With a city so far in debt, why squabble over this issue?

City Councilwoman Patty Kim hit the nail on the head with her observation on the issue of whether council or the mayor has the right to appoint the city solicitor:

“This is not the time to engage in a sparring match when we are dealing with major financial challenges that will affect every single resident and our future.”

Council Vice President Dan Miller is leading a challenge to Mayor Stephen R. Reed’s authority to appoint the solicitor, who heads a five-person city law bureau.

Reed contends it’s an executive branch position with mayoral power of appointment under the city’s strong-mayor form of government.

Miller disputes that legal interpret ation and has point ed to a 2003 Com monwealth Court ruling involving the City of Easton that he says supports council authority. The timing is right to address this, Miller says, since the position recent ly became vacant with the resignation of Stephen Dade and Reed’s nomination of Philip J. Harper to replace him.

We understand why this issue is of concern to Miller and other council members. Although the mayor has a long list of accomplishments during his seven terms in office, he also has a one-man operating style and a track record of keeping council in the dark on key projects.

The most recent example is the debacle involving his proposed Museum of the Wild West. The mayor spent millions personally collecting artifacts before the proposal even came to light. Then, after the city’s poor financial condition forced him to abandoned the project, auctions of the artifacts have only returned $1.7 million of the $7.2 million Reed spent.

Also, in Miller’s defense, the current vacancy and nomination give some justification to his pushing the issue now. But we agree with Councilwoman Kim that there are simply bigger things on which council and the mayor should be concentrating.

Council literally has the city’s short- and long-term financial framework in its hands as it continues to vet an investment group’s offer to lease a large part of city parking facilities over the next 75 years.

Reed contends the $215 million upfront payment and subsequent annual revenues will pay off parking authority debt, provide significant property tax relief, and put more police officers on the street.

If council rejects the offer — and Miller has been a staunch opponent of it — then it needs to put forth ideas to address high property tax rates in the city, crime and other pressing needs at a time when the nation’s dismal economy is going to create even more budgetary pressure.

Council’s full attention should be directed to those issues. It’s also not like council members are completely shut out of the solicitor appointment process, since nominations are subject to council confirmation.

Better timing to address this issue might be next year, when there will be mayoral and council contests on the ballot, and it can be brought up as a campaign issue.

At this crucial point in the city’s history, we have to question whether residents are as concerned about who appoints the solicitor as they are about seeing their elected officials at City Hall working jointly on remedies to immediately pressing issues affecting their daily lives and finances.