ON MY SOAPBOX
This column represents the thoughts and opinions of Jason Hennington. This is not the opinion of the Taylor Press.
The election is over, the votes have been canvassed and a new mayor and mayor pro tem have been elected by their fellow City Council members. So, what happens next?
During the May 4 election, all of the proposed changes to the City Charter passed overwhelmingly, and residents are asking when they go into effect. While some will be enforced as soon as the next council meeting, the voterapproved amendment to the charter allowing for the at-large election of a mayor will not take place until the 2026 voting process.
In other words, the council among its own membership will select the mayor one more time after this year. Earlier this week, the council chose At-large Councilman Dwayne Ariola as mayor and mayor pro tem, District 3’s Kelly Cmerek.
The proposition allowing for residents to pick a mayor won by a landslide, showing that people want to choose who represents them at the head of the council. That’s fine, but in my humble opinion I still believe having the council members on the dais pick a mayor and a backup mayor among themselves is effective.
Technically, in this city the mayor doesn’t wield any more power than the other council members, but in terms of public perception, the title does carry more weight.
Being the mayor is more than conducting a council session. In larger cities, the mayor is the tie-breaker on crucial votes. Mayors also have the power to sign disaster declarations.
In Taylor, the mayor fulfills a ceremonial role as the “face” of the city. That includes working with other elected representatives and business leaders outside of Taylor, including officials with Samsung Austin Semiconductor.
I’m not saying residents cannot choose a person capable of the workload, but when the council makes the pick, those elected leaders are giving the nod to someone from their own ranks they collectively feel can lead Taylor and serve as the town’s spokesman or spokeswoman.
Unlike the voters at large, the council members can also name a new mayor from among themselves whenever they wish, and vote to have the current mayor to return to just being a council member.
I understand that in other communities the mayor is elected by the voters and it works for them. But for those of us in Taylor, the current system has proven successful for years. That doesn’t mean all council members always agree, though.
Until this year, at least to my memory, the five-member council vote for a mayor was usually unanimous. But when the May 4 votes were canvassed Tuesday and the council then turned to picking a new mayor, the decision to name Ariola was 3-1 with District 4 Councilman Robert Garcia dissenting and Gerald Anderson, District 1, absent from the meeting.
It will be interesting to see how the council moves forward the next two years. Once the change in selecting a mayor happens in 2026, the first term for an atlarge leader will determine if the voters’ decision to amend the charter was the right move. Meanwhile, I am in no way suggesting Ariola is wrong for the position. Any of the current incumbents — Ariola, Garcia or Anderson — are quite capable of holding the spot. After all, during their three-year tenure these members of the dais — along with Brandt Rydell and Mitch Drummond — won City Council of the Year in 2022 from the Texas Management Association.
But given the fact the vote to name a mayor was not unanimous this past week, the council needs to figure out how to work together.
I’m going to get off my soapbox now, but before I do, I want to make a shameless plug for the Taylor Press 3-on-3 Basketball Tournament July 13-14. It is accepting teams, donations and volunteers; call 512-3528535 or email taylorpres-s3on3@ gmail.com for more information.
“I believe the best type of mayor is one who seeks to uplift people and make their quality of life better and sometimes that requires tough decisions.”
— Francis X. Suarez
