July 20, 2021 - Proposition One Voter Guide Arguments

Per Idaho Statue Vote Guide arguments for proponents and opponents of Proposition One are due on July 20th.  Below are these arguments

Argument in Opposition (Vote "NO" to Elect a "Strong Mayor")

By Lewiston SMART

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OF RETAINING THE COUNCIL-MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT IN LEWISTON

Vote “No” on Proposition One to replace Lewiston’s UNELECTED city manager with an ELECTED “Strong Mayor”.    Proposition One is asking the voters if they want Lewiston to “retain its organization under the ‘council-manager’ plan”, or in other words continue to have Lewiston managed by an UNELECTED city manager.  Vote “No” on Proposition One if you want to ELECT a “Strong Mayor” to manage the City of Lewiston who is directly accountable to the voters.   

Most Lewiston residents are surprised to learn that an ELECTED city councilor must get permission from an UNELECTED city manager to obtain information about the city if getting that information requires assistance from city staff. This power gives Lewiston’s UNELECTED city manager enormous control over the information seen by the city council.  Because of this, one member of the Lewiston City Council has resorted to filing “Public Record Requests” with the city in order to obtain the information he requires for oversight. By voting “No” on Proposition One, an ELECTED “Strong Mayor” will have unencumbered access to all of the city’s information. 

We believe an UNELECTED city manager not directly accountable to the voters has led to the City of Lewiston having some of the highest taxes and fees in the State of Idaho.  Voting “No” on Proposition One will place an ELECTED “Strong Mayor” in charge of developing the city’s budget who will have to answer directly to us about how our money
is spent. By voting “No” on Proposition One, Lewiston will join the overwhelming majority of Idaho cities that have a “Strong Mayor” form of government.

Submitted by:

Lewiston SMART

Joseph Gish, Chairman, 20341 Red Bird Rd, Lewiston

Maureen Anderson, Treasurer, 3510 11th ST C, Lewiston 



Argument in Favor (Vote "YES" to continue with an Unelected City Manager)

By John Pernsteiner (Lewiston City Councilor)

The proposal is to change Lewiston's form of government from the current Council-Manager format to a Mayor-Council format, or what the opposition is calling a "Strong-Mayor" form of government.

Retaining the current Council-Manager form keeps Lewiston less susceptible to corruption, is economical and efficient for taxpayers, and provides the professionalism and accountability that Lewiston residents deserve.

The key question to be answered by this proposal is whether changing Lewiston's form of government to Mayor-Council from Council-Manager is best for our City:

1. The proposed change in government is being conveyed as a way to increase accountability in governance. This idea is simply untrue. Currently every decision, check written and e-mail sent is open for scrutiny by the City Council, and at a moment's notice, the City Manager could be removed. Under a Mayor-Council form of government, the Council would be left with little recourse to reign in a mayor's abuse of power aside from an expensive and cumbersome recall or waiting for an election that is only permitted at certain times of the year.

2. A Mayor, under the Mayor-Council form of government, would control the City Council agenda, hiring and firing of City personnel, and preparation of the budget. Currently the City Manager performs these same duties, but has been selected based on education, defined qualifications and extensive City management experience. He/she is appointed by, works under the direction of, and is held accountable by the City Council. Under the proposal, the only qualifications a mayoral candidate must possess include being a U.S. citizen, a resident for 30 days, 18 years of age and a registered voter. Lewiston deserves guaranteed experience when dealing with a multi-million-dollar budget.

3. The increased costs under the proposal are substantial. Not only would the Mayor be paid $80,000 per year, plus approximately 40 percent in benefits, but would likely require a City Administrator who would receive an advanced salary and a second set of benefits. Amending the entire City Code, policies and plans would also be required and would be extremely expensive and time-consuming. The upheaval and learning curve of the proposed transition would cost the City greatly in the efficiency of its processes and would be repeated again after the next mayoral election and every four years thereafter. A City Manager, however, brings long-term stability.

4. A study performed by Kimberly L. Nelson and Whitney B. Afonso, Public Administration Review, states that local governments led by City Managers are 57 percent less likely to have corruption. When power is concentrated into one role it can be prone to abuse. The current form of government equally disperses power across seven elected councilors which makes it harder for any one councilor to engage in activities that endanger Lewiston residents.

Retaining a Council-Manager form of government saves valuable taxpayer money, provides efficiency in operations, increases accountability, ensures the city is managed by an experienced individual, and reduces the chance of corruption. Vote YES to retain the current form of government and KEEP Lewiston moving forward.

Submitted by:

John Pernsteiner, 1905 Ridgeway Drive, Lewiston, Idaho