People unfamiliar with Englewood’s unusual form of local government often assume that our mayor has a lot more legal authority than is in fact the case. For example, they may note on the nightly television news the frequent presence of the mayor of New York City, clearly a person of considerable importance and power, and assume that our mayor is comparable. Although most Englewood mayors have been happy to perpetuate this misunderstanding, the fact is that, under most circumstances, our mayor is far less important in the government of Englewood than are the five members of the City Council and the non-elected City Manager. This has particularly been the case since 2000 when Englewood voted by referendum to abolish the mayor’s power to appoint members of the Board of Education.

Under Englewood’s City Charter, adopted in 1979, the mayor has no vote on the council except in the case of a tie. The mayor may, however, veto council actions, which can only be overridden by four of five council members. Neither the mayor nor members of the council have any administrative authority, since the city manager is designated by the Charter as "chief executive officer." The mayor’s legal responsibilities are thus largely appointive, most importantly with regard to the Planning Board, where the mayor has sole appointive power and serves as a member. The elected Board of Education is now entirely independent.

The mayor’s legal authority should, however, be of little consequence as long as he (or she) is aligned politically with a majority of the council members and is respected in the community. The mayor, as the public face of the City, can act as spokesperson for policies and decisions jointly arrived at. Persons with the necessary leadership qualities can achieve considerable influence regardless of their actual legal authority.

There are many ways in which our mayors can use their visibility to the advantage of the community. They can appoint official committees to study specific problems. They can act as spokesmen articulating the reasons for Council decisions. They can act as ombudsmen assisting residents in dealing with City departments and can develop and utilize contacts with county, state and federal officials for the benefit of Englewood.

Englewood’s mayors in recent years have varied considerably in their approach to the office, some more able to exercise leadership and work with their colleagues on the council. Too often, they have given the impression that their own political advancement takes precedence over the interests of our City. That Steve Rothman has springboarded to Congress from the Mayoralty of Englewood has apparently not been lost on those who followed.  Our city has a political importance in the County that is out of proportion to its size, due to the regular large Democratic pluralities Englewood generates for candidates at all levels. Combine this with the mayoral tactic of avoiding votes on controversial issues while taking credit for positive trends, and one can see how the Englewood mayoralty is an attractive platform for persons seeking higher office.

The mayor has a three-year term of office and runs on the same ticket as the council member-at-large. Over the last quarter-century, most commonly, the Democratic Municipal Committee has endorsed a white male for mayor and an African-American male for the at-large council seat.  These endorsement have survived what have been limited primary or general election challenges. We would like to think, perhaps optimistically, that we have reached the stage in our history when such racially balanced tickets may no longer be necessary.

The next election for mayor and council-at-large is not scheduled until 2009, but it is not too soon to start thinking about the kind of candidates we should be seeking. We are unhappy with the concept of the mayoralty of Englewood as a stepping stone to higher office. as what is in the interest of our community may not be in the interest of the Bosses of political advancement in our County and State.  We would rather think in terms of people who have demonstrated a commitment to the community and are likely to continue to do so. However, when personal ambition takes precedence over community welfare, we draw the line. Englewood’s most valuable and competent mayors and council members over the years have been public spirited citizens who have been genuinely dedicated to the welfare of their community. Capable people who are successful in other careers often cannot devote the time and effort necessary for effective public service, but, when they can, their varied experience can be valuable.

It is our hope that more of the many capable persons resident in Englewood will take seriously the possibility of public service. It is easier than they may think to become actively involved in local government, and maybe even to run for mayor.