Back in 2010, we supported the charter change that brought Portland an elected mayor.

At the time we said that the position would give direction to a city government in which nine councilors had nine agendas. We thought a full-time elected mayor would be able to articulate a vision that was supported by a majority of residents, bring together factions and lead.

We were not concerned that the position was a “weak” mayor, who would not have the power to hire, fire and direct staff, because the city had a long tradition of strong management. Portland needed political leadership, in our view, not an elected manager.

Events at City Hall this week do not change our view.

On Wednesday highly regarded Acting City Manager Sheila Hill-Christian announced that she would be leaving in a month to take a job in Cincinnati, Ohio, leaving the city without a manager at the start of a difficult budget process. She didn’t say so, but speculation is rampant that Hill-Christian was leaving because of confused lines of authority at City Hall.

CALL FOR CHANGE

Voices around the city, including members of the City Council, are saying that it’s time to change the charter again. Several councilors have said they think Portland would be better off with a part-time ceremonial mayor, as we had before the charter change.

But even if Portland’s transition to an elected mayor government is not working out as smoothly as some had hoped, it’s far too early to call for a new form of government.

Mayor Michael Brennan is the first occupant of a new post. He has had to define the job on the fly and has been faced with a pair of challenges that the charter commission did not see coming.

Brennan came to office facing a governor who has made attacking Portland a major policy goal. Even though the city is the state’s economic engine, Gov. LePage has cut or tried to cut the city’s school funding, General Assistance and municipal revenue sharing. Portland is a party in a lawsuit challenging the governor’s authority to change General Assistance eligibility rules for non-citizens single-handedly, and the LePage administration is responding by withholding millions of dollars in reimbursements. A decades-old understanding between the city and state over financing its homeless shelter was dissolved by the LePage administration, putting pressure on city taxpayers and the councilors who represent them.

The second challenge is a power vacuum at City Hall. Months before Brennan took office, the City Council hired a new city manager, Mark Rees, who was forced out last year. Rees appeared to be overwhelmed by the job, uncomfortable speaking up at meetings and unwilling to respond to media inquiries. Portland ended up with a weak mayor – by design – and a weak manager – by accident. It was not a good combination.

The charter revisions of 2010 did not touch the city manager’s role. Rees had just as much authority as the strong managers of the past like Joe Gray, Robert Ganley or John Menario. The next manager will too.

What has changed is the relationship among the elected officials. The mayor used to be a councilor who took a one-year turn in the big chair. Now the mayor is accountable to the electorate, not the other councilors.

TENSION IN THE COUNCIL

Whatever new power the mayor has isn’t taken away from the city manager, it comes from the other members of the city council. It’s not surprising that there is tension between the mayor and the council, which includes four former mayors. But that doesn’t mean that Portland needs a new form of government.

It’s up to Brennan and the council to find a way to make their relationship work. If councilors don’t like the way Brennan operates, they don’t need to change the charter.

There is a mayoral election in November, and anyone who doesn’t like the city’s direction is free to run for the job.