With a potential casino in East Boston and the pit in the middle of Downtown Crossing as backdrops, tensions are flaring between the Menino administration and City Council President Stephen Murphy.

Some of that stems from confusion over how much leverage the City Council has in forcing a developer who is a minority stakeholder in the Suffolk Downs race track – which is angling for a casino license – to act on restarting the development of the Downtown Crossing hole. To the chagrin of local officials, including Mayor Thomas Menino, developer Steven Roth of New York’s Vornado Realty Trust has done little to the downtown site after the former Filene’s Basement was demolished and financing for new construction dried up.

“I’m not trying to do anything but add my voice to chorus and be very, very surgical in the way we maximize leverage on behalf of the people who send us to City Hall,” Murphy said, expressing frustration with Roth, whom he referred to as a “jackass from Manhattan.”

Roth did not return a call for comment.

The leverage, according to Murphy, includes the power of the City Council to sign off on a referendum on a casino proposal.

Whether it’s a vote city-wide – or simply in the ward the casino would be located in – Murphy contended that an order with the vote must come through the City Council, citing the casino law passed in November 2011.

“In our reading of the law, that was an area that gave – and I don’t mean just us – gave the mayor and us more leverage because of that component,” said Murphy, who met with Suffolk Downs officials last week and told them of his stance.

At the center of the leverage debate is the complex casino bill that Beacon Hill crafted and passed into law last year. According to the Menino administration, the law requires a referendum to occur once an applicant such as Suffolk Downs requests it, leaving little leverage for the City Council. The request would come after officials from the host community for the casino – in this case, Boston and Revere – came to a mitigation agreement with the applicant.

In the law, the “local governing body” has the ability to opt out of a ward-only vote, and go to a city-wide vote on whether a specific proposal for a casino should go forward. Ask around City Hall and Beacon Hill, including those who kept close watch on the casino law as it made its way to the governor’s desk, and most would say “local governing body” refers to the City Council.

But the law defines “local governing body” as the mayor and the City Council. And one reading of the law contends that even if the Council moves towards a city-wide vote, Menino, who along with East Boston’s elected officials ardently supports a ward-only vote, is needed to sign off on such a move. In this view, then, for a city-wide vote to happen, the City Council and the mayor have to agree on it.

Murphy maintains that in taking his aggressive stance he is acting as the “captain of the legislative team”, with Mayor Menino playing the role as “captain of the executive team.”

On the other side of City Hall’s fifth floor, the feeling does not appear to be mutual.

“The mayor will not engage in politics when it comes to economic development and jobs in the city of Boston,” said Menino spokeswoman Dot Joyce, echoing some of the comments she made to the Boston Globe over the weekend when asked about Murphy’s comments. “The project at One Franklin Street is too important.”

In the Globe’s weekend story, the head of the Boston Redevelopment Authority appeared to slap down Murphy’s stance. “Singing, dancing, yelling, screaming – nothing can make this more important than the mayor has made this already,” the BRA’s Peter Meade told the newspaper.

Murphy hit back, telling the Reporter on Monday, “I think Peter Meade’s comments are unprofessional and unnecessary and Dot Joyce’s comments are bizarre.”

Asked about Murphy’s comments, including his mention of at being “captain of the legislative team,” Meade offered a clipped response: “Good for Steve.”