Hilliard, Whitehall consider changes to government style
Voters in Hilliard and Whitehall will consider proposed amendments to their cities’ charters on the Nov. 6 general election ballot.
Hilliard voters will decide whether they want to switch to a city manager who is appointed by the city council or continue with an elected mayor.
Supporters of the switch say it would help the city’s government run more efficiently. It also would align Hilliard with its suburban neighbors, many of which have adopted a city manager approach to leadership.
Those who oppose Issue 33, including City Council President Albert Iosue, say that eliminating an elected mayor would undercut the system of checks and balances — isolating too much power in one branch. In a city council-city manager model, council sets a direction for the city — through legislation and a budget — and the city manager is tasked with the day-to-day execution, Councilman Pete Marsh said. That model also would eliminate having a mayor with veto powers who might have ideas that compete with the council, he said.
“Right now, we unfortunately have a situation where there’s a tug in two different directions, which makes for some inefficient processes and inefficient decisions,” Marsh said.But opponents to the change say the dissent that occasionally arises isn’t worth tearing up the current system. “Sometimes, the disagreements between the mayor and city council may cause things to slow down, but I don’t think that’s a bad thing,” Iosue said. “We want to have an administrative branch and a legislative branch: One person or one entity doesn’t have the full power.”
Marsh, however, stressed that council members are elected by voters and if residents don’t like the decisions being made, they can vote them out.
Having a council-city manager system would actually heighten city council’s accountability because when voters “hear something they like or don’t like, they will know it came from a direction set by city council,” Marsh said. “There’s no more passing the buck saying it was someone else’s decision.”
In May, the Hilliard City Council voted 5-1 to bring Issue 33 before voters. Iosue was the lone dissenter, though he said he isn’t the only council member who supports keeping a mayorcouncil, or “strong mayor” government. Some voted for it, he said, because they believed residents should make the call.
The change also would undercut the citizen-led charter review commission, which voted 10-1 in February to stick with the current system as part of its yearlong study of ways to improve the city’s government, Iosue said.
If Issue 33 is approved, the change in governance would begin Jan. 1, 2020. Mayor Don Schonhardt’s fourth term will expire Dec. 31, 2019. When asked about the mayor’s stance on Issue 33, a city spokeswoman declined comment.
Councilman Nathan Painter said he hasn’t decided which way he’ll vote on Issue 33, but added that changing forms of governance wouldn’t be a “magic bullet” for solving the city’s issues.
It won’t, for example, solve Hilliard’s need for increased revenue, Painter said, and it won’t solve what he perceives as a lack of leadership from the Schonhardt administration rather than a problem with the “strong mayor” form of government in general.
On the other side of Franklin County, Whitehall has a number of charter amendments on the November ballot.
In addition to measures that would refer to individuals using gender-neutral language and permit the city attorney, auditor and treasurer to serve three consecutive four-year terms instead of two, voters have a chance to alter the line of succession if the mayor leaves office during a term.
Currently, if the city council president declines to take over for the mayor and less than a year remains on the mayor’s term, the director of public service steps into the job. Because the director isn’t an elected official, a charter review commission recommended that the city council be allowed to appoint any elected official to finish the remaining term.