City Administrator Divorces Himself From Aldermen Intent to Place Items on Their Agenda

By Pauline Masson –

Aldermen may complete the first reading Tuesday evening of a bill that authorizes individual aldermen to add items to the agenda of the Board of Aldermen Meeting.

Before this action, aldermen have had the opportunity to read a written declaration by City Administrator Steve Roth that he will not take part in a scenario where an alderman can add anything to the agenda that he creates and the mayor approves.

The bill is one of three pieces of legislation, asserting the power of the legislative body, that Scott Lesh, acting president of the board of aldermen introduced at the May 16 board. The full board approved the intent of the bills and voted to instruct City Attorney Bob Jones to write the bills, which are on the June 6 meeting agenda.

In his June 2 memorandum to the mayor and board of aldermen Roth wrote a lengthy diatribe of his reaction to aldermen wanting to put an item on the meeting agenda.

The new bill, he said, is a change from current procedure, in which the staff (he Steve Roth) typically maintains (creates) a draft agenda, and then forwards it to the Mayor for approval prior to posting. A summary of specific action items is included in his report to the Board. 

His report for the June 6 meeting, is the subject of this post. Readers can download the June 6 meeting packet from the city’s web page and read Roth’s entire reaction to aldermen injecting items on what he considers his and the mayor’s agenda.

He focused a direct assault on aldermen in his discussion of Bill 5201 Agenda Preparation.

He said he does not want any part of an agenda that includes an item that an alderman has added.

Using the Queen Victoria prerogative of referring to himself in the third person, he refers to himself throughout the declaration as staff.

“If the Board wants to conduct itself in this manner,” he said, “the Board can certainly do that. However staff – meaning the city administrator –  has no business nor desire to be involved in such disputes. My recommendation then is for the bill to be amended to make clear that alderman agenda requests must go to the Mayor only.”

He worries that aldermen might not be smart enough to place an item on the agenda.

He said he (staff) writes a summary report on each agenda item after asking department heads to write a report on agenda items that affect them but he offers no intention of making a similar offer to an alderman to give him a summary of an item he or she wants on the agenda.

He asks the  question: “Will alderman agenda items then require the same “back-up.”

“I would think the answer would be no,” he said. “But in such event where an item is added with no explanation, then staff (Roth) of course would have no information if questioned by other aldermen, employees, or the general public. Nor would any information be included in the Board packet, which of course is made public prior to every meeting.” 

He goes on to threaten aldermen with the suggestion that approving this bill authorizing an aldermen to add an item to the agenda might jeopardize aldermen’s ability to talk on items during the meeting other than the specific agenda item.

He concludes with the assertion that for a single alderman to place items on the agenda seems to be in conflict with the concept that individual aldermen do not have any particular executive or legislative authority, but only have authority collectively, as a Board. 

What he does NOT say is where he (staff) gets his authority to create, maintain, or control the Board of Aldermen Meeting agenda. Where is it written that the city administrator and mayor have the sole power to determine what is to be included on a Board of Aldermen Meeting agenda?

It is tempting to say that Roth’s reasoning on this issue is deranged, or insane. But let’s take a breath. For a city administrator to offer such open disagreement and unwillingness to comply with the wishes of the elected legislators is – to put in the gentlest word that comes to mind – mindboggling.

What the city administrator is talking about here is is NOT the staff (city administrator’s) meeting. It is NOT the Mayor’s meeting. It is the Board of Aldermen Meeting.

This is the Board of Aldermen meeting – required by state statute – where the elected legislators are empowered to craft the laws and policies that govern the city.

I do not envy aldermen, who have been going out of their way to be diplomatic, to be respectful, to the status quo, in determining how to respond to this staff reprimand of their daring act.

Perhaps they will just ignore it and go on. But to this seasoned reporter, it looks a lot like irreconcilable differences.