading the Republicans to do that. So the Mayor has unlimited power. What he wants he gets? Interesting. Sounds like it is just as easy for the mayor to get what he wants. I think something should be done. I don't even care if a Democrat becomes mayor. Something needs to be revised so that the mayor is not this powerful. There shouldn't be anyone that has that kind of power.


Modernliberal:)

[rapuda]

I agree 7 out of 9 is too high for overturning a veto. 6 would be a better number because it would be a two thirds majority (66.7%). 7 is about 77.8% of the council. I didn't realize this until I read the article in yesterdays paper about a charter revision.
So based on this information that I just learned, I would say it's difficult to overturn a mayoral veto, which in turn does give him more power than I originally thought.
I'm not sure about him having too much power though, because the council still has control. You could say the town council doesn't have enough power to over-ride the mayor. Or you could say the party that the mayor belongs to has an added advantage in the town council.
I'm not sure where I stand on this issue anymore. I do agree though that the number of council members needed to over-ride a veto should be 6.
Does anyone have input as to why it should stay at 7?

[Modernliberal]

I am sorry, you will get no argument from me on the two-thirds. It is and always has been two-thirds everywhere else. Why isn't it here? This should have been changed awhile ago. I still think he has too much power, if he wants to pass a law all he has to do is propose it, then when the Dems vote it down he will be upset, and will automatically veto what they want, and so leaving them without the ability to do anything. I am not saying that the Dems would be right for voting him down, I am just stating that it looks as if it will be two more years of nothingness in the town of Wallingford. This troubles me seeing as how there are many things that need to get done, and they always seem to fall by the wayside, because the politicians think it is better to play one side against the other than to do what is best for the town. Sad, so very sad.

Modernliberal:)

[rapuda]

Unfortunately things aren't going to change until the voters of Wallingford get upset about something. Dickinson has the senior vote locked up and they represent a large voting block in this town.
I don't agree with some of the things our mayor does. I feel he is too reactive and not pro-active. He has done a great job of keeping the budget balanced, but sometimes at the expense of certain departments such as police and fire.
I think only a referendum can change the rule on overturning a veto. It was tried once before and failed.
I would say if you want to try it again, go for it. I'd sign a petition for that referendum.

[melto]

I believe changing it to 6 would require a charter revision, and of course that would open a can of worms. I would be glad to see a charter revision, but many are concerned that it would mean changes to other parts of the charter.

Yes, the Mayor has too much power, and it's not just about Veto power either. In yesterday's paper, there was an article about the town going to self-insurance. That's a good thing, but it went on to say it was a decision made completely by the Mayor, which to me implies to me that it is the Mayor that has kept this from happening in the past. The article also suggested that there might not be a bidding process, and the current insurance might simply remain in place. Again, a decision of the Mayor.

It is clear that our mayor doesn't like change. No internet in Town Hall. No cell phones for town employees, though it would make a great deal of sense for certain jobs - like building inspectors. Meeting minutes not available through the town website - meetings are broadcast on Cable Access, but have you noticed how many dishes there are in town? Sure, many residents don't have internet access in their homes, but they can get access at the public library. In today's paper another article says he is wary of offering Direct Deposit to town employees! When are we going to join the rest of the state in the 21st Century?

[collie]

When he retires, I guess. Unless, by some miracle of miracles, someone could beat him in an election.

[catnap]

You mean Mayor Dicktatorison?


nawww........:rolleyes:

[gunderstone]

To answer the earlier question, it does in fact take seven votes to override a mayoral veto. It has never happened (in my memory) as no one will break rank.

Additionally, the majority lock on the town council is set at the state level. So long as there are councilors all at large rather than district based such as in Meriden you'll probably never see this.

I've blogged about this last year and if anyone would like to review the details are at http://jasonzandri.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!AA559A45099B2EBD!214.entry

Anyone that needs proof on whether or not the Mayor yields too much power only needs to attend a council meeting. It isn't for a lack of the Council trying to get the mayor to do something - indeed, many directives have grown old on his desk after the council have approved them but what can they do? The council cannot fire the mayor only the voters can and they seem to continually overlook these things.

Perhaps with all the fall out over the healthcare issue it'll get the hardest full court press this time.

We'll see - others are driving that right now while I am working on getting the signatures needed to form the charter revision commission