10/15/2002 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes 10/15/2002 the provisions of the Ohio Constitution to put a charter amendment by initiative on the ballot. The court dismissed Westlake's arguments that its charter require proponents of such charter amendments to obtain signatures amounting to 10% of the total number of voters voting at the last municipal election at which a charter amendment was presented to the Westlake voters. The court held that such a reading was extreme, and that in any event it would conflict with the Ohio Constitution. The lesson for us in North Olmsted from this case is that cities cannot adopt provisions, charter or otherwise, for placing charter amendments on the ballot which conflict with the Ohio Constitution. We can add procedures that supplement, but not those which conflict with what is in the Ohio Constitution. 6) On October 7, he provided advice to the Mayor and to Council as to whether the city could legally adopt a resolution supporting or opposing a school levy. In looking at the resolution, it does not violate Ohio campaign or finance general laws. It is up to the discretion of the Council whether it believes it is appropriate for the Council as a whole to adopt such a resolution. 7) He is happy to hear the Mayor announce that tomorrow there will be an appointment of a new Service Director and a Safety Director because it is an issue that has legally concerned him for some time. During the period October 8 through 11, he and the Mayor exchanged a series of memoranda regarding the vacancy in the office of the Service Director. He had asked the Mayor to substantiate that good faith efforts had been made to fill the vacancy in the Service Director position, which at that point had already been vacant for two months. He was a little bit surprised by the reaction his memo received from the Mayor's office, which may happen from time to time as everyone tries to do their jobs in city government. The Mayor advised him that he had made substantial efforts to fill the position, and he was not required to inform him what those efforts were although, as a courtesy only, he had from time to time reported his progress in searching for a new Service Director. A further memo from the Mayor was received last Friday stating that, because of the priority of work in his office, he would provide requested documents, but couldn't do so until October 18, which would be 10 days after the initial request. He had basically requested any and all records that would assure him that the job search had been substantial. Like the Mayor, he takes the duties of his office seriously. He is not legally concerned about who the Mayor appoints as the next Service Director, and he does not desire to dictate to the Mayor how he goes about conducting a search for the best candidate for the position. Those are matters that are truly left to his discretion. He does, however, have a role under the Charter in this matter. Under Section 733.56 of the Ohio Revised Code, which is incorporated into the city Charter, "...the city Director of Law shall apply in the name of the municipal corporation, to a court of competent jurisdiction for an order of injunction to restrain the misapplication of funds of the municipal corporation, the abuse of corporate powers or the execution or performance of any contract made in behalf of the municipal corporation in contravention of the laws or ordinances governing it or which was procured by fraud or corruption." As the city Law Director, it's a duty he has to inquire into these matters. By way of background, this statute goes hand-in-hand with the taxpayers' statute that any taxpayer who has a complaint that the city is misappropriating funds or that the city is abusing its powers, comes to the Law Director and asks him to take action. The way he views it, this provision requires the Law Director to serve as a guardian for city taxpayers with 3