It's time to clear the air and take a deep breath in Lehi.

Misinformation abounds concerning both the legality and the mechanics of a change in form of government proposed by members of the City Council that would negate the power of Mayor Howard Johnson.

The council commissioned a citizens panel to evaluate options and make a recommendation, but the composition of the group was stacked against the mayor and the report the committee submitted was embarrassingly inadequate -- so poor that the people of Lehi should disregard it entirely.

A majority of the panel recommended a change to a form of government advocated by members of the City Council by means of a simple ordinance passed by themselves under a legally tenuous bit of Utah's municipal code. The voters would be left out of the process.

This is like changing the form of the United States Government through an act of Congress instead of by constitutional amendment and the blessing of the states. It is wrong, and it needs to be stopped.

Contributing to an already confused political scene in Lehi, the report erroneously called the recommended form a "council-manager by ordinance (CMO)," which does not exist in state law. What the panel meant to say was "manager form of government," which is found in Utah statutes (who knows how it got there) as an apparent alternative to the core statutes that govern the organization of municipalities.

Under the unambiguous law describing municipal organization, a vote of the people is always required for a change in form of government. But Lehi partisans are leaning entirely on this odd little appendage found in Title 10 -- 10-3-830 -- that contradicts elements of the main statutes and seems to grant city councils the right to change without consulting voters.

There are substantial problems with this approach, starting with the question of why Lehi's City Council would choose the back door rather than using the front door of the state's main governing statutes. Why would Lehi's council even consider taking a change of government upon themselves? Apparently only because members don't like Mayor Johnson or the agenda he was voted into office to fulfill. They would like to remove him as a meaningful actor in city government. He bugs them, and they want to swat the bug.

The option recommended by the citizens panel would even deny the mayor the full City Council vote to which he would be entitled if the change were made according to the proper statute.

This is quintessential mean-spirited small-town politics.

It seems a number of people believe this big change can be accomplished by simply passing an ordinance -- morphing Lehi's traditional six-member council format into what is vaguely called under 10-3-830 "a manager form of government." They insist that this is distinct from a similarly named form of government -- "council-manager" -- that is outlined elsewhere in law.

Their legal stance appears to rely on a narrow reading of 10-3-830 that entirely ignores the general thrust of law governing the organization of all cities. They particularly dismiss the statute describing "council-manager" in 10-3-1223, which directs that the mayor in a council-manager system is to have full voting rights, not just a tie-breaking vote as in Lehi's current form.

To those who argue that 10-3-830 conclusively establishes a council's authority to change the basic form of government by ordinance, we say bunk. At best it is unsettled law -- a disputed point that must be clarified by a judge or by the Legislature. The fact that other cities may have made a similar change by ordinance means little if the matter has never been adjudicated.

The recently published Citizen's Guide to Utah State Government by the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel is instructive. It first outlines what it calls the four "basic forms" of government in Utah:

-- Five-member council in which the mayor is a full voting member (small towns);

-- Six-member council in which the mayor breaks tie votes (Lehi's current form);

-- Council-mayor in which the legislative and executive branches are separate and the mayor may veto council actions (Provo and many larger cities);

-- Council-manager (Orem), established by a vote of the people that some in Lehi believe they can side-step under 10-3-830.

The guide elaborates on this latter point:

"Another form of municipal government is mentioned in another part of the Utah Code. ... That form is referred to as a 'manager form of government.' It is established when a governing body adopts an ordinance ... [and appoints] a person to act as city or town manager. Establishing this form of government does not require voter approval."

Before you get excited (or discouraged), read on:

"A city's form of government is determined at the time of incorporation. Voters at the incorporation election select the form. ... A municipality retains the form of government under which it is currently operating until [it] adopts another form of government. Changing the form of government under which a municipality operates may be initiated by either the governing body of the municipality or a citizen initiative. A change in the form of government requires voter approval."

The necessity of a vote is also implied by Utah law 10-3-1206: "Following approval of an optional form of municipal government by the voters of a municipality, no other form of municipal government may be adopted for a period of four years ..." Other requirements apply when voters disapprove a proposed change in government. [Italics added for emphasis.]

Anybody can see the contradictions. And voter approval is not the only problem. Even if 10-3-830 were airtight, it provides no formula for reassigning the power of a currently sitting mayor who was elected by the people under different expectations. If Lehi were allowed to proceed as the council desires, it would amount to setting aside the results of a valid election. We don't see any court going along with this.

The final solution, obviously, must come from a court or from the state Legislature. We strongly advise that the Legislature be allowed to consider the matter, as we're only a few months away from the 2007 session. That body should act quickly to clear the fog.

This problem goes beyond Lehi: A lawsuit is in the pipeline in an identical mayor/council battle in Bluffdale. The same controversy is brewing in Syracuse. Eagle Mountain is teetering on the brink.

Lehi's council would be extremely unwise to proceed precipitously to enact any change in government at this time. If a majority are hard-headed enough to do so without regard to divisions in the community, they will create lasting scars.

We believe they will not prevail in any case. Once citizens turn to their representatives in the state Legislature, any reasonable court will order Lehi to wait for the outcome, only a few months hence. We would urge the Legislature to clear the air by requiring a vote of the people in all cases involving a change in a city's form of government, including the one described in 10-3-830.

It is not too soon, however, for Lehi residents to mount a petition drive to solve this problem themselves. The solution is to move to a council-mayor style of government by a vote of the people. We urge concerned citizens to get this on the ballot at first opportunity. The political Gordian Knot is wound too tightly to untie, and a solution is needed like the one devised by Alexander the Great: cut the rope. We have come to believe that this is the only way to heal Lehi and move forward.

Fences make good neighbors. The mean-spiritedness demonstrated lately in Lehi amply demonstrates the need for a strong fence between branches of government. It's time for real checks and balances provided by a council-mayor format.