The Tampa City Council moved a sweeping package of charter changes closer to the ballot, advancing proposals that would expand its authority over the Mayor’s Office while abandoning a contentious effort to give the Council the power to remove mayoral appointees.
The decision followed weeks of debate over the balance of power at City Hall that led Mayor Jane Castor to accuse Council members of pursuing a “power grab.” Council members argue they are trying to reclaim authority lost under previous administrations.
The remaining proposals would allow the Council to overturn mayoral executive orders, initiate midyear budget changes and exercise greater control over its own staffing. They would also establish an independent Inspector General and tighten mayoral term limits.
The amendments will return for first readings Nov. 5 and final adoption hearings Nov. 19. Each will be considered separately before potentially appearing on the March 2 municipal election ballot, where voters would have the final say.
Thursday’s most significant reversal involved a proposal that would have allowed five Council members to remove certain city officers appointed by the Mayor for cause, including misconduct, poor performance or failure to carry out their duties.
The provision narrowly survived an Oct. 1 discussion, when the Council voted 4-3 to have charter attorney Kenneth Tinkler develop more restrictive language. But Council Chair Alan Clendenin, who had initially supported the idea, changed his position Thursday.
Clendenin said he understood the frustration of Council members who struggle to get cooperation from department heads, but he worried that allowing seven elected officials to make personnel decisions could expose Tampa to employment-related lawsuits — especially if Council members were to make inappropriate statements while discussing an employee’s removal publicly.
“It’s very difficult to train seven of us in HR and employment law,” Clendenin said.
The Council voted 5-2 to reject the provision, with Bill Carlson and Lynn Hurtak opposing its removal. Carlson then proposed a narrower version that would apply only to the City Attorney, arguing that the position is supposed to serve both the Mayor and the Council. That effort also failed, 2-5.
Council Member Luis Viera, who opposed both versions, warned that even requiring cause for removal could leave employees vulnerable to political pressure. Charlie Miranda and Guido Maniscalco also raised concerns about inserting the Council into personnel decisions traditionally handled by the administration.
The Council did approve changes involving mayoral term limits, although that proposal again drew objections over its timing.
The amendment would prevent anyone who serves as Mayor or acting Mayor for more than six years from later returning to office. Unlike Tampa’s current system, which limits Mayors to two consecutive four-year terms, the new restriction would prevent future comeback bids after a qualifying period of service.
The restriction would apply prospectively, meaning former Mayor Bob Buckhorn’s service from 2011 to 2019 would not count against him. Buckhorn is seeking another term in 2027, when voters will also consider the proposed charter amendments.
Viera questioned whether placing the measure on the same ballot could inject the issue into the mayoral campaign. Carlson and Hurtak are both running against Buckhorn. Viera and Miranda opposed advancing the term-limit language.
Other proposals drew considerably less opposition Thursday.
One would allow five Council members to void a mayoral executive order and prevent the Mayor from reissuing the same order during that term without the Council’s approval. The change follows long-standing disagreements over whether mayoral executive actions can supersede legislation approved by the Council.
Another would remove a requirement that certain midyear budget changes be originated by the Mayor and allow the Council to initiate those amendments itself as well. Members have argued that the existing restriction limits their ability to respond to changing financial circumstances after adopting the annual budget, giving leeway to the Mayor’s Office to make unilateral decisions.
The Council would also gain authority to fund additional staff positions supporting its legislative functions without requiring separate mayoral approval, although those positions would remain subject to budget limitations.
The proposed Inspector General would operate independently of both the Mayor and the Council, with authority to conduct investigations, audits and reviews. The Council expanded the proposal beyond the version recommended by the citizen Charter Review Advisory Commission to allow the office to initiate investigations without receiving a written complaint.
The package has drawn opposition from Castor, who previously argued that the Council was threatening Tampa’s strong-Mayor system of government.
Carlson has repeatedly rejected that characterization, contending that the changes would restore checks on mayoral authority rather than undermine the city’s governing structure.
Thursday’s votes do not place the amendments on the ballot. The Council must still approve the individual ordinances in November before voters can decide whether to rewrite those portions of Tampa’s charter during the March 2027 election.