Crisis of confidence' spurs efforts to remake City Hall
Governance changes would be first in three decades
May 21, 2010 5:20 PM DANIEL CHACÓN
THE GAZETTE
After three decades of relative stability, the city of Colorado Springs is facing sweeping changes in how it is governed, including a proposal that would redefine who calls the shots at City Hall.
The push for institutional change stems from a general sense that city government has become ineffective and that Colorado Springs is headed in the wrong direction, observers say.
“I think there’s somewhat of a crisis of confidence right now,” longtime local businessman Les Gruen, who served on the city’s Planning Commission for eight years, said Friday.
“If the community perceived everything as rosy, I don’t think there would be the same interest in pursuing change,” he said.
Residents have lost faith in the city’s ability to govern effectively, at least under the existing governance structure, said Josh Dunn, a political science professor at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs,.
“What happened last November was a repudiation of city government,” he said, referring to the crushing defeat of Issue 2C, a proposed property tax increase.
“I don’t think anyone really believed these claims that the heavens were going to fall,” he said.
Still, the defeat of Issue 2C led to millions of dollars in cuts, including turning off streetlights, closing pools, removing trash cans from parks, reducing the hours of operation of certain departments and laying off employees across city government.
Dunn said the public also lost confidence in City Hall over the agreement between the city and the U.S. Olympic Committee.
Although the deal is back on track, the first agreement fell apart after a series of problems, including a lawsuit filed by the developer, who had a previously undisclosed business relationship with Mayor Lionel Rivera. Also, some residents opposed spending taxpayer money to prevent the prestigious sports organization from moving.
“That didn’t help city government at all,” Dunn said.
The last time the structure of city government underwent a major change was 1979, when the power to pick the mayor switched from the City Council to the electorate, said Bob Loevy, a professor of political science at Colorado College.
That change came on the heels of another voter-approved charter amendment only a couple of years earlier that restructured the makeup of the council.
Since 1920, the council had been comprised of nine at-large members.
During the civil rights movement, a charter review commission recommended changing the council to five at-large members and four district members in an effort to increase minority representation, Loevy said.
“Those were the last two times that we had major changes in the way the city is governed in the form of charter amendments,” he said.
“But in those two cases, they came out of charter commissions appointed by City Council that held public meetings and public hearings,” he said. “What’s different this time is these charter amendments are not coming from a charter commission but are coming from individuals petitioning them onto the ballot. The technique is completely different.”
The proposals being considered for the November ballot include:
• Asking voters to switch from a council-manager form of government, where a city manager oversees day-to-day operations, to a strong-mayor form of government, where the position of city manager is eliminated and the mayor becomes the city’s chief executive.
The city’s original charter created a commission form of government, with a mayor and four at-large council members. On July 6, 1920, Colorado Springs switched to a council-manager form of government, which it has kept for the last 90 years.
“The manager was granted broad powers and duties, including the right to exercise the power and authority of the commissioner or head of any of the five departments originally created in 1909,” according to the City Attorney’s Office.
• Asking voters to create a fifth council district seat by eliminating one of the at-large seats. Under the proposal, each of the five district council members would represent about 82,000 residents. Under the current structure, each district member represents about 100,000 residents.
Supporters say the city has grown and become increasingly diverse and that every area of Colorado Springs needs better representation.
“Usually people who want more district council (members) are looking for more minority representation,” Loevy said.
• Asking voters whether they want the city auditor to be independently elected rather than appointed by the City Council.
An elected auditor could be more aggressive and independent, said Councilman Sean Paige, who is spearheading the proposal.
“Over the years of watching city government, I’ve come to the conclusion that one of the things that’s lacking is some sort of champion of the taxpayers or a watchdog on behalf of the taxpayers,” Paige said.
The proposal for a strong-mayor form of government and to add a fifth council district seat have already been examined by the city’s Initiative Review Committee. Paige said he wanted to get his proposal out to the public to determine if there’s interest in pursuing it.
The city’s fiscal situation and “maybe some distrust” built up in recent years have “created fertile ground for thinking about doing things differently,” Paige said about the proposals to restructure city government.
“I think a sense of crisis brings out that creativity,” he said.
“Yeah, I think we are at a potential turning point and maybe a turning point for the better, not the worse,” he added. “I think the general sense of crisis in the city opens the door to some new thinking and a new evaluation. As a city, I think we should be constantly reevaluating.”
The structure of city government isn’t the only one under the microscope.
The governance structures of Memorial Health System and Colorado Springs Utilities, both city-owned enterprises, are also under review.
Of coarse this is an article about Colorado Springs not Estes Park, Colorado Springs is a Home Ruled Community, a community where the locals are the legislators as apposed to Estes Park where after one hundred years the locals still reject the responsiblility ( the idea of community involvement in EP amounts to “joint a club”). Five years ago Home Rule was proposed for Estes Park , all the elected officials ran for the commission to shout the proposal down. Including Bill Pinkham and Eric Blackhurst and Chuck Lavine. (You elected me so I can do as I please being the local credo.)
Like a bunch of hillbilly’s Estes Park’s politics consist of back room pals, personal relationships, and hiring family. As a matter of fact and public record your Estes Park Trustees haven’t proven they can operate Estes Park lawfully let alone ethically or judiciously. In Estes Park we read the same old puffery, misrepresentations and out and out hot air and no one even gives it a second thought.
(Isn't it the official policy of the State of Colorado to encourage all communities to adopt their own charters, I belive the polocy is "the best govenment is the government closest to the people - Home Rule?)
The Estes Parkian - A Home Rule of One
