Efforts are underway in Camas and Washougal to determine if the cities’ current “strong mayor” form of government is the best path to follow.
On one side is the mayor-council government, or the “strong mayor” system now in place in both cities. This traditional system of local government was meant to provide a set of checks and balances with an executive branch, the elected mayor, who acts as a chief executive officer, directing the city operations and appointing/removing department leaders; and the elected city council members, who make up the legislative branch.
Although it has its benefits, including the fact that strong mayors are more beholden to voters and to the public and therefore — in theory — must be more transparent, the strong-mayor system also lends itself to abuses of power.
Opponents of this form of government argue that “strong mayors” have too much control over the city and could use their office to further their own political agendas, resisting feedback from council members, vetoing council decisions, and even trying to control the flow of information by keeping reports and daily operational practices from the council. Additionally, many mayors are great politicians, but not so skilled at managing hundreds of employees or overseeing a multi-million-dollar budget made up of public funds.
The alternative now being explored by two committees in Camas and Washougal would pull power from one person, the “strong mayor,” and spread more power throughout the elected city council. Under this form of government, an elected mayor would still be available to sit on the council and promote the city’s interests throughout the region, but would not be in control of the day-to-day operations or have veto powers. Instead, the council would hire a professional city manager to oversee the city’s departments.