Influence a mayoralty option

My councillor experience of Mayor Peter Chin's mayoralty was that of a man with usually gentle manners who played the role of an essentially ceremonial mayor.

He was proud of his record of leading a council which he worked hard to keep happy by avoiding direct confrontation, acquiescing to spending, and by avoiding involvement in DCC detail.

This style contrasted sharply with that of former mayor Clifford Skeggs, now Sir Clifford, whose autocratic style surprised me when I first ran unsuccessfully for council in the 1980s.

These differing approaches coincided with significantly different effects on Dunedin rates and debt. Sir Clifford's businessman's reign saw low rate rises and debt, while Mr Chin's tenure has seen unprecedented high rises in both rates and debt.

Mr Chin was fond of saying publicly that the mayor had just one vote, and his style was humble, often to the point of being self-deprecating. Privately, he appeared to value his A-Team majority of eight usually compliant councillors to smooth the passage of staff paperwork through council.

If one accepted the mayor's role as simply a facilitator with ceremonial duties, Mr Chin's focus and prowess in these roles would cast him as a successful, inclusive mayor.

My view is that ceremonial facilitation is just part of the mayor's role, and that it also vitally requires checking staff aspirations, costs, and information supplied, promoting the city and specific initiatives, and ensuring that all decisions are representative, properly consulted on and in the interests of all of Dunedin.

Unlike councillors, the mayor does not have just one vote. He has a casting vote as well, which we have recently seen used to push through the controversial Lovelock Ave realignment.

The mayor also has a personal discretionary budget, extensive staff access, communication and legal resources, a special relationship with the CEO, unmatched media access, automatic figurehead and University Council roles, and the all-important powers of appointment of committee chairs, deputies, appointments to outside organisations, and the apportionment of councillor remuneration.

These mayoral decisions do require a majority new council vote, but in practice they pass without real challenge and, most recently under Mayor Dave Cull, without any dissension or debate. The mayor is able to review all appointments throughout the triennium and is also able to decide on councillor travel and conferences.

All this mayoral discretionary power has resulted in varying degrees of mayoral sucking up by councillors and others, some of it quite extreme during my 2004-2007 term. It is a strong mayor, indeed, who is immune from flattery, allegiance, and inevitable false praise, when so much depends on mayoral favour.