Charter group says electing town mayor is top consideration

As the deadline for a recommendation approaches, the commission has ruled out the council-manager form of government.

By: Paul Szaniawski
   With less than a month to complete its report, the Charter Study Commission rolled up its sleeves and got to work by narrowing down the type of government that could be considered to potentially replace Hillsborough’s township committee.
   This effort came after the commission established that residents indeed want to see a change and elect their own mayor.
   State law allows municipalities to adapt to one of four different types of governments – mayor-council, council-manager, manager-council and a special charter.
   At a special meeting Friday, the commission ruled out the council-manager form of government and edged closer to forming a final opinion.
   The commission was formed in December to research different types of municipal governments so it could make a recommendation for change to Hillsborough’s governing body.
   Any change recommended will be placed on the November ballots for voters’ approval.
   The commission members took note of the 2005 proposal to directly change the government to a mayor-council form with wards, which was rejected by voters, saying false information about the cost of changing the form of government may have been the primary cause of the defeat.
   "It failed because the opposition was completely dishonest," commission member George Ostergren recalled. "These people came out at the eleventh hour and said it would cost $700,000. That was an absolute, flat-out lie."
   A political action committee called Residents Against Wards (RAW) was created to defeat the move to change the government to a mayor-council form, according to commission Chairman Chris Jensen.
   While campaign information issued by the group also charged voting wards would divide the town, its estimates of $700,000 in costs to change to a mayor-council form was a prominent part of the campaign.
   After early speculation of high costs clouded the current charter study earlier this year, the commission decided to ask the town’s codification professionals for an estimate two months ago. General Code, a company based out of Rochester, N.Y., estimated redoing the town code would cost approximately $23,000, according to Mr. Jensen. Attorney fees are not included in the cost estimate, and if a government change is made, township attorneys would have to prepare the transition in less than three months to execute a legal transition.
   "We know if we have an attorney working full-time over 90 days it will cost $60,000," Mr. Jensen said. His estimate comes from a formula based on a township attorney working eight hours each day at $125 per hour, the current lawyer’s standard fee.
   Despite voters rejecting the 2005 proposal to change the township committee to a mayor-council government, Hillsborough residents still want a mayor the commission concluded.
   "Like what I’ve been saying for years, we need someone to run this town," commission Vice Chairman Glenn van Lier said. "Hillsborough has nobody in charge."
   Mr. van Lier noted 5,000 residents signed the petition that put a change of government on the ballot two years ago, and it was evident that direct election of a mayor was at the top of the public’s wish lists.
   "In 2003 and 2004 some of us went door to door and stood in front of the library or supermarkets and the most resounding thing we head was that people wanted to elect their own mayor," Mr. van Lier said.
   Commission member Bill Page said 59 percent of voters last November chose to empanel the current charter study, another clue that resident want to see a change he said.
   Once the commission agreed Hillsborough residents seemed to want a mayor, Mr. Jensen asked his fellow commissioners if there was any form of government they felt wouldn’t fit the town. Commission members reached a consensus that council-manager wouldn’t fit Hillsborough’s needs and it was crossed off, at least temporarily, from consideration.
   Mr. Van Lier also found similar chinks in the mayor-council-administrator form, where a six-member town council and a full-time administrator wield power. The legislative and executive powers are separated.
   "The mayor is not the CEO," echoed Mr. van Lier. "The person doing the day to day work is the administrator. Where do his allegiances lie?"
   The vice chairman’s concern was that the administrator "serves under the pleasure of the council," and he pointed out that the council is the administrator’s final judge because it can vote him out of office with four out of six votes. Thus, the administrator may concentrate on gathering the council’s favor instead of moving toward the mayor’s vision.
   "What good is it to elect your mayor if he can’t do anything for the people who put him there?" Mr. van Lier said.
   Only four towns in the state use the manager-council-administrator form, in which no options like a nonpartisan government or voting wards are allowed.
   "I don’t personally think Hillsborough likes wards and it isn’t big enough for wards," said Baird Drive resident Frank Herbert at a public hearing on June 28. "I’m really starting to feel that MCA would be the way to go – if you recommend a change." Mr. Page disagreed — he said he preferred having government options available because of flexibility in the future. But Mr. Page also didn’t like the gray area of who held the executive power, the administrator or the mayor.
   However, he was careful of not moving too quickly.
   "I’m not ready to dismiss mayor-council-administrator," Mr. Page said. "I have some concerns but I would like to go over them first."
   On July 19, the commission will get that chance to go over mayor-council-administrator as well as the mayor-council form. With only weeks left before the Aug. 8 deadline for a recommendation, the meeting may possibly be the last to see debate over which government form could be recommended.