The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Chairman Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:32 pm.
Present: Garry Thompson, Terry Duncan, Fran Migliorino, Jack Sadlon, Dave Humpal, David Neumann, Brett Iafigliola (arrived at 8:29 p.m.). Members excused: Lori Jones and Laura Graham. Others Present: Mike Dolan, Assistant Law Director/Prosecutor.
INTRODUCTION OF COMMISSION MEMBERS
Mr. Thompson asked each member to introduce themselves and state how long they have lived in the city, any activities or officers held, and any hobbies or interests you may have.
Terry Duncan stated she is the Council representative for Ward III. She has lived in the city since her son was 1 year old and he has now turned 38.
Jack Sadlon stated he came to the city in 1983 and has lived on Lindberg since then. He presently serves on the Civil Service Commission for the city. He was a school teacher for Berea City Schools for 34 years.
David Neumann stated that he has lived in the city since 2003. He moved to Ohio in 1995 for law school and is originally from Massachusetts. He is married to Holly Neumann. He has been involved in all sorts of community activities. This is his first involvement in his home town best interests.
Dave Humpal stated that he moved into Olmsted Falls in 1978 from Berea. He also taught in the Berea High School and Midpark. He was the girls track coach at Berea. He retired in 2001 and took up bag pipes. This is the first time he has been involved in any city government operation of any kind.
Fran Migliorino stated she has been a resident of the city for 40 years. All of her children went through the entire school system of Olmsted Falls. She actually served the public for 30 years, she ran the governor’s office in Northeast Ohio, worked for Voinovich and Taft, her department was the Department of Development. She worked with all the business community, universities, etc., for four counties. She now serves on the Olmsted Falls Planning & Zoning Commission, also the chair of the JEDD board.
Mike Dolan stated that he graduated law school in 1990, undergraduate degree in computer architecture and was a patent attorney, intellectual property for a few years. He worked for the City of Cleveland in the law department representing police, fire, water, power. He worked for the City of Cleveland for five years and was an elected official on City Council in Cleveland for the next 11 years. He served Governor Strickland for four years, been an assistant prosecutor, assistant law director, economic development director, he has had a private law practice since 1992 in Kamms Corners. He is present to help Mayor Graven. He is the temporary person for tonight’s meeting as the law director Andrew Bemer will be present. Our role will be advisory to the commission as this is a citizen’s committee.
Garry Thompson stated that he grew up on Columbia Road behind the greenhouses. He went through the Olmsted Falls school system, he attempted to move out and tried to find his business in Strongsville or medina but ended up in Olmsted Falls. He has been fixing law mowers and small engines for 39 years at the corner of Columbia and Sprague. He married his wife Chris, who is from Olmsted Falls, and has been married for 39 years. He served 10 years on Olmsted Falls City Council from 2004 to 2014, four of those years as President of Council. He has a little bit of legislative experience and obviously some charter experience.
Mr. Thompson stated that everyone did receive a roster of the Charter Review members. He stated that Ms. Mancini will be the secretary to the Commission. We will communicate through emails but if there is a need to contact commission members we will call. Ms. Mancini did sent out a memorandum to each member regarding the meeting dates. He asked Mr. Dolan to review the process.
Mr. Dolan stated that the City Charter prescribes an elective process for members of the Charter Review but there was no one who ran for the Commission so everyone is present by appointment. He distributed some information regarding Municipal Home Rule and the Charter. The structure between the Ohio Constitution and Charter municipalities and home rule is similar in that when you have a charter it basically, under Ohio law as long as it does not conflict with statewide laws and rules. It is the city’s constitution and is an important document and is the first document referenced to learn how your government works.
The function the Commission provides is a critical function and each member will be credited for serving on the community and giving of their personal time. The Commission will review the entire charter and determine if tweaking is needed, you are also permitted to take evidence and solicit opinions. It is recommended that you review other city’s charter to determine how they operate. There should be a separation of powers and duties between the legislative branch, which controls legislation and the executive branch which is empowered to enforce and execute the laws administratively.
Mr. Dolan stated that the law director’s role is advisory. He stated that when the Commission has completed its review the members will vote on what they believe would be the proposed charter amendments and then the harder work is finding the language that would be placed on a ballot initiative to propose to the elector, the elector would then vote. If the proposed amendment passes the elector’s then have amended the charter, if it fails charter remains the same.
Mr. Sadlon asked how the judicial play into this at any point, not just Olmsted Falls. Mr. Dolan stated that all the courts are underneath the auspices of the State of Ohio government so even when you have a municipal court, you do not set your budget. The judges and courts are separate from municipal government as they answer to the Ohio Supreme Court as the third branch of the Ohio government.
Mr. Thompson stated that he drafted brief rules of order in order to have some decorum. This is a public meeting and the public is invited and welcome to attend but may not always be able to speak. There will be opportunities for the public to speak and we will make sure those dates are publicized. He is asking that each member raise their hand which is more for the Clerk so that he may recognize an individual and the clerk will know who is speaking. He stated that after a while the clerk will learn everyone’s voices. He stated that when voting a simple majority of the commission members will prevail. He stated that whatever is presented as proposed changes to Council cannot be changed. They may vote on the proposed amendments but they do not have the authority, per the charter, to change the language of the proposed amendments. Ms. Migliorino asked how many votes are needed from the Commission to present proposed changes. Mr. Thompson replied a majority is needed, there are nine members on the Commission; five votes are needed to move anything to Council. Mr. Dolan stated that in order to hold a member five members are needed for a quorum and a decision would need to be made if a majority is needed of the quorum of actual commission members. He stated that there could be a lesser number of members approve things as an intermediate step and then at the conclusion of the work the commission can go through and require five members to vote in order to advance any amendments to Council. Mr. Thompson agrees to that suggestion. Mr. Sadlon suggested voting on that suggestion as well as determining what would be voting dates that would require five members.
Mr. Thompson stated that the schedule of dates will be Tuesday’s in March and are the 6th; 20th and 28th. In April we will meet on Wednesday’s which are the 11th and 25th; in May the dates are 9th; 23rd; and 30th; June would be the 13th. The overall timeline is any amendments need to advance to Council for their June 26th meeting, which will allow for three readings prior to the date any amendments need to be presented to the Board of Elections, assuming any amendments are made. The Board of Elections deadline is September 7, 2018 at 4:00 p.m. Traditionally, Council goes on summer recess in July and August but will typically meet once a month during that recess. Within these dates the different government bodies will be invited to come in and speak with the Commission. For example, the Mayor and his administration, Council, finance department, boards and commissions, civil service and then the general public. Mr. Dolan stated that for those individuals within City Hall the commission could request written submissions of proposed changes or issues and/or concerns.
Mr. Thompson stated that he believes the commission could work with a majority of a quorum that is present, unless it is something that will be placed into legislation. Mr. Dolan stated that the vast majority of his legislative experience comes from Cleveland, there were 11, 9 and 7 member committees, and then there was a committee of the whole which required 11 votes to pass, unless the charter required a simple majority. The way the committee system worked was a lesser number would meet and the majority of that committee would move things which would end up in front of the finance committee which was a majority 11 member committee. For example on a 9 member committee they needed five members to pass a piece of legislation, which would move to finance and finance required six members for approval in order to move to the floor, in order to obtain final passage and become law it would be an 11 person vote unless a super majority was required. So, in order to not hamstring members or the committee, if six members attended a meeting to make a quorum, you could move things to a set time on an agenda by the majority present. You would then need to inform all members that in order to get an issue out of the committee and onto final approval all members need to be present for voting. Ms. Duncan stated that Mr. Dolan’s recommendation would be for instance to move if a majority of the quorum could move an item to the next agenda. Mr. Dolan stated that the working committee majority advances an issue to either take an issue off the table as no action needed or advance for further work and that committee would be a greater number of people.
Ms. Migliorino suggested a motion to move working recommendations first with the majority of quorum members and move stated recommendations to council for future work with majority numbers.
Mr. Humpal stated that if there is a five member quorum and the vote is unanimous would that move it automatically. Ms. Migliorino stated that it would move from a working recommendation with a majority quorum of those present and then the stated recommendations with the majority of the nine to Council. Mr. Dolan stated that this would give the committee flexibility where there is a conflict so you can catch back up.
Ms. Migliorino stated that should could amend her previously suggested motion to a 2/3 majority to move any issues to Council for the state recommendation.
Ms. Migliorino moved the working recommendations first with the majority quorum members and more stated recommendations for future work with Council with the majority of 2/3’s of commission members; Mr. Humpal seconded. Mr. Neumann stated that 2/3’s would be six members of out 9; and asked if this would be considered the quorum. Ms. Migliorino indicated that a quorum would be five and they would vote on working recommendations and then six would be needed for the stated recommendations. Mr. Thompson stated that the charter is silent on this issue so this commission may set rules. He stated that we have never had council members on the Charter Review Commission before so if there are issues that deal with Council they would need to abstain from voting. Ms. Migliorino agreed. Mr. Dolan stated they would also have to remove themselves from discussions. Mr. Thompson and Ms. Migliorino agreed so there would be no appearance of impropriety. Mr. Neumann stated that he would like some council input. Mr. Dolan stated that to avoid any conflicts that may appear the members of council present could ask council to give the commission their positions as a council as a whole. He stated that this commission is to be a-political and be more about governmental function and structure. He believes what Ms. Jones and Ms. Duncan can do is present the concerns of their branch of the government that way it protects them from people saying that they individually are overreaching. Ms. Duncan agreed.
Mr. Thompson stated that even this committee with the elected process that no one ran for and nobody even knew they could run for could be something that this commission considers changing. It has not worked since he has known about it and no one has run for a seat on the commission that he knows of but it has not worked for the last two times. Poll: 6 ayes; 0 nays. Motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
Review of Olmsted Falls City Charter
Mr. Thompson stated there are a couple different ways the commission can handle this review, one suggestion is if each member of the Commission took one article of the Charter and researched that section with other city charters. For example, if he had the charter section relating to the Mayor, he would research only that portion of the other cities charter and then report back his findings to the board. Another suggestion would be to have two or three people research or each member could research other cities. He believes that each member taking one section of the charter would be the best way to proceed.
Mr. Dolan stated that there are sections in the charter that will not be changed, for example, Articles 1, 2 and 3 are names and boundaries and municipal powers. Mr. Neumann stated that on boundaries he knows there are other provision that deals with how are lands are acquired if they exceed two acres and there seems to be add on provisions that somewhat at least with regard to expanding or picking up areas there seems to be overlap. He stated that there is name and boundaries and procedures for annexation. Mr. Dolan stated that if you read your charter the provisions of article one for name and boundaries have to be read so that they are harmonious with later provision and you can look at Section one which basically says when you do annexation or change the boundaries of the city you basically have to follow state law for local self-government and has to be uniform throughout the city. The other things as far as voting requirements you could change so long as it does not violate state law. He would suggest taking the “low hanging fruit” off the table because the stuff that is meatier the commission will want to spend more time on. Mr. Thompson stated he did read the portion Mr. Neumann is discussing and what he believes this refers to if there is more than 1,000 people and two square miles we would add another person on to the Council so there would be more representation.
Mr. Dolan stated that hiring/firing is part of executive and administration. The majority of the employees in the city are civil service which are required to be civil service. All the employees from the fire and police chief down are all in the classified service and those rules are all prescribed, no one can be a member of civil service without examination and there is no promotion in the classified service without examination. If you wanted to change that and put that to the electorate there are other models. If you want to make changes to the civil service rules, to the extent that would require a charter change, that would be something the commission could discuss.
Mr. Neumann stated that the runoff election is unique. Mr. Dolan stated that it is unique and is something the commission could discuss. Ms. Migliorino stated that she also flagged that section as it does not seem as though there was a charter for the way that election run off happened. Mr. Neumann stated that he is unsure if separating the sections is the right way to proceed because they are all intertwined. He noticed that sometimes he sees 2/3’s, majority or ¾’s. Mr. Dolan stated that you shouldn’t overturn things that prior people put together without careful thought, the people who set up the Charter put a lot of time and effort into it and you should be cognizant of that fact. The balances that your charter sets forth are philosophical questions, do you want 66% or simple majority, these are tough questions and that is what the commission should be discussing.
Mr. Thompson stated that he has a list of possible discussion topics: Charter review commission being elected versus not elected and runoff elections, because so many people thought the election was over; then there are so many more mail in ballots today than there was when the charter was written; change terms of council to four years and stagger, in 1990 when we elected a full time mayor and made that term four years there was a vote for Council to become four years but that was voted down. Theoretically, right now you could “clean house” which has happened, and put seven new people in office that have absolutely no legislative experience. He stated that the Charter now states that the Mayor is the presider of all meetings of Council, most other communities do not operate that way. He is not saying whether it’s good or bad. Theoretically if Council holds a work session the Mayor is the presider of that meeting. Any meeting of Council, according to the Charter, is the presider. In other communities the Council President runs the meetings and the Mayor gives a report. This is an issue that came up when he was in office as well.