Amending charter still an issue in Pickerington
City Council members are split over a third change colleague wants on ballot
By Kirk D . Richards THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
If a Pickerington councilman is willing to compromise with his political rivals, city voters could see two charter amendments on the November ballot.
One would require appointed City Council members to stand at the next election if more than 2?½ years remain on their term. The other would require the law director to examine referendum petitions to make sure there are no mistakes on the paperwork before circulators seek signatures. Minor discrepancies have invalidated past petitions.
The two charter amendments were among three thatCouncilman Mitch O?’Brien proposed, but he needs five votes on the seven-member council to send them to the ballot. That won?’t happen, three councilmen say, unless O?’Brien drops the third amendment, which would rule out using emergency votes to approve zonings and annexations.
O?’Brien said those development issues should pass as regular legislation, which would take effect in 30 days and give citizens an opportunity to oppose them through a referendum. Emergency legislation takes effect immediately.
All three proposed amendments are part of one ordinance. The third and final reading ?— in which five votes are required for passage ?— could come June 21.
Councilman Michael Sabatino said the amendments ought to be separated.
''If it?’s all or nothing, it?’ll be nothing,?’?’ he said.
Councilman Doug Parker said he supports the first two proposed amendments but called the third ''reckless legislation.?’?’
''Taking emergencies away from annexations puts us in a weaker position,?’?’ Parker said.
Councilman Ted Hackworth, an O?’Brien ally, said that more than 70 percent of ordinances in 2001 ?— before he was elected ?— were approved by emergency. He doesn?’t want to pull an amendment that could prevent a future council from doing that, he said.
''If we don?’t keep that in there, the effort is wasted,?’?’ Hackworth said.
O?’Brien said he would prefer not to split the proposed amendments but will consider doing so in hopes of getting two of them approved this month. He acknowledges that the third proposal probably must be tabled for further discussion.
''I just hate holding up what we?’re trying to do for the citizens,?’?’ O?’Brien said.
Meanwhile, Sabatino is proposing two amendments of his own, which are not yet in legislative form.
One would let voters decide whether they want a ward system, dividing the city into four areas, each with its own council member. The other three members would be elected at large. Sabatino said that would help ensure that issues in certain parts of town are not ignored.
Sabatino also wants the city manager to be under the direction of the council.
Hackworth questioned how manager Judy Gilleland could be asked to answer to seven council members. Sabatino said Gilleland would take orders from the majority.
krichards@dispatch.com
City Council members are split over a third change colleague wants on ballot
By Kirk D . Richards THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
If a Pickerington councilman is willing to compromise with his political rivals, city voters could see two charter amendments on the November ballot.
One would require appointed City Council members to stand at the next election if more than 2?½ years remain on their term. The other would require the law director to examine referendum petitions to make sure there are no mistakes on the paperwork before circulators seek signatures. Minor discrepancies have invalidated past petitions.
The two charter amendments were among three thatCouncilman Mitch O?’Brien proposed, but he needs five votes on the seven-member council to send them to the ballot. That won?’t happen, three councilmen say, unless O?’Brien drops the third amendment, which would rule out using emergency votes to approve zonings and annexations.
O?’Brien said those development issues should pass as regular legislation, which would take effect in 30 days and give citizens an opportunity to oppose them through a referendum. Emergency legislation takes effect immediately.
All three proposed amendments are part of one ordinance. The third and final reading ?— in which five votes are required for passage ?— could come June 21.
Councilman Michael Sabatino said the amendments ought to be separated.
''If it?’s all or nothing, it?’ll be nothing,?’?’ he said.
Councilman Doug Parker said he supports the first two proposed amendments but called the third ''reckless legislation.?’?’
''Taking emergencies away from annexations puts us in a weaker position,?’?’ Parker said.
Councilman Ted Hackworth, an O?’Brien ally, said that more than 70 percent of ordinances in 2001 ?— before he was elected ?— were approved by emergency. He doesn?’t want to pull an amendment that could prevent a future council from doing that, he said.
''If we don?’t keep that in there, the effort is wasted,?’?’ Hackworth said.
O?’Brien said he would prefer not to split the proposed amendments but will consider doing so in hopes of getting two of them approved this month. He acknowledges that the third proposal probably must be tabled for further discussion.
''I just hate holding up what we?’re trying to do for the citizens,?’?’ O?’Brien said.
Meanwhile, Sabatino is proposing two amendments of his own, which are not yet in legislative form.
One would let voters decide whether they want a ward system, dividing the city into four areas, each with its own council member. The other three members would be elected at large. Sabatino said that would help ensure that issues in certain parts of town are not ignored.
Sabatino also wants the city manager to be under the direction of the council.
Hackworth questioned how manager Judy Gilleland could be asked to answer to seven council members. Sabatino said Gilleland would take orders from the majority.
krichards@dispatch.com
