Mayor chats up charter debate
By Timothy Woerner | Enterprise-Journal
Posted: 04/24/08 - 12:23:25 pm CDT
Mayor Zach Patterson renewed his call for citizens in McComb to inform themselves about civic government Tuesday, saying in his “Chat with the Mayor” that he is “not advocating anything but a dialogue,” but also stating that the city’s charter “protects the power of the old guard.”
Handing out copies of Mississippi Senate Bill 2781, excerpts from a handbook on Mississippi municipal government and editorials published in the Enterprise-Journal between 2002 and 2008, Patterson highlighted forms of government utilized in other cities in the state as well as calls for change from the Enterprise-Journal when jurisdictional issues arose under prior administrations locally.
Using the combined interpretation of those pieces, he sought to clarify what he called “out of context” remarks in an April 20 story on the Senate bill’s local impact, encouraged examination of shortcomings in the city’s governing code and again chided the newspaper for not promoting such a discussion.
“I never said this applied,” Patterson said of the bill, which clarifies mayoral executive power and aldermanic legislative power in code charter cities. “But I’ll tell you what I will say: Is the town of Magnolia a code charter city? Is the town of Summit a code charter city? Then if our newspaper is providing local coverage on matters that impact the local government, why didn’t they have this in there, because it fully applies to the mayors of Summit and Magnolia? … My question to the Enterprise-Journal was, ‘Why didn’t you cover this if it impacts our local community directly?’ Hmm? There are similarities between this and our charter and I said that this should be used to open up the dialogue in the city of McComb, asking the question to the voters.”
Patterson has often said one shortcoming of the city’s current governmental structure is the degree to which responsibility delegated to the mayor’s office is not matched by authority to perform required tasks.
“We’re in a form of government where you can’t fix blame,” Patterson reiterated Tuesday. “I want to be held accountable and responsible. Any elected official worth his salt would want to be held accountable. We need to know where the buck stops.”
He portrayed a 3-2 vote against hiring an independent review of the city’s charter form of government at the city board meeting Tuesday as further evidence that some were scared to talk about that problem.
“For some reason we don’t want to review the charter,” Patterson said. “But what you see quoted in the newspaper is that this charter has lasted us for so long that it should stay here. And I’ll say ‘No. The citizens of McComb should decide what kind of government we should have.’ Our charter was written in 1872. The Civil War ended in 1865. We were in the Reconstruction period in the beautiful state of Mississippi at that time. We were almost 100 years prior to the passing of the Civil Rights Act,where all citizens could even take part in the process. So that’s when this great charter was formulated. … This is information that you need to know about how your government works.”
Patterson then turned to the municipal government handbook, which is published by Mississippi State University’s Center for Governmental Training and Technology and available at cgt.msstate.edu/munic_govt_ms.html, and quoted segments concerning municipal charters to illustrate how he hoped McComb could use guidance from legislation on code charters to apply locally.
“Few cities utilize their old municipal charter,” the second chapter notes. “The Constitution of 1890 directed the manner in which all future municipal charters would be granted. … Municipalities were permitted to choose to keep their existing city charter or elect to be governed by the new ‘code charter.’ … A number of cities and towns around the state chose to retain their private charter and continue to operate under them today.”
“Today these charters are referred to as ‘private charters,’ ” Patterson continued. “At the time, there was only one form of government set out in the code. That form called for a mayor-board of aldermen form of government. The term ‘code charter’ is still frequently used in referring to the mayor-alderman form of municipal government. … In reality, all forms of municipal government are ‘code charters’ in that the primary elements of government are defined by the Mississippi Code.”
The mayor also brought up old editorials, beginning with a 2002 piece written around the time state representative and former selectman David Myers legal case concerning dual service was being argued before judges in Jackson.
“If the mayor’s job is to execute decisions made by the board and he lacks the right to check the board’s authority by vetoing a decision … the mayor is essentially a figurehead,” the Enterprise-Journal wrote.
“It is, however, clear that when McComb got its municipal charter in 1872, city or state officials wanted a weak mayor. Perhaps they overdid it. Maybe the mayor’s office is too weak, and maybe the board is too strong. And that, at the core, is why the city is in court. Blurred lines between the three branches of government in small communities is nothing new. … Future boards of selectmen should study this issue and more clearly define the mayor’s authority and the board’s authority.”
“It would make for better government,” Patterson said. “Or so (editor) Jack Ryan and the Enterprise-Journal says.”A 2003 editorial related to Myers’ appeal preached the same message.
“The city board ought to take this opportunity to more clearly define its executive and legislative branches,” the paper wrote. “Put plainly, the board ought to amend its charter to give the mayor more power. … Authority is unfairly tilted toward the legislative side of city government. There are no checks and balances.
“There would be risks to doing this,” the editorial continued. “What if a crackpot gets elected mayor? Such a person, with more power and a willingness to use it selfishly, could badly damage city government and the public’s trust in it. Those arguments, however, display an amusing lack of confidence in McComb voters. … Usually the voters get it right.”
“They are mute on this matter now,” Patterson teased. “What’s the position now? I think his nightmare came true. That’s all it is to me, amusing, that crackpot comment.”
Patterson then showcased a third editorial in 2008, discussing a bond issue for the wastewater treatment facility, quoting portions that read: “The board is being criticized for rubber-stamping Mayor Zach Patterson’s recommendations. ... The selectmen deserve the criticism. ... The mayor is correct when he says the board has had plenty of time in the past to ask questions. ... But the mayor and selectmen, on this and many other issues, simply do not inspire confidence.”
“He (Jack Ryan) is saying ‘Please challenge him. Please be divisive,’ ” Patterson responded. “All these things that he criticized them for in the past. ... We can’t be trusted to do a $30 million project, but less than one year after Tommy Walman was the mayor, he was talking about amending the charter to give him more authority.”
Meanwhile, Patterson continued to chastise current coverage as well, asking how the paper had previously printed the city charter when local attorney Norman Gillis Jr. had complaints, but couldn’t find a full copy of the document at City Hall last week.
He said he still saw what amounted to efforts to sow division.
“See there’s a conspiracy,” he said. “There are those who don’t want to enter into a conversation about the charter in this city.
“I haven’t said anything was lied about or misquoted,” Patterson continued, talking about the Sunday article on the Senate bill, “But what I said was out of context, and I wasn’t allowed to be clear in what I’ve said. And that was exactly what was intended in the writing of this article, was to draw a wedge between myself and the selectmen.”
Patterson asked to retract the “conspiracy” quote after the chat, but failing that, offered some explanation.
“I was primarily talking about the things that were to draw a wedge between myself and the selectmen,” he said in an interview. “You know that I did not dispute anything you wrote. But what I told you to do was to look at the similarities in that piece and let’s highlight the similarities between the bill and the charter. ... It was not meant at your writing … But I do accuse the Enterprise-Journal of trying to drive a wedge between the selectmen and myself. They’ve tried to get the selectmen to break the peace and come after me.”
Patterson then repeated that his main goal was to galvanize public interest in city code.
“Take the time to study and figure out what’s happening in our government,” Patterson challenged citizens. “That’s what voters are supposed to do.”ernment in small communities is nothing new. … Future boards of selectmen should study this issue and more clearly define the mayor’s authority and the board’s authority.”
“It would make for better government,” Patterson said. “Or so (editor) Jack Ryan and the Enterprise-Journal says.”
A 2003 editorial related to Myers’ appeal preached the same message.
“The city board ought to take this opportunity to more clearly define its executive and legislative branches,” the paper wrote. “Put plainly, the board ought to amend its charter to give the mayor more power. … Authority is unfairly tilted toward the legislative side of city government. There are no checks and balances.
“There would be risks to doing this,” the editorial continued. “What if a crackpot gets elected mayor? Such a person, with more power and a willingness to use it selfishly, could badly damage city government and the public’s trust in it. Those arguments, however, display an amusing lack of confidence in McComb voters. … Usually the voters get it right.”
“They are mute on this matter now,” Patterson teased. “What’s the position now? I think his nightmare came true. That’s all it is to me, amusing, that crackpot comment.”
Patterson then showcased a third editorial in 2008, discussing a bond issue for the wastewater treatment facility, quoting portions that read: “The board is being criticized for rubber-stamping Mayor Zach Patterson’s recommendations. ... The selectmen deserve the criticism. ... The mayor is correct when he says the board has had plenty of time in the past to ask questions. ... But the mayor and selectmen, on this and many other issues, simply do not inspire confidence.”
“He (Jack Ryan) is saying ‘Please challenge him. Please be divisive,’” Patterson responded. “All these things that he criticized them for in the past. ... We can’t be trusted to do a $30 million project, but less than one year after Tommy Walman was the mayor, he was talking about amending the charter to give him more authority.”
Meanwhile, Patterson continued to chastise current coverage as well, asking how the paper had previously printed the city charter when local attorney Norman Gillis Jr. had complaints, but couldn’t find a full copy of the document at City Hall last week.
He said he still saw what amounted to efforts to sow division.
“See there’s a conspiracy,” he said. “There are those who don’t want to enter into a conversation about the charter in this city.
“I haven’t said anything was lied about or misquoted,” Patterson continued, talking about the Sunday article on the Senate bill, “But what I said was out of context and I wasn’t allowed to be clear in what I’ve said. And that was exactly what was intended in the writing of this article, was to draw a wedge between myself and the selectmen.”
Patterson asked to retract the “conspiracy” quote after the chat, but failing that, offered some explanation.
“I was primarily talking about the things that were to draw a wegde between myself and the selectmen,” he said in an interview. “You know that I did not dispute anything you wrote. But what I told you to do was to look at the similarities in that piece and let’s highlight the similarities between the bill and the charter. ... It was not meant at your writing … But I do accuse the Enterprise-Journal of trying to drive a wedge between the selectmen and myself. They’ve tried to get the selectmen to break the peace and come after me.”
Patterson then repeated that his main goal was to galvanize public interest in city code.
“Take the time to study and figure out what’s happening in our government,” Patterson challenged citizens. “That’s what voters are supposed to do.”
|
Let us know what you think about this story or topic.
|
Your comment may not
immediately appear on this Web site. We appreciate your patience.
|
|
|
|
|
RSS
ha ha wrote on Apr 25, 2008 4:56 PM: