When the Palo Alto City Council returns from its winter break in January, it will continue the city's long-standing tradition by choosing one of its seven members as the city's mayor for the coming year.

Unlike in year's past, however, the council also plans to delve into a politically thorny question: Should this tradition be modified or even outright abolished?

Like in many cities in Santa Clara County, a mayor in Palo Alto serves a largely (but not entirely) ceremonial role. They run council meetings, cut ribbons at ground-breaking ceremonies, appoint members to committees and represent the city at regional, state and national conferences.

Some on the council, however, believe that it's time to reconsider the mayor's role. Council members Vicki Veenker and Greg Tanaka, who both serve on the council's Policy and Services Committee, suggested in May that the city would benefit from longer mayoral terms. On Dec. 18, the full City Council agreed to hold this discussion in early 2024.

Veenker suggested at the Dec. 18 meeting that broader societal shifts may warrant changing the city's policy for choosing its mayor, which is enshrined in the City Charter.

"The Congress is fairly dysfunctional and the role of cities is rising," Veenker said. "I think Palo Alto needs to talk about how it participates in this conversation.

"One of the things that cities that have mayors who stick around longer than a year have is some continuity in relationship with election officials in other cities, in other levels of government and organizations, like the U.S. Conference of Mayors and others."

Around Santa Clara County, the Palo Alto model of electing a council member as a mayor for a year is more of a rule than an exception. Most of the county's smaller cities have procedures in which council members choose one of their own to serve as mayor for one year, whether through a popularity contest or through a regular rotation. This includes the cities of Mountain View, Saratoga, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Campbell and Cupertino.

Others do things differently. Morgan Hill residents elect their mayor for a two-year term. In San Jose, Santa Clara and Sunnyvale, mayors are directly elected to four-year terms.

If the city opts to make a change, it would need to bring the issue to the voters during an election year in which council members are also on the ballot. As such, the discussion will not affect next month's proceeding, in which the council will likely follow its informal tradition of choosing vice mayors to serve as next year's mayors and elevate Greer Stone to its top leadership post.

It could, however, have bearing on when, how and by whom future mayors would be chosen. Tanaka argued during the May meeting of the Policy and Services Committee that they should be chosen directly by the voters.

"I think having a directly elected mayor is a good thing because it gives authority to the mayor, versus if we just elect ourselves," Tanaka said.

He also suggested that having a mayor serve in the position for multiple years would make it easier for the chosen person to fulfill the goals they were elected to achieve.

"It's really hard to get something done in one year. It's extremely hard," Tanaka said.

It's also entirely possible — and, in fact, quite likely — that the council will retain its current model. Veenker was the only council member during the Dec. 19 hearing who expressed some urgency about changing the status quo. City Manager Ed Shikada also indicated that city staff has little appetite for offering any recommendations or opinions on this topic, which goes to the heart of how city residents want to be represented and which he argued should be handled by the council itself.

"Quite frankly, I think it's fraught with peril for us as staff to try to articulate the pros and cons of a governance question of this nature," Shikada told the council.