In a historic move Monday night, the Rutland City Board of Aldermen voted to reappoint Kim Peters as Recreation Superintendent—effectively bypassing Mayor Mike Doenges, who had allowed the appointment window to lapse. It marks the first time in city history that the board has exercised its authority under the city charter to override the mayor’s inaction and install a candidate of its choosing.
The vote followed months of uncertainty surrounding the leadership of the city’s Recreation Department, after Doenges opted not to reappoint Peters earlier this year. Under Section 9-15.4(b) of the Rutland City Charter, the mayor has 90 days to submit a new appointee for board approval. That 90-day clock expired without a name from the mayor—triggering a little-known clause that allows the Board of Aldermen to step in.
And step in they did.
The board voted 7–3 in favor of reappointing Peters. Voting in support were Aldermen Clifford, Cupoli, Davis, Donahue, Gillam, Whitcomb, and Board President David Allaire. Opposed were Aldermen McClure, Talbott, and Savage—all affiliated with the political group Rutland Forward. Alderman Anna Tadio, also a member of Rutland Forward, was absent from the meeting.
Per the city’s charter, seven votes were required to make the appointment stick. That threshold was met only because Allaire—typically a tie-breaker—was allowed to vote on appointments under board rules, a nuance that proved pivotal.
The Charter
§ 9-15.4 Confirmation of appointment
(a) Unless otherwise provided, all appointments authorized to be made by the Mayor under any of the provisions of this charter shall be submitted by him or her, in writing, to the Board of Aldermen at a regular meeting for confirmation. The Board shall act upon the appointments at the next regular meeting. Such appointments shall stand confirmed unless rejected by a vote of seven members. If a person so appointed is rejected, the Mayor may appoint him or her or another person for such office and submit the same to the Board of Aldermen within one month. In no case shall the Mayor submit the same name more than twice. In case he or she fails to do so within said period, the Board of Aldermen may proceed to make such appointment, which appointment shall be valid without the consent of the Mayor.
(b) If the Mayor fails to appoint any of the officers authorized by section 15.2 or 15.3 of this charter within 90 days, then the Board of Aldermen may appoint said officers by a vote of seven members without the approval of the Mayor.
A Strong Board, A Procedural Mayor
To understand how this moment unfolded, it helps to know a little about the city’s power structure. Rutland operates under a “weak mayor / strong board” form of government—a setup common in many New England cities.
In this model, the Board of Aldermen holds the bulk of the governing authority, including budget decisions, ordinances, and appointments. The mayor’s powers are more limited, functioning as an administrator, communicator, and figurehead, but without veto power or unilateral control over department leadership.
It’s a system designed to reflect consensus and shared governance rather than a top-down executive approach. While it often operates quietly in the background, the board’s recent use of Section 15.4(b) shows just how powerful that balance can be when put to the test.
Political Undercurrents and an Absent Vote
The split vote also reflects a deeper political divide within the board itself.
Three aldermen—Kiana McClure, Michael Talbott, and Carrie Savage—voted against reappointing Peters. All are part of Rutland Forward, a progressive-leaning political group that has gained traction in recent elections and often aligns with Mayor Doenges on policy and personnel matters.
Notably absent from the vote was Anna Tadio, also a Rutland Forward member. Her absence, while unexplained at the time of publication, raised some eyebrows given the stakes and timing. Some observers speculated that it may have been a strategic decision, allowing her to avoid casting a politically difficult vote—either opposing a widely respected city official or breaking ranks with her political bloc. Of course, the absence could just as easily be unrelated. As of press time, no statement had been issued.
No Comment from Peters—Yet
Kim Peters did not issue a comment Monday night. Her silence may reflect the gravity of the situation. Reentering a role that became the center of political drama could carry complications—not least of which is how she chooses to engage with an administration that previously passed on reappointing her.
Even so, for many residents and longtime city watchers, the vote signals broad confidence in her leadership and a desire for continuity in the city’s recreational programs.
“This wasn’t about politics,” one board member said informally after the meeting. “It was about doing what’s right for the city and giving Kim the credit she’s earned.”
Looking Ahead
For Mayor Doenges, the board’s action represents a notable check on executive power and a reminder that in Rutland, the Board of Aldermen calls many of the shots. For the board, it’s proof that they’re not afraid to use the tools at their disposal—even if those tools have never been used before.
Whether Peters accepts the reappointment and how the administration responds remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: in a system designed for shared power, the board just reminded everyone that it intends to use it.
Dave Soulia | FYIVT
You can find FYIVT on YouTube | X(Twitter) | Facebook | Parler (@fyivt) | Gab | Instagram
#fyivt #VermontEducation #PreKCosts #SchoolSpendingTruth
Support Us for as Little as $5 – Get In The Fight!!
Make a Big Impact with $25/month—Become a Premium Supporter!
Join the Top Tier of Supporters with $50/month—Become a SUPER Supporter!
Subscribe to RSS
Leave a Reply