Laserfiche WebLink
~~A~` <br />MAYFIELD VILLAGE <br />6621 Wilson Mills Road Mayfield Village, Ohio 44143 <br />ADMINISTRATION <br />(216) 461-2210 <br />BLASE PIETRAFESE <br />Mayor <br />July 23, 1992 <br />Members of Council <br />c/o Donna Heath, Clerk of Council <br />6621 Wilson Mills Road <br />Mayfield Village, Ohio 44143 <br />Dear Members of Council: <br />Pursuant to my authority under Article IV, Section 6, of the <br />Charter of the Village of Mayfield, I am hereby vetoing Ordinance <br />No. 92-28 for the following objections. <br />It is obvious to me that certain members of Council are <br />insistent upon carrying their political opposition to me in the <br />last election into the day to day operations of this Village. It <br />is apparent that the sponsor of this legislation, and certain other <br />members of Council, are not willing to allow me the opportunity to <br />perform the functions of Mayor of this Village without obstruction, <br />interference or controversy. <br />Ordinance No. 92-28 is a remake of No. 92-22 and was justified <br />by, Mr. Ferrante as being a response to my remarks at a Safety <br />Committee meeting where I had indicated to him that I felt I could <br />hire a Community Relations Coordinator under my own spending <br />authority, but chose not to do that because of my pledge to work <br />with Council. I attempted to receive Council's approval of such <br />matters rather than jamming them down your throat as was done in <br />the past. This was taken as an insult by Mr. Ferrante, and thus <br />the introduction of Ordinance No. 92-22 and then 92-28. The <br />reasoning is illogical and not a sound basis for changing the laws <br />of this community. It is vindictive politics, which our citizens <br />do not deserve. <br />This Ordinance received less discussion or consideration than <br />the Cablevision Company changing its name, which was pending before <br />Council for several months. There has not been.one complaint to my <br />office about the expenditures made to date. There was not one <br />example given on Council floor as a realistic cause for changing <br />• the limitations. There was no request for input from any of the <br />department heads, specifically the Finance Department. Most <br />revealing is Mr. Ferrante's failure to even request input from the <br />