From My Corner by Dalia Diaz

Duties of the Mayor and the City Council

Lawrence needs accountability, not blind obedience.

Mayor Brian DePeña has been a personal friend of mine since his arrival in Lawrence. Writing critically about his administration is painful, but friendship cannot take precedence over public responsibility. As journalists, we must publish the truth, support our statements with evidence, and hold elected officials accountable.

This column examines the responsibilities of the mayor and the City Council under the Lawrence City Charter and asks why our city continues to face turmoil, mismanagement, and growing public criticism.

In my view, both branches of government must accept responsibility. The mayor must manage the city competently, and the City Council must exercise its authority rather than blindly follow his lead.

The Mayor Cannot Act Alone

Section 4.3 of the City Charter states:

“The mayor shall appoint all city officers, department heads, directors, and members of multiple member bodies for whom no other method of appointment or selection is provided by the charter […] Except for appointments to multiple member bodies, all such appointments made by the mayor, unless otherwise provided, shall be subject to review and confirmation by the City Council as provided in Section 3.7.”

The principle is clear: when Council confirmation is required, the mayor’s choice is not automatically final.

Councilors must independently evaluate nominees’ qualifications, experience, and ability to perform their duties. They should ask questions and determine whether an appointment serves the city’s best interests. The City Council is not supposed to be a rubber stamp for the mayor.

When department heads lack the necessary qualifications or management skills, employees lose confidence, morale deteriorates, and residents ultimately suffer.

The charter also addresses temporary appointments:

“Whenever a vacancy, either temporary or permanent, occurs in a city office and the needs of the city require that such office be filled, the mayor may designate the head of another city agency, or a city officer or city employee to perform the duties of the office on a temporary basis until such position can be filled as provided by the charter, by law, or by ordinance.”

This provision raises an important question: Are temporary appointments being used appropriately, or are they becoming a way to bypass established procedures?

When an appointment requires Council confirmation, the administration must follow the applicable rules. Councilors must not remain silent when legitimate questions arise about whether those rules have been followed.

Leadership Means Correcting Mistakes

Section 4.5, concerning the removal of officials, states:

“The mayor may remove any person appointed under Section 4.3 subject to the provisions of Section 3.7(b) of this Charter.”

Leadership means more than making appointments. It also means recognizing mistakes and taking corrective action.

Consider Caryl García, the city’s human resources director. Her appointment involved a three-year contract with a condition concerning coursework related to her responsibilities. Questions about compliance with that requirement deserve answers.

Human resources is a critical department. Its leadership affects employee relations, workplace morale, and the confidence city workers place in their administration. I have heard serious concerns about García’s handling of employee relations and her impact on the atmosphere at City Hall.

If contractual requirements have not been met or a director is failing to perform her duties, the mayor should address the situation appropriately. If he considers renewing her contract, the public deserves to understand why.

A leader’s responsibility is not to defend every previous decision but to correct problems when they arise.

The City Council Must Exercise Its Authority

Section 3.5(a) of the charter states:

“The legislative powers of the city shall be exercised by the city council as determined by its own rules, unless other provision is made by law or by the charter.”

Section 3.10 adds:

“Except as otherwise provided by law or by the charter, all powers of the city shall be vested in the city council which shall provide for their exercise and for the performance of all duties and obligations imposed on the city by law.”

These provisions establish the Council’s important role in Lawrence’s government, subject to the limitations of the charter and applicable law.

Councilors cannot disregard every mayoral decision simply because they disagree with it. However, they must exercise the authority the law grants them. When confirmation is required, they must evaluate nominees independently. When administrative decisions raise legitimate concerns, they must demand answers.

The mayor has executive responsibilities, but he does not possess unlimited power. The City Council has its own obligations, and political convenience is no excuse for neglecting them.

Silence Is Not Leadership

I have become increasingly frustrated by the difficulty of obtaining meaningful responses from some elected officials. I have personally experienced unanswered calls, and residents deserve better.

I cannot presume to know why individual councilors fail to respond, but public officials must understand that questions and criticism come with the job.

Residents do not elect councilors merely to attend meetings and vote on routine matters. They elect them to represent the public, ask difficult questions, and hold the administration accountable.

When officials fail to do so, residents have every right to demand explanations. We must attend City Council meetings, raise our concerns, and insist on answers. Silence and resignation will not improve Lawrence.

Lawrence Deserves Better

Public confidence cannot be restored through political loyalty or personal relationships. It must be earned through competence, transparency, and accountability.

Our councilors must understand the City Charter and exercise their authority responsibly. They must be willing to question appointments, demand explanations, and make independent decisions.

The mayor, meanwhile, must ensure that departments operate effectively, personnel decisions comply with the law, and problems are addressed rather than ignored.

Neither branch can fulfill its responsibilities alone.

The City Council is not powerless, and the mayor is not omnipotent. Both are public servants entrusted with the responsibility of serving Lawrence’s residents.

After years of watching our city struggle with these issues, I believe it is time for our elected officials to remember whom they work for. The people of Lawrence deserve a government that follows the law, respects its employees, answers its residents, and accepts responsibility for its decisions.

Nothing less should be acceptable.