How come the next mayor was always the last name on the letterhead ?

Chapter Three, Section Five of the City Charter states the commision shall elect one of its members as mayor .Some have called position an honorary one. Former two time mayor, Dale Dawkins said the position of  mayor, "is  our way of saying  "thank you." The Charter however describes the role of mayor as much more extensive. The Charter says  (a)  mayor who shall be the presiding officer of the commission and chief executive head of the city and who shall have such other powers and perform such other duties as are or may be imposed or authorized by the laws of the state, by this charter or by the commission. He shall be the conservator of the peace and may exercise within the city the powers conferred upon sheriffs to suppress disorder.

Words out of sight, out of mind

Some years ago, ( some say more than thirty of which that last eight can be documented by archived records available on the city's website) a change was made. The wording in Chapter Three, Section 5 of the City Charter which states the commision shall elect one of its members as mayor was ignored,forgotten, left to benign neglect, closeted, deep sixed, put out to pasture or whatever.The words from the City Charter concerning the election of a mayor,  somehow vanished from the collective conscience of city commission. The words were not officially or legally changed. To do so would have required a Charter amendment and a vote of the electorate. The words remained the same but  the city commission decided to do it their way. When none of the voters seemed to notice or object and the years went by  a new word was found to explain it all if anyone ever asked. The word was "Tradition" and the tradition was simply the replacement of reason by rote. Electing one of their member as mayor required  a certain amount of reasoning, Rotating the position of mayor amongst all the commissioners  required none. It also eliminated any unpleasantness or  bickering.  So instead of the election of a mayor as the charter called for the "Tradition"  became an appointment of the commissioner,  who had been on the commission the longest and who had either never been mayor or had been mayor least recently.  Repeat mayors popped up at more or less four year intervals.Mayor Dawkins  was mayor in  2002 and 2006. Mayor Zambricki was mayor in 2004, 2008, and was due again in 2012. Mayor Hardy a first time mayor in  2007  was scheduled to be Mayor again this year. The Tradition lasted because the commissioners liked it and the people weren't paying attention, but not everyone was in complete agreement.

"I often wondered " mused one former commissioner "what would happen if  we asked for a Charter amendment that said,"the Mayor of Bloomfield Hills will be the  commissioner whose name appears last on the City's letterhead,. Who would vote for that ?"

A flawed tradition.

Probably no one. Besides the sheer inanity  of replacing rote for reason the Tradition  had other flaws.  It short changed the people of Bloomfield Hills in two ways. By law all changes in the Charter must be approved by the people. The city commission,  by ignoring  the charter and doing their own thing usurped the power of the  people.  By making the appointment of  mayor a mere formality the commission completely removed the people from having any say in who the mayor would be. When the mayor was elected by a vote of the city commissioners, the people had  at least had some

influence by voting for commission candidates who would support their choice for mayor.

The last flaw was the one that destroyed the Tradition and that was the failure to factor in a doomsday scenario. What if the commissioner next in the rotation to be mayor was one who the other four commissioners couldn't tolerate. ? That is the subject of our next post .