David O'Meilia: He says the proposal wouldn't make the city more effective.
Mayor Dewey Bartlett on Monday vetoed a City Council ballot measure aimed at curtailing mayors' unilateral authority to appoint city attorneys, saying it would intrude on traditional mayoral responsibilities.
Councilors sought a Nov. 12 election for a City Charter amendment that would give them limited authority to reject a mayor's city attorney appointment. A two-thirds council vote would be needed to override the veto and send the measure to voters.
"It's certainly an attempt to limit the mayor's powers and responsibilities and increase the power and responsibility of the City Council," Bartlett said. "The Charter gives the Mayor's Office the responsibility of the operation and administration of the city of Tulsa and this would take away that responsibility."
Bartlett said he made his decision after reading a 22-page opinion by City Attorney David O'Meilia that objects to the proposal's effect of "limiting the mayor's administrative and executive authority."
The opinion also says the measure fails to meet the charter's definition of a necessary amendment - one that would make city government "more representative, efficient or economical."
Councilor G.T. Bynum, the proposal's author, said he disagrees with that reasoning but that he will ask councilors not to seek an override vote.
The council approved the measure unanimously last month and would need only six of nine votes to override the veto.
"I have observed way too many needless fights between the City Council and the mayor where councilors tried to play junior City Attorney and tried to second guess the City Attorney," Bynum said. "I'll respect the argument and live by it even though I disagree with it."
The ballot proposition would subject city attorney appointments to council review, giving councilors authority to reject an appointment based on qualifications and merit.
It would also require that the city attorney be a civil service employee, removing a mayor's option to appoint an at-will attorney who could be terminated without process.
Bynum described the measure as a reaction to fears among councilors that past city attorneys have favored the mayor on issues that involve disagreements between the two branches of government.
He stressed that it was not a reflection on O'Meilia's performance.
Bartlett argued Monday that the city attorney "is not a referee," but rather an independent adviser bound by the City Charter to work for the entire city.
Bynum maintained that his proposal would have fostered a "better level of collaboration" by giving both the mayor and the council confidence in the appointment, but he said overriding the veto would only distract voters as officials prepare to ask them to approve a nearly $920 million capital funding package.
The council might propose the ballot measure again under a future mayor who supports "a more collaborative system," he said.
"We have a council right now that is very business-like and not prone to controversy, and we've got bigger fish to fry between now and November as it relates to the capital improvements package," Bynum said.
Bartlett will face former Mayor Kathy Taylor in the Nov. 12 general election.
Bartlett vetoed a City Charter amendment proposal in 2010 that would have made the city attorney an elected position. Bynum also opposed that measure.
Earlier this year, councilors cut $100,000 that the Legal Department had requested for outside legal counsel under a budget amendment aimed largely at growing the police force. The department now has $15,953 to cover such costs.
Zack Stoycoff 918-581-8486
zack.stoycoff@tulsaworld.com
Original Print Headline: City attorney appointment plan vetoed
