First of a series
Following what is expected to be yet another quiescent meeting this evening in Council Chambers, the no-longer-new City Council officially turns one year old a week from tonight when the divided members will choose a new 12-month mayor.
In a year dominated by as much hope-and-change locally as there was nationally, observers say that the freshman member projected to be the bedrock of the three-fifths rookie Council has delivered.
Neither shrill nor bashful but somewhere in between, as the fairy tale goes, Andy Weissman, a reliable source of reasoned debate during his decades on city commissions, has brought that welcome gift for economy to the often argumentative City Council.
On a Council where lengthy observations, even on settled matters, are extensive, his, typically, are spare, as if he were being charged by the word.
Freshly turned 59 years old, Mr. Weissman has emerged as the steadying hand that his supporters predicted he would be, a calm, unflappable political hand who leads by example of moderation when tempers flare, as they do about once a week.
Weissman backers describe him as prudent and judicious.
In his Downtown law offices, Mr. Weissman’s comportment matches his public image on the dais, measured and reflective, as he discusses the first 25 percent of his elected term.
Attired in one of his favorite summer-flavored Hawaiian shirts, the Councilman forthrightly confronts the questions of his interrogator. He answers with the same let’s-shoot-the-breeze matter-of-factness that he would if he were responding to his three young grandchildren.
What is the main distinction between serving, for decades, on a low-profile city commission and as an always-on-stage elected member of the city’s legislative body?
“The major difference is the overwhelming amount of information that you receive — mainly from city staff, but from all sources —as a Council member,” Mr. Weissman said. “Then there is the element of constituent contact, mostly by email rather than telephone. That only accounts, though, for about10 percent of my time.”
Do residents present you with conundrums or is the request more like “Here is something you must do”?
“Mainly, these communications fall into two categories — to present a viewpoint about an item on an upcoming agenda or it is a request for information, guidance, assistance.
“My sense is that the community — residential and business — is, in large measure, satisfied with the direction that the city has been, and is, going. I encounter little in the way of complaints other than certain items that are coming up. Whether it is dogs in the park, composting in Carlson Park, animal control. Those issues tend to generate opinions.
“I don’t hear very much about the good things, not more than two or three emails in the last year.”
Happy people don’t write.
“I agree. That is how I come to the conclusion people are satisfied.
“That may change with the economic situation that faces us. People may not be as sanguine about how things are going if they are going to feel service cuts.”
Are there Council-type subjects where you are expert and others where you are less certain of yourself?
“When I was elected last year, I had the benefit of fairly extensive experience in city business. I knew a lot about what was going on, either as a member of a commission or a committee, or by virtue of having been around a long time.
“A lot of what we deal with as Council people was not new as subject matter. I was familiar with zoning as a consequence of having been on the Planning Commission, and as an attorney.
“I was familiar with personnel actions and policies provided for in the Civil Service rules as a result of being on the Civil Service Commission.
“The overall subject matter was not new. But drilling down to the details is the biggest difference between commissions and Council. The level of detail that you are required, or should have, to make an intelligent decision is very different.
“As a commissioner, we are fed information on a need-to-know basis.
“By contrast as a Council member, you are continually being fed streams of information, on a regular basis, for background and perspective. It may be information that you never will be called upon to use. Or it may be something that does not comeback for eight months.
“Finance would be an example.
“On a frequent basis, we are provided with information on where the city stands regarding revenues and expenses. It is not necessarily related to an agenda item. It is just so we have the information to absorb, to reflect on it and be able to use it when necessary.
“As commissioners we met less often. So we did not have an ongoing stream of information, as I said. The Civil Service Commission met once a month. Same with Planning. Same with Parks & Rec. You would get an agenda a couple days before the meeting. That would be pretty much the extent of the background. Generally, you did not have a real lead-in regarding history and background before the night of the meeting.”
(To be continued)
