Charter Changes

[Lynn Farris]

I noted in Stan's minutes of council this charter change:

The fourth and fifth items referred to changes in the initiative and referendum procedures. It will raise the threshold of signatures required to 10% from the current 5% and the base from which this percentage is determined is changed from the mayoral election to the number of votes cast in the gubernatorial election.

These were not proposed by the charter commission. Due to the huge turnout in the last mayoral election due to the West End, the numbers required to do an initiative petition or referrendum went up significantly. The argument I kept getting when I suggested changing the charter to ban eminent domain for economic development or limit it was it was easy to do an initiative petition/referrendum and undo it. Now they are making it more than twice as difficult. At the same time that Eminent Domain has become significantly easier to do.

Additionally, we spent hours rewriting this section so that the average citizen could read and understand it without having to hire an attorney to compare the Ohio constitution and the Lakewood Charter. That change isn't going in - obviously they want it to be more difficult and confusing for the average citizen.

The best thing we did in the Charter Commission in my humble opinion was to rewrite it in English. My goal was that any HS senior should be able to read and understand it. Those changes are taking place. I'm irritated.

[Donald Farris]

Hi,
Who on Council made this recommendation?

What was the reason for it's need?

I wish our elected Councilmembers would answer here individually where they stand on this and why they are for it, if they are.

[stephen davis]

Lynn (My fellow Charter Commissioner),

As you know, after great debate, City Council struck down their own proposal to raise the petition threshold at the Committee of the Whole meeting tonight. This change keeps the Initiative and Referendum process available to voters, without any additional burden.

I was pleased to see that a majority of the Council decided that there were more important proposals on the table.

Personally, I would have liked broader discussion of the City Manager form of government. I also wish I would have lobbied harder for the inclusion of the proposal to eliminate all but the Safety departments from the charter. They could all be reinstalled by ordinance, making our city government more flexible and efficient.

I am extremely happy that they have tackled a few contentious issues in the name of good government. Having been involved in the past two charter reviews, I have been frustrated with some fairly recent charter amendments that have an ever-increasing negative impact on Lakewood. The amendments now proposed by Council will reverse those poorly designed ones.

Passing the charter amendments proposed by Council will help to guarantee a strong and qualified pool of future candidates for elected city offices, and provide funds for our aging infrastructure.

Kudos to Council for their focus on the future. We may not always agree with them, but we all need to get behind these good government ballot issues.

I’m sure we will have more great charter discussions, at least until November, and hopefully beyond.

Steve

[dl meckes]

Lynn (My fellow Charter Commissioner),

As you know, after great debate, City Council struck down their own proposal to raise the petition threshold at the Committee of the Whole meeting tonight. This change keeps the Initiative and Referendum process available to voters, without any additional burden.
Steve

I'm glad that Council changed its collective mind about this. While I certainly don't favor government by referendum, the proposed petition threshold seemed unreasonably high and (not that I necessarily would have) I hadn't heard anyone from Charter Review discuss that kind of a change.

[stephen davis]

dl,

You didn't hear about a raised petition threshold from anyone on the Charter Commission because, although it was discussed along with hundreds of other ideas, it was never proposed as an amedment. That was Council’s own doing.

The Commission had decided not to add an amendment that would protect against the use of eminent domain. As a compromise, it was decided to make the Referendum and Initiative sections clearer, and without a higher petition threshold, as a remedy.

I’m glad Council changed their minds. Now they’ve proposed amendments that we should all get behind.

By the way, the Mayor and Finance Director presented very compelling arguments for the water rate amendment to our Commission. I hope that they will make the same arguments available to the Lakewood Observer newspaper and forum.

Steve

[Lynn Farris]

I was pleased with the Council's decision to eliminate the increase in the number of signatures to place a referrendum or an initiative petition on the ballot. I appreciate your help, Steve, at bringing this to council's attention. Thank you.

I learned a great deal working on the commission. Unfortunately I thought the best thing we did was rewrite the charter in English instead of legalize so that everyone could read it without the help of an attorney.

Without the entire charter being put out there, that is gone.

Additionally I would have liked to see a city wide discussion of a mayor vs. city manager form of government. It would have been an interesting and productive.

[Dan Shields]

I was one of the nine members appointed to the 2004 Charter Review Commission.

I wanted to update the amendments to the Charter that will be heading to the ballot, for those of you keeping score.

As indicated, Council decided to scrap any increase in the number of signatures needed to pursue initiative and referendum petitions at the Committee of the Whole meeting on Teusday, July 12, 2005.

That leaves three Charter amendments up for vote:

1. Amendment to Article XI, Section 3 regarding Classified and
Unclassified Service;

2. Amendment to Article II, Section 5, Article II, Section 3 and Article
XI, Section 7 concerning salary recommendations for Council and
the Mayor;

3. Amendment to Article III, Section 9 regarding voter approval of
Ordinances and Resolutions.

The Charter Review Commission is appointed to meet every ten years. Thus, this is an opportune time for all the citizens of Lakewood to familiarize themselves with the Charter, review our work on the Commission throughout 2004, and support our recommendations as adopted by Council.

Dan Shields