Restoring Council Oversight

in Montrose’s Council-Manager Government

By Michael J. Badagliacco

During the 2026 campaign, charter amendments formed the central theme of my platform. Voters in Montrose responded positively to proposals for stronger elected oversight, changes to election timing, term limits, and other reforms. Many voters shared ideas they wanted us to pursue if elected. Two of those ideas involved restoring the Police Chief and City Clerk to the roles they held prior to the 2014 charter amendments. These proposals stood out because they would restore accountability to the people through their elected representatives.

However, some now suggest that we should form a citizen commission before advancing any amendments. This approach contrasts with the process used for similar changes in the past and raises questions about consistent standards. When citizens disagree with the outcome of an election it does not and should not compel the elected Council set aside its principles to satisfy those who voted differently. That is not character, that is unfounded capitulation, and “you don’t unplug your values like unplugging a toaster”. And, I believe it was President Barrack Obama who said, “elections have consequences”. 

Home Rule and the Council-Manager Form: Montrose operates as a home rule municipality under Article XX of the Colorado Constitution. Since adopting the Council-Manager form in 1914, the city has placed policy-making authority with the elected Council. The appointed City Manager, who serves at the pleasure of the Council, executes those policies through daily administration. The City Attorney and the Municipal Judge also report directly to the Council. Until the 2014 changes, the Chief of Police and City Clerk followed the same structure. This structure reflects the republican form of government, with elected representatives directly accountable to voters at the ballot box.

Council Policy-Making Authority: The Council adopts ordinances, approves budgets, sets priorities, and provides overall direction. The Manager’s role is administrative execution within the framework established by the Council. The Manager holds no independent policy-making power. The job is administration and execution of Council policies.

When the Manager Crosses into Policy Territory: Difficulties arise when an appointed manager gains control over positions that shape policy in practice.

• The Police Chief determines how public safety policy takes shape on the ground. This includes departmental culture, enforcement priorities, and community engagement within the legal and policy boundaries set by the Council. Granting the Manager sole authority to hire, fire, or direct the Police Chief effectively transfers to an unelected administrator the practical authority to implement policy in a critical area where responsibility properly rests with the elected Council.

• The City Clerk serves as custodian of official records, keeper of the city seal, and administrator of elections and Council proceedings. These duties protect transparency and the integrity of processes. Direct accountability to the elected Council helps ensure these functions align with the will of the people rather than becoming insulated within the administration.

The 2014 Change: Resolution 2014-06 shifted hiring, firing, and reporting responsibility for the Police Chief and City Clerk from a shared Council and Manager process to the Manager alone. That change gave the appointed administrator policy-level leverage over two of the city’s most visible and consequential functions and lengthened the accountability chain.

Restoring the Proper Balance Through Home Rule: Many Colorado home rule municipalities have retained Council appointment or confirmation authority over the Police Chief and City Clerk in their charters. They recognize that these roles carry policy weight and that clear lines of responsibility from voters to elected representatives strengthen good governance. Those municipalities that have not taken this step risk blurring the lines between policy-making and administration.

Home rule equips Montrose residents with strong tools, citizens have the right to petition directly for charter amendments for direct placement on the ballot. While the Council can propose amendments, debate them in public, and place them before voters for approval. This honors the principle that local citizens, through their elected representatives, hold final authority over the structure of their government.  With a citizen commission the Council has the right to accept, reject any or all of the commission’s recommendations or propose their own amendments before submitting for voter approval on the ballot. 

Both the 2014 change and the proposed 2025 amendments followed the normal Council process without a citizen commission. Applying a different standard now simply because the majority has shifted does not strengthen public trust. Consistent rules, applied evenly, build confidence in local government.

Realigning with Representative Governance: Restoring meaningful Council oversight through voter-approved charter amendments would realign Montrose with the foundational premise of its Council-Manager form. The people, acting through their elected Council, would once again hold clear policy-making authority while the Manager focuses on the important work of execution and administration. That is the promise of home rule and representative governance in action.