Coalville City Councilmember Lynn Wood introduced the controversial ordinance at the council meeting April 14. She said it’s to help the city handle future challenges.
“We have some big items looking at us as far as annexation and growth, and we realize that we need to look at our structure and how we are obtaining our professional advisors,” Wood said.
However, residents at the meeting thought it would upset the Coalville government’s separation of powers.
“From any reasonable perspective, the proposed adjustment is nothing but a personal retaliation against current city officers,” resident Matthew Boyer said. “It is the result of a feud between sitting city officers and a portion of the currently impaneled city council.”
Roots of the disagreement
The ongoing feud Boyer was talking about came to a head last year when councilmembers Wood and Louise Willoughby objected to a decision other officials made.
Mayor Mark Marsh, City Attorney Sheldon Smith and Community Development Director Don Sargent allowed the nearby gated resort community of Wohali to list its short-term rentals for sale. Wood and Willoughby said the council should have voted on that.
In February, the council came close to voting on whether to fire the city attorney. The mayor said then he’s in charge of employment so a vote to remove Smith wouldn’t be legal. The council didn’t take a vote after all.
It already votes to confirm mayoral appointments but doesn’t get to choose whom it’s voting on.
Now, the council is discussing giving itself that power — the right to appoint the attorney, and a new position called “strategic planning director.”
“I feel like those positions are extremely important to the role that the city council plays in our legislative ability, more particularly the strategic planning director,” Wood said. “Although the city attorney certainly has a huge role in that — that’s exactly what we're doing is we're creating laws — but probably to a greater degree, the strategic planning director.”
But some residents cried foul, saying it's a separation of powers issue, shifting power from the executive to the legislative branch.
A power grab?
Municipal offices are non-partisan, but resident Rory Swenson said the ordinance still politicizes administrators.
“Our city employees are not politicians, they are career professionals who serve the city, working with administrations of all kinds. They rely on a clear administrative chain of command to do their jobs effectively, ethically and without fear,” he said. “But this ordinance creates a structure where any single employee must now weigh the shifting winds of five different political agendas, five personalities.”
Sargent, the only current planning official, said there’s no need to add a position because his duties aren’t full time as it is.
And Denise Smith, the city attorney’s wife, would prefer the mayor to stay in charge of city employment. She quoted Plato at the council meeting, referencing the ancient philosopher-king ideal.
“Only those who do not seek power are qualified to hold it,” she said.
Parts of the discussion were high-minded; other parts devolved into arguments.
Councilmember Willoughby got emotional, saying she’s collected public “attacks” from Denise Smith into a folder.
“I dare any of you to run for city council. I dare you to be the butt of the harassment that I have been. And what is worse, nothing has been stopped. Nothing. It's been allowed,” Willougby said, later adding she appreciated the public input.
Allegations of a “power grab” flew both directions. Willoughby read a comment from longtime city official Steve Richins.
Richins said previous mayors had disbanded committees councilmembers sat on “so that they could get what they wanted at the time.” He thinks the council should be more involved in day-to-day affairs.
“The major sticking point — well, really, probably the only sticking point — is the changing of appointments and that is something that we could easily change,” Wood said, referencing city attorney and planning director appointments.
The rest of the ordinance codifies the status quo: the mayor proposes a new hire and the city council votes on it. The city council decided not to take action on the new ordinance yet.
