Mayor hogs power, council claims

Seattle City Council members have griped for years that Mayor Greg Nickels is a political bully -- marginalizing the council with his stubborn ways.

If so, has Nickels finally pushed too far?

Council President Nick Licata has accused Nickels of autocratically ignoring some council laws and directives. The balance of power at City Hall is out of whack -- with too much power influenced by one man's agenda, constituents and backers, Licata complained.

"The mayor is ignoring (a) cherished principle of our democracy: the separation of powers. No executive, whether they are President George W. Bush or Mayor Nickels, can ignore legislative authority, particularly when it comes to the administration of something as fundamental as equal justice under the law," Licata wrote in a recent editorial in the West Seattle Herald.

That time, the issue was Licata's complaint that Nickels had ignored a 2004 council-approved law regarding public-defender contracts, as well as a more recent council policy statement.

"I don't believe that's true. There was a difference of opinion on how to measure caseload. And that's been resolved," Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis said. "We don't ever ignore legislative authority, but we also understand that there are limits on legislative authority and, when they reach those limits, we let them know that."

Broadly, though, some council members lately seem to be spoiling for a showdown. One predicts "retribution" in the city budget, while Licata is talking about a revolution.

Council members complain the council lacks resources to develop ambitious proposals from scratch, especially given Nickels' tight reins on city departments.

Other council members say it's challenging to muster a consensus on the non-partisan, nine-member council, which lacks the sort of discipline that party caucuses lend the state Legislature.

"If we have an executive that does not follow the ordinances that the council passes, we have a breakdown in local government," Licata said last month, referring to Nickels' recent refusal to say whether he will implement night-life regulations that the mayor disliked. "We cannot have city a governed with a mayor that's not willing to cooperate."

Licata is mulling over ways to "attach penalties" whenever Nickels fails to implement council directives. Righting the balance also might require voter-approved changes to the city's governing charter, he said.

For example, under Portland's unusual governmental structure, the four commissioners and the mayor sit on the City Council. The five share legislative and administrative duties. Commissioners oversee various municipal agencies at the mayor's discretion.

Nickels insists he respects the council's role and that he collaborates with council members. For example, the two sides compromised last year on the thorny matter of increasing construction density downtown. Disagreements between his executive branch and the legislative branch reflect a healthy, democratic tension, Nickels said.

"There is a separation of powers, and I have a great deal respect for it, particularly having served 14 years as a (King) County Council member," Nickels said. "But there is a balance.

"What I will resist is the council micromanaging. And I think there's been a tendency to do that," said Nickels, who declined to provide examples.

To be sure, the council is partly responsible for Nickels' lopsided influence on legislative matters. It's relatively rare that council members produce major policy initiatives on their own. Rather, they've ceded much of their policy-setting authority to the mayor.

"For the most part, we've either passed it or amended it," Licata said. "In that sense, we've been very deferential."Some council members have said they consider it primarily the mayor's job to develop legislation. The council has a "secondary role" in legislation -- the job of refining it as appropriate, Councilwoman Jean Godden said in an interview last fall.

It's an unusual political perspective, as basic democratic principles usually assign the legislative branch the duty to write laws and the executive branch the responsibility to administer them.

The current council also does not reflect a philosophical slate, as have previous councils.

"It's very difficult to mobilize sustained cohesion among the council," Licata said. "Every time we take on an issue, we start over, clean slate. It enables the (mayor) to literally divide and conquer."

And Nickels leads with a distinctly different style compared with his predecessors, Councilman Peter Steinbrueck said. He said Nickels' aggressive style is counterproductive.Nickels asserted his dominating style from the get-go. Almost immediately after taking office in 2001, he fired top officials and discouraged city department analysts from working directly with council members."It's a commander style more than it is collaborative," Steinbrueck said. "We hardly ever see the mayor. ... Mostly, we work through his surrogates."

Nickels acknowledged a unique style.

"Each mayor brings his or her own style to the job. My job is to carry out the programs of the city, to set a direction," Nickels said. He then quickly added, "And work with the council to ultimately determine what that direction is."

Still, Licata has complained in recent years that Nickels or his departments have ignored legislative direction -- either by ignoring laws and policy statements, or failing to implement budget decisions. Also, in recent years, the council provided money for the Police Department to add an internal affairs investigator and civilian assistants. With Nickels' blessing, the Police Department chose not to fill those positions. After Licata raised a stink, Chief Gil Kerlikowske acquiesced on the misconduct investigator, temporarily at least.

"The council can appropriate money for something -- they can't force the executive to spend it," Nickels said. Similarly, "the council can express its opinion ... until they express that with an ordinance, that's their advice."

And even then, when the council dictates something as law, Nickels may direct his department not to enforce it. For example, after the council approved night-life regulations that Nickels considered insufficient, he would not say whether he planned to actually implement them.

"He raises the concern amongst all of us of whether he's going to be enforcing the law," Licata said. "In the legislative branch, we make the laws. The mayor does not. It's clear and simple; he executes them."

Numerous council members complain that Nickels' office jealously restricts city departments from cooperating with them -- or even from offering technical guidance. In light of such struggles, council members are trying to coordinate better, working as more of a unified force in some areas, such as efforts to improve pedestrian safety, Rasmussen said. While council members generally acknowledge a sometimes unwelcome tension between the council and the Mayor's Office, they offer varying opinions on whether the power is seriously unbalanced. Not all feel as strongly as Licata that Nickels too often ignores their directives.

"For the most part, I have not personally experienced the mayor failing to follow through or stonewalling," Rasmussen said.

Councilman Richard McIver said Nickels generally listens to the council. But it can be a different story with specific matters, such as the council's resistance to Nickels' request for authority to close troublemaking nightclubs.

For that, "I would say that there might be retribution in the budget," McIver said. The council is now reviewing Nickels' 2008 city budget proposal. "We can take money away."