The Coalville City Council claims its first proposed ordinance of 2025 is an attempt to streamline government operations and clearly inform the public of rules and procedures. Yet residents who showed up at Monday’s City Council meeting called it an unprecedented power grab to strip away the mayor’s authority.

City Councilors Lynn Wood and Louise Willoughby spearheaded the idea alongside Saratoga Springs City Manager Mark Christensen. Wood said their goal was to better define the municipality’s operating procedures and to outline the roles of the City Council in relation to the mayor.

She added that Christensen’s involvement came at the recommendation of Mayor Mark Marsh, and Saratoga Springs was used as a blueprint for the proposed ordinance. Few changes had been made from the Saratoga Springs document.

“The city manager position was eliminated, and there were some changes made to the city attorney position as well,” Wood said.

But the change to the city attorney position is substantial. 

Instead of being appointed by the mayor, the individual would be appointed by a majority vote of the City Council — a key shift amid the long-rumored tension between some councilors and current City Attorney Sheldon Smith.

On Monday, Smith said he thought moving the city attorney position to the City Council’s purview would set a dangerous precedent. He referred to the move as stemming from a “vendetta” against him perpetuated by sitting councilors.

Marsh alluded to the City Council’s efforts to seemingly “oust” Smith at a public meeting in February. That discussion was ultimately tabled, but the mayor said he was opposed to anything ending Smith’s employment with Coalville. Marsh added that city code asserts the mayor has power over the city attorney position, and he would refuse to fire Smith if that were something the City Council pursued.

Wood briefly touched on modifications to the city attorney position on Monday, which hypothetically would allow the City Council to dismiss Smith without the mayor’s approval. It would also allow the City Council to appoint the city attorney and the strategic planning director, a proposed new position intended to advise councilors on special projects.

“Well, why those two? I feel like those positions are extremely important to the role that the City Council plays in our legislative ability,” Wood explained. “I think that it’s very important that we have a strong voice in selecting the right people for those positions and that future councils would have that opportunity too.”

Community members attending the ordinance’s public hearing disagreed with Wood’s perspective, however.

“Having read the ordinance, I question the motives behind it,” said resident Matthew Boyer. “This ordinance leaves it up to the mayor to hire all city positions but two. From any reasonable perspective, the proposed adjustment is nothing but a personal retaliation against current city officers. It is the result of a feud between sitting city officers and a portion of the currently empaneled City Council.”

Boyer said he did not believe the council should have the unilateral authority to hire or dismiss any specific city employee, calling the ordinance a “power grab” and emphasizing the importance of checks and balances between the legislative and executive branches of the municipality.

Rory Swensen, a lifelong Coalville resident and chair of the Summit County Democratic Party, said the legislation was a “profound shift” in how the city functions disguised as a benign restructuring of government operations.

“This proposal strips the mayor of administrative authority and instead vests that in a five-member council,” he said. “That may seem like a matter of structure, but it’s far more than that. It fundamentally politicizes the employment and management of every city officer and employee.”

Swensen said moving employee management to the City Council would harm municipal operations because staff would no longer have a clear chain of command.

“It’s not political governance. It’s managerial chaos,” he said.

Former Coalville City Councilor David Vernon told the City Council the ordinance was “poorly thought out.” He encouraged collaboration between the mayor and City Council rather than changing who manages city employees.

“The state Legislature clearly defined the roles between the legislative and executive branches of city government, two separate but equal divisions,” Vernon said. “I don’t think it serves any of us well when you start blurring those lines.”

Many residents expressed their disappointment in the City Council, saying they voted for the mayor for a reason and it was to lead the city administratively. A number of speakers, including Summit County Council Chair Tonja Hanson, a Coalville resident, also bemoaned the effort city councilors put into developing the ordinance rather than focusing on other issues.

“I’m here because I don’t understand why so much time, energy and money is being spent considering a change of our government. Our current system is based on a time-tested democratic model,” Hanson said. “The legislative branch, which is the council, enacts laws and makes policy decisions. The executive branch, which is our mayor, carries out those laws and oversees the day-to-day administration. The judicial branch, which is our city attorney, interprets the law and ensures all actions stay within legal bounds. This separation of powers is fundamental to democracy.”

Hanson said the current design of the government helps balance authority, and she questioned why the City Council would want to change a system she viewed as functional and efficient.

“I appreciate the fact that you’re going through the policies to make sure that there’s guardrails around everything, but why would you single out [two] positions?” Hanson asked.

Not everyone who spoke at the public hearing was against the ordinance, though. While a majority of speakers opposed the proposal, a handful of residents defended the City Council. They mostly referenced the quality of the council’s work so far, the importance of collaborative decision-making and the function of a representative government.

“I don’t see anything in this ordinance that will drastically change the roles and duties of the council and mayor from how it’s functioned for years,” said Margarita Richins. “I do see many benefits to having an ordinance that clearly defines the offices of the city and the procedures by which each office is appointed.”

Steven Richins, another former city councilor, submitted a written comment before the meeting that was read into the record. He claimed the ordinance was actually an effort to restore power to the City Council because the city previously had a personnel committee until it was abolished in 2016.

“By 2022, all the committees were gone. The mayor and some of the unelected people that he had around him had done away with them,” Richins wrote. “It alienated the council, so they no longer were involved with what was going on. The way I see it, it was a power grab so that they could get what they wanted at the time. The council needs to be involved in all that is going on in the city.”

Ultimately, 15 people spoke against the ordinance during the hours-long public hearing while six people were in favor of it.

“What we are doing is very legal,” Willoughby said after the hearing concluded. “We are very much allowed to work this way and to work together. And if you had been to our meetings, you would know that there isn’t a lot of working together going on. We’re trying, but we get maneuvered around. We’re trying to make decisions for Coalville that will move us forward and protect us. I am not after a power grab.”

Willoughby said conflicts with city employees and similar issues have made it difficult for the Coalville government to function collaboratively.

“It should not happen. We should be working together, so what we are after is very legal to do. He may stay the city attorney. Who knows what we’re going to do, but we need some ordinances. We even asked him to put this ordinance together,” she said.

Willoughby said Christensen was brought on after Smith reportedly struggled to draft a legal ordinance that was within the scope of the City Council’s powers.

Smith strongly disagreed.

“With the first drafts of this, yes, I was involved, but there were a number of issues in trying to get the direction I needed from the council that didn’t come,” Smith said. “I was out of town for the meeting where Mark Christensen came. I never heard one time that what I had drafted was illegal in any way. It was not illegal. In fact, I talked to him after, and he said, ‘You know what? You’ve done a very good job. It’s just too sophisticated for this council.’”

He said the mayor should be the one selecting the attorney since the two positions work together closely and the mayor supervises the city attorney on a day-to-day basis.

Wood said she was grateful for the amount of community involvement on the issue, saying she and other councilors were elected to hear the opinions of all residents and not only those who agree with her.

She echoed Willoughby’s sentiments regarding dysfunction on the City Council, adding that her goal with the ordinance was to clearly define everyone’s roles to make it easier to collaborate and work together.

The rest of the City Council seemed to agree there was conflict between government offices, but they were unsure if the ordinance in its proposed state was the best solution.

The City Council unanimously voted to table the ordinance until the next work session on April 28.