Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

By TAMARIA L. KULEMEKA
The Eagle-Gazette Staff
tkulemeka@nncogannett.com
PICKERINGTON - Pickerington voters may have to approve changes to the city's charter in the November election.
The proposed changes would address the way City Council fills vacancies, eliminate emergency language on zoning and annexation legislation and give those who want a referendum on the ballot access to the city's law director.
Council is expected to have a second reading on the proposed legislation tonight.
The charter typically is reviewed every 10 years and any changes are made then. The last review was in 2000.
City Councilman Mitch O'Brien, who proposed the legislation, said the changes are needed now.
''My opinion is the city is growing and evolving at such a rate that makes waiting a full 10 years difficult,'' O'Brien said. ''As the city gets more complex and the needs of the city change, we need to be willing to offer residents a chance to adjust the charter as we go.''
Residents aren't able to place referendums on the ballot about legislation that is passed with emergency language because this type of legislation goes into effect immediately, instead of 30 days after it is enacted.
The revision would eliminate rezoning and annexation requests passed as an emergency. This would give residents a chance to put the issue before all the voters via referendum.
This may not be suitable for every piece of legislation, said Councilman Michael Sabatino, who voted against the proposal in its first reading.
''I really don't have a problem with it being (subjected to referendum) ... (but) there may be some instances where you might want to reserve the ability to do something quickly,'' Sabatino said.
Anyone appointed to council fills the full unexpired term of the person who held the seat before them. Under the proposed legislation, if the vacancy occurs in the first 2 1/2 years of the term, the appointee would have to run for the council seat in the next general election.
If the vacancy occurs in the final 1 1/2 years of the term, the appointee would serve all the remaining time.
O'Brien, who was appointed to council in January 2004, said he would've been affected by this change if it were in place at the time of his appointment.
''What this does is helps to give citizens a voice in who represents them on council,'' he said. ''If someone is appointed that citizens wouldn't want, they would have the opportunity to choose for themselves in the election.''
When residents file a petition or referendum, they have to hire an attorney to make sure they have the right format and wording. The proposed change would allow the city law director to offer assistance to residents, O'Brien said.
''We're planning to have the attorney prepare a checklist for citizens to use to make sure everything is correct,'' he said. ''What I'm hoping to accomplish is ensuring that petitions aren't rejected for incorrect wording or format - things that have happened in the past.''
Sabatino said there should be a clause that prevents denial of residents' referendum on a ballot when the law director has reviewed a petition.

continued....

More Info continues....

''I think this is a way for (council members who support the proposed legislation) to potentially see what citizen groups are doing. Hopefully, their intentions aren't that, but I'm a little skeptical.''
O'Brien said the changes are meant to empower citizens.
''I have been accused that this is a political move, but I don't see any politics in this. It's simply returning the power back to the people,'' O'Brien said.
The proposal needs five council votes, according to the city charter, to pass and be placed on the ballot.
Four of the six council members attending the May 17 council meeting voted for the proposed changes in a first reading.
Dissenting votes came from Sabatino and Councilman Bill Wright. Councilman Doug Parker wasn't at the meeting.
O'Brien said he doesn't know how tonight's vote will go. There still will be one more reading after tonight's meeting.
Pickerington resident Chris Chapman has followed council issues closely, especially since the fallout over the Diley Road widening.
In January, residents wanted to put a referendum on the ballot to stop the widening. The petition was rejected because special legal counsel ruled ''when more than one ordinance is necessary to complete a public improvement, a referendum applies only to the first ordinance.''
There were nine ordinances enacted on the project that will widen the road from two to five lanes.
Chapman supports issues that give voters more say in city government and wishes voters had an opportunity to decide the fate of Diley Road.
He supports putting the proposed legislation on the ballot if the council passes it.
''My initial reaction is it's a good thing,'' Chapman said. ''My second reaction is I distrust everything this administration is doing. This Diley Road thing is a sour point with me. ... I am distrustful of the (Mayor David) Shaver administration. ... They can basically push anything they want through right now.''

Originally published June 7, 2005

Interesting

Mr. Chapman doesn't trust Mayor Shaver's administration because they can ram anything through at anytime.

Hmm...I hope he was just as suspicious about Mayor Postage and his gang in prior years.

should have watched in 2001

from PATA our pages in 2001 read full article at this link:

http://www.neighborhoodlink.com/public/clubextra.html?nclubid=68303919&nid=208068317

Additionally, the city has applied for a Federal grant for a nine million dollar road improvement project to widen Diley Road from SR 256 to SR 33 and feels optimistic about receiving such monies to fund the project by 2006 and they are considering inititiating the project sooner, using federal funding to pay back the debt. (See Diley Road improvements on the Our pages section and the link to the Service committee meeting minutes below)This road improvement is welcome.... but do we need another highway exit into a sea a subdivisions similar to the exit on I-70 into the Glenshire subdivision in Violet Township? PATA asks the question whether community federal tax dollars wouldn't be better spent encouraging commercial development in this Diley Road area with the road improvements instead of the short sightedness of zoning for thousands of single family homes in the Pickerington School District?