04/07/2015 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

through the Charter Review process. At the time the issue was raised by members of City Council and the Administration of Westlake as to whether or not the recommendations of the Charter Review Commission were required to be placed before the voters. City Council authorized litigation and a friendly lawsuit was instigated to determine, by judicial decree, the process that was to be followed regarding recommendations of the Charter Review Commission being placed before the voters. The court held that the Charter Review Committee can only recommend to Council. Council can consider, amend, alter, or delete the recommendations of the Charter Review Committee. In other words, the recommendations of the Charter Review Commission are not required to be placed before the voters. Rather it is the City Council that is the body that makes the determination to do so by a 2/3rd vote of its members. Mr. Lambert always has been very fond of picking and choosing his language to suit his own purpose. Please note that Article XII of the Charter which provides for the amendment of the charter relates back to the Constitution of the State of Ohio at Article 18. In Article 18, as well as "Amendments to the Charter" in the charter at Article 14, there is an indication that there are two methods to amend the charter. One way is to have Council by 2/3 of the members vote to place a charter amendment on the ballot. The other is to have signatures submitted by the electors equaling 10% of the number of those who voted at the last general regular municipal election. There is no third way to amend the charter. Mr. Lambert, is free and loose with the terms of Article 14, entitled Charter Review Commission. There are a few very important words in that provision, not the least of which is within "9 calendar months after their appointment, the Charter Review Commission shall RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL..." the Council then shall forthwith submit to the electors as specified....in the "Article Amendments to Charter." The article Amendments to Charter indicates that there are only two ways that the charter can be amended, which are to be submitted in accordance with the Constitution. Once again, this is Mr. Lambert's slight of hand in his attempt to buffalo people who he is preaching to. I wonder if Mr. Lambert ever truly contemplated what he is espousing. Imagine an issue goes before the Charter Review Commission; it is approved by 4 of the 7 members of the Charter Review Commission. According to Lambert, those 4 members who were never elected would have superpower to have matters placed on the ballot, which the City Council could not even have because it takes 2/3 of the members of Council to do that. To permit such action would be to permit the City Council to delegate its authority to 4 members of the Charter Review Commission when, if fact, they do not have a right to delegate that authority and the Constitution provides that it takes 2/3 of the members of Council to accomplish the feat of having the charter amendment placed on the ballot. Mr. Lambert is a buffoon. He stands up and pretends to be an expert about something he knows nothing about. Yet, he thinks that he has the right to judge my professionalism by saying such things as "Michael Gareau, Sr. is not trustworthy...is basically deceptive in the way he did business as a city lawyer..." By advising the Council back 20 years ago regarding this issue he was dishonest and deceptive and that opinion was an abuse of power and that violated his oath office. Rest assured that the opinion I formulated in 1971 and delivered to the City of North Olmsted in the early 70's, 80's and 90's is the same. There are only 2 ways that you can amend the Charter of a city. One is by Ordinance passed by 2/3 of the members of Council; the other is through petition presented by the electors to council to have the same placed on the ballot. There is no other way to have charter amendments placed on the ballot. Judge Nara in the case of