MOUNT VERNON — In a 5 to 2 vote, city council adopted legislation that puts the question “Shall a commission be chosen to frame a charter?” on the November ballot. Councilwomen Nancy Vail and Janis Seavolt cast the nay votes.
During an Employee and Public Relations Committee meeting on Monday, resident Bruce Malek urged council members to delay passing the legislation. He told them to “take the time to collectively determine and then share with the voters what is broken with our current form of government and how a charter might fix it.”
“Voters have only been told what could be done, not what should be done and why,” he said. “This is not an infringement on the voters or any future commission tasked with considering a charter. It is common sense. How can you expect the voters to fairly judge the need for a charter if you don’t tell them about current problems, if any?”
In response to the question of what is wrong with putting the issue before the voters, Malek said, “Plenty, if those voters have not had the opportunity to become adequately educated and informed on the issue.”
Resident Don Carr agreed with Malek about the short time frame between council broaching the idea of a charter and legislation being read. Noting that although a panel discussion was held last year, he said the issue was postponed until May when it was revived in a committee work session. He compared this time frame with that of the recently enacted income tax increase issue, which involved nine months of deliberation and marketing by a city finance group.
“There has been no study group created although there was a pro-charter panel forum put together to sell the benefits of charter government,” he said. “The bottom line is that the public does not have enough information or trust to make an informed vote.
“Many residents feel that our present form of local government has served Mount Vernon citizens very well before and after 1912 when home rule became available as an option to Ohio municipalities,” he told council. “If you don’t help citizens understand in-depth the logic to move from a tried-and-true form of government to some unknown structure, you’re just asking for public confusion and a defeat of the referendum at the polls and the waste of time and money for all involved.”
Dennis Swingle of East Chestnut Street also urged council to vote no on the legislation.
“So far, all we’ve heard are the positives. We want to hear the negatives,” he said.
“The study group is the commission. The commission will ask all of those questions,” said Councilman Jeff Gottke. “I think people are smart enough to make the call. I don’t think it’s too hard to understand for the people.”
“I may have my own opinion what a charter should look like, but the voters will decide,” said Councilman Matt Starr. “That’s empowering for the voters.”
Regarding the difference between the current structure under statutory government vs. charter government, Starr said a charter gives the city the ability to make changes if needed.
“Otherwise, we’re beholden to the people in Columbus,” he said, adding that the city has a recourse if it feels the state is overreaching. “People say we’re moving too fast. My question is why have we taken so long?”
Seavolt said she feels council is moving too fast on the issue. Regarding the civil service method of promoting to leadership positions in the police and fire departments, which other council members have said is one of the disadvantages under the current statutory structure, she said, “I like the civil service because we know who we are advancing.”
“I think we need to have more meetings and talk about what needs to be changed,” she said, adding that she would like anonymous input from city department heads as well as the mayor.
Vail also upholds the civil service mode of promotion, and said the issue relates to who is hired in the first place. Citing Columbus as an example of a charter mess, she also voiced the concern that the government structure could be very different if the commission was overloaded with members favoring a particular style of governing.
The discussion continued during council’s legislative session. Law Director Rob Broeren related the reasoning behind the timing of the ballot issue. If the city goes outside of the legal time frame required for placing an issue on the November ballot, it would trigger a special election which the city would have to pay for.
The timing also relates to giving the board of elections enough time to verify the signatures on candidates’ petitions to run for the commission.
Vail restated her opposition to the legislation based on reading and listening to residents’ comments, her belief that council has not done due diligence because of the possible extreme change in government structure, and her belief that there will not be a balanced representation on the commission.
Councilman Chris Menapace said he did not believe that what he’s heard is a consensus of city residents, only a passionate few.
“We need to be very careful to not allow a dozen people represent the views of 16,000 plus,” he said.
He also said that Columbus is doing wonderful things and disagreed with Seavolt’s comments on civil service promotions. He said he has spoken with many law enforcement and fire personnel who feel the civil service process is antiquated and does not work. Citing the city’s recent experiences with legal issues surrounding police and fire leadership, he said, “If you want to know what’s broken, those are some instances.”
At that point Vail called the question, which means further debate is cut off. Failing to receive the two-thirds vote required to end debate, Francis continued the discussion by saying that in the private sector when deficiencies in product or efficiency is noted, consultants are hired to analyze the situation. He noted that the city hires consultants for design services for city projects.
“We’re not hiring a consulting group, we are asking 15 individuals to come into City Hall and look at our inefficiencies and deficiencies,” he said. “We’re asking 15 members of the community to come in as a consulting team.”
He then called the question, and council adopted the legislation.
