by J. Brooks Terry
Staff Writer
Still smarting from a Mayor’s Office funding shift made last month, the City Council is firing back with legislation that, if left unchanged, could do them more harm than good.
Introduced at the Feb. 8 Council meeting, legislation that would limit Mayor John Peyton’s fiscal flexibility is up for consideration.
Peyton angered several Council members when he used approximately $2 million that had been set aside for the Juvenile Justice program to pay for the Feb. 15 Special Election.
According to the City’s Charter, Peyton can transfer dollars between City departments without the Council’s approval or knowledge. Now they say they feel like the mayor has too much power and money to play with.
Council member Sharon Copeland is among those co-sponsoring the pending legislation and says the Council needs to be involved with major budgeting decisions so that “a system of checks and balances remains in place.
“We just want to be sure we are responsible when we look at the different funding issues coming our way,” Copeland said. “Every year we, as the Council, have to review and approve a budget. If (Peyton) can move things around so easily, I think it nullifies us.”
Nullified or not, Peyton advisor Susie Wiles said the practice of moving money around is “protocol that has been in existence for a long time.
“We’ve had discussions with the Council about placing limits on that,” she said, “and we are prepared to be governed by whatever rules that they put in place.”
But the long term impact of limiting Peyton’s abilities may not be in the Council’s best interest, said Wiles, who maintained that most money moves are made to help pay for the Council’s district projects.
“I think they are going to have to decide which is the larger calling,” Wiles said. “Do they want to allow us the flexibility we’ve always had or do they want to examine everything we do and greatly slow down the process? It’s up to them.”
Copeland said she was, “less concerned with the small stuff,” adding that she expects the bill will be amended several times before it is ever passed.
“We understand that there will be implications associated with doing something like this, but we do want to open up that dialogue,” Copeland said. “I think that at the end of the day, we’re going to be more concerned with moving huge amounts of money around before we talk about scrutinizing everything.”
Copeland was unsure what the bill would look like when it comes up for a vote before the full Council by as early as next month, but she anticipated it would likely require Peyton’s office to provide more information when larger dollar amounts are moved.
Those qualifying benchmarks have yet to be established.
“Again, this is more of a precaution than anything else,” she said. “It’s not that we don’t trust the mayor’s office, but we do we feel like we need to know what’s going on and we need to have some kind of say in those decisions.”