City Car Use Unauthorized for 2015?

Beside the matter of where city-owned vehicles for top officials come from, there may be another question as to why none of the usual council authorizations for vehicle use were made in 2015.

Having covered annual reorganizations of city government for nearly 30 years, I have a strong sense of what is normally included in their agendas. The governing body sets a meeting schedule for the year, names official newspapers, approves rules of order and authorizes use of city-owned vehicles for five officials each calendar year. The mayor and city administrator usually receive authorization for 24-hour use of unmarked city-owned vehicles. The superintendent of Public Works, who may be called on at any time to address weather-related emergencies and such, usually is granted 24-hour use of a marked city-owned vehicle. Since the elimination of the title of police chief in favor of "police director," the assignment of vehicles for public safety officials has become a bit confused, especially after the head of the Department of Public Affairs & Safety and police director became one and the same in Martin Hellwig. Formerly, the police and fire chiefs reported to the department head, one of three mandated by the city's special charter. Hellwig in effect reported to himself as both police director and department head.

The confusion is apparent in the 2014 roster of those allowed 24-hour use of city-owned vehicles, which assigned cars to both titles (see below).

*R 008-14 COUNCILMANIC RESOLUTION APPROVING AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR’S USE OF AN UNMARKED CITY-OWNED VEHICLE ON A TWENTY-FOUR HOUR BASIS FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2014 – CITY CLERK.
*R 009-14 COUNCILMANIC RESOLUTION APPROVING AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S USE OF AN UNMARKED CITY-OWNED VEHICLE ON A TWENTY- FOUR HOUR BASIS FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2014 – CITY CLERK.
*R 010-14 COUNCILMANIC RESOLUTION APPROVING AUTHORIZATION FOR THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS & SAFETY’S USE OF AN UNMARKED CITY-OWNED VEHICLE ON A TWENTY-FOUR HOUR BASIS FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2014 – CITY CLERK.
*R 011-14 COUNCILMANIC RESOLUTION APPROVING AUTHORIZATION FOR THE POLICE DIRECTOR’S USE OF AN UNMARKED CITY-OWNED VEHICLE ON A TWENTY-FOUR HOUR BASIS FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2014 – CITY CLERK.
*R 012-14 COUNCILMANIC RESOLUTION APPROVING AUTHORIZATION FOR USE BY THE FIRE CHIEF OF AN IDENTIFIED OR MARKED CITY-OWNED VEHICLE FOR CONDUCT OF OFFICIAL BUSINESS ONLY FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2014 – CITY CLERK.
*R 013-14 COUNCILMANIC RESOLUTION APPROVING AUTHORIZATION FOR USE BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC WORKS OF AN IDENTIFIED OR MARKED CITY-OWNED VEHICLE FOR CONDUCT OF OFFICIAL BUSINESS ONLY FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2014 – CITY CLERK.

On the agenda for the 2015 annual reorganization, there were no resolutions for use of city-owned vehicles. Could it be that all current users of 24-hour city-owned vehicles are unauthorized?

The issue of providing vehicles to top officials has generated controversy in the past. In 2009, council members pondered whether use of vehicles should be part of an official's compensation package. From a Plaintalker post on the 2009 reorganization:

After a confusing series of votes, the council approved year-long use of a city-owned vehicle only for the mayor and the fire chief. Approvals for the city administrator, director of Public Affairs & Safety and superintendent of Public Works passed only for January, pending further discussion of compensation.

Over the years, there have been other fiascos over car use, including times when a hostile council simply wants to embarrass a mayor in front of a crowd at a reorganization meeting by denying car use to cabinet members.

Perhaps the time to bring up car use issues in 2015 was not in the context of a budget meeting and not by a former mayor who is apparently unaccepting of the 2013 election results. Maybe the question should have come up in January, when car use is usually authorized and in 2015 for whatever reason did not follow past practice. Corporation Counsel Vernita Sias-Hill spoke of "past practice" in a discussion of vehicle procurement on June 10. Beyond the customary purchase of vehicles through state contracts, their eventual use seems to be covered only generally by the Municipal Code's section on Personnel, specifically Sec.11:17-4.

If "past practice" is now problematic, certainly the governing body can amend the code to clarify 24-hour use of city-owned vehicles. But the law should be fair and free of politics, for someday it may apply to a current critic who goes on to become mayor.

--Bernice