Tuesday night's surprise removal of Monroe Alderman Michael Boyce as chairman of the city's Finance and Taxation Committee makes us wonder if the move was a legitimate bid to address leadership issues - or perhaps an attempt to squelch a freshman alderman asserting his authority.
Mayor Bill Ross told the city council Tuesday that he was replacing Boyce, who represents the 3rd Ward, as committee chairman with Alderman Dan Henke. Ross said Boyce has been struggling in the role, and after considering the situation for a couple of weeks, decided it would be best to oust him.
For his part, Ross said that, in retrospect, he made a mistake appointing a new alderman to chair a committee. We tend to agree on that particular point. It's probably not in line with best practices to put a newly-elected alderman in the chairmanship of a committee with as much influence as Finance and Taxation. And it's probably best if freshman aldermen serve for a year or so - to gain experience and a deeper understanding of city workings - before assuming a leadership role. But, that said, at issue here is not how the city has handled previous aldermanic appointments. (In fact, other new aldermen have been appointed committee chair posts in the past, including Finance and Taxation.)
Given such a precedent, the mayor was wrong to try to "fix" his misstep five months later.
Boyce, meanwhile, maintains that his removal is the result of trying to assert his authority as chairman - and we tend to agree. Boyce said he has questioned why the city clerk has the power to call committee meetings and to set their agendas, rather than reserving the right for committee chairmen to do so.
And he was prepared to raise just that issue at Tuesday's meeting.
Regardless of motive, though, we remain troubled by the move for other reasons.
According to Boyce, Ross informed him of the decision just before the Tuesday meeting. While Ross said he has having ongoing discussions with Boyce over his committee concerns, the abrupt change still seems to us as if it was intended as a very public blindside.
At the very least, Ross could have extended the courtesy of discussing his decision with Boyce in advance.
What's more, we question the practical realities of appointing Henke to assume the chairman's role. Henke is an experienced alderman and former council president, and as a small business owner, brings valuable insight to his position. Yet Henke also is in the midst of his campaign for the 80th Assembly District seat and if elected, would have to relinquish his seat.
That sets up yet another change in finance committee leadership.
If there were concerns about Boyce's ability to lead Finance and Taxation, perhaps the mayor should have asked Henke or another more experienced alderman to mentor Boyce. Likewise, city employees, such as the city clerk, typically help aldermen by offering assistance in navigating the city's processes - not usurping their authority.
The city is at a critical crossroads. The pressure to provide needed city services under the state-mandated cap of 3-percent for budget increases creates a daunting task for local elected officials.
But switching horses midstream - on the eve of Wednesday's budget meeting with department heads, in this case - was a poor choice. It seems the power struggle at City Hall continues, to the detriment of the public good.
Mayor Bill Ross told the city council Tuesday that he was replacing Boyce, who represents the 3rd Ward, as committee chairman with Alderman Dan Henke. Ross said Boyce has been struggling in the role, and after considering the situation for a couple of weeks, decided it would be best to oust him.
For his part, Ross said that, in retrospect, he made a mistake appointing a new alderman to chair a committee. We tend to agree on that particular point. It's probably not in line with best practices to put a newly-elected alderman in the chairmanship of a committee with as much influence as Finance and Taxation. And it's probably best if freshman aldermen serve for a year or so - to gain experience and a deeper understanding of city workings - before assuming a leadership role. But, that said, at issue here is not how the city has handled previous aldermanic appointments. (In fact, other new aldermen have been appointed committee chair posts in the past, including Finance and Taxation.)
Given such a precedent, the mayor was wrong to try to "fix" his misstep five months later.
Boyce, meanwhile, maintains that his removal is the result of trying to assert his authority as chairman - and we tend to agree. Boyce said he has questioned why the city clerk has the power to call committee meetings and to set their agendas, rather than reserving the right for committee chairmen to do so.
And he was prepared to raise just that issue at Tuesday's meeting.
Regardless of motive, though, we remain troubled by the move for other reasons.
According to Boyce, Ross informed him of the decision just before the Tuesday meeting. While Ross said he has having ongoing discussions with Boyce over his committee concerns, the abrupt change still seems to us as if it was intended as a very public blindside.
At the very least, Ross could have extended the courtesy of discussing his decision with Boyce in advance.
What's more, we question the practical realities of appointing Henke to assume the chairman's role. Henke is an experienced alderman and former council president, and as a small business owner, brings valuable insight to his position. Yet Henke also is in the midst of his campaign for the 80th Assembly District seat and if elected, would have to relinquish his seat.
That sets up yet another change in finance committee leadership.
If there were concerns about Boyce's ability to lead Finance and Taxation, perhaps the mayor should have asked Henke or another more experienced alderman to mentor Boyce. Likewise, city employees, such as the city clerk, typically help aldermen by offering assistance in navigating the city's processes - not usurping their authority.
The city is at a critical crossroads. The pressure to provide needed city services under the state-mandated cap of 3-percent for budget increases creates a daunting task for local elected officials.
But switching horses midstream - on the eve of Wednesday's budget meeting with department heads, in this case - was a poor choice. It seems the power struggle at City Hall continues, to the detriment of the public good.
