September 22, 2014

Medina
Cloudy
53°F

Brunswick: 17 questions for voters

BRUNSWICK — The city has 17 questions on the Nov. 2 ballot per­taining to proposed charter changes.

Law Director Ken Fisher said the charter is reviewed every five years by a Charter Review Commission that suggests changes to City Coun­cil, which then can pass an ordi­nance to put the proposals on the ballot.

“Times change,” Fisher said. “It’s just to make sure the charter’s con­tinually updated.” While some of the changes alter only the wording of articles or sec­tions, others propose changing job requirements and election proce­dures for Council members.

The third ballot question, for example, asks voters to consider how at-large Council members are elected.

Currently, the three at-large can­didates who garner the most votes become members.

The change asks for Council seats to be numbered 1, 2 and 3 and each to be voted on separately. Each can­didate, therefore, would be running for a particular at-large seat.

Ballot question 16 asks the public to approve changing the job requirements for the position of the development director/chief build­ing official. The charter currently states he or she must have a mas­ter’s degree in an area relevant to urban planning and development issues.

Voters will have to decide whether to adopt a change that would allow someone to hold that position with a minimum of a bach­elor’s degree from an accredited institution of higher learning.

The city terminated Roger West­fall from the position of develop­ment director/chief building official in June because he did not have a master’s degree.

Members of the public interested in learning more about the pro­posed charter changes can go to www.brunswick.oh.us.

The 17 questions are:

• Shall the amendments to all Articles & Sections of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commission, requiring that references to notice by publi­cation also include posting of said notice on the City’s official web­site, be adopted?

• Shall the amendment to Section 3.01 of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commis­sion, to clarify that Council mem­bers shall be elected by qualified electors and that only qualified electors, as defined by the Ohio Revised Code, shall be eligible to hold the office of Council mem­ber, be adopted?

• Shall the amendments to Sec­tions 3.01, 3.02 and 9.03 of the Charter, as proposed by the Char­ter Review Commission, requiring that Council at Large members be elected separately and establish­ing and clarifying the election procedures for separately elected Council at Large members, be adopted?

• Shall the amendment to Section 3.05 of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commis­sion, clarifying the prohibition against Council members’ appointment on any City Board or Commission, be adopted?

• Shall the amendment to Section 3.08 of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commission, eliminating the requirement that the Clerk of Council be an elector of the City, be adopted?

• Shall the amendment to Section 3.09(b) of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commis­sion, requiring that the Mayor pre­side at all regular and special Council meetings, be adopted?

• Shall the amendment to Section 3.09(e) of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commis­sion, amending the forfeiture of office provisions for the office of Mayor, be adopted?

• Shall the amendment to Section 3.10 of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commission, requiring that the Vice-Mayor pre­side over Committee of the Whole meetings, be adopted?

• Shall the amendments to Sec­tion 4.01(b) of the Charter, as pro­posed by the Charter Review Com­mission, amending the profes­sional and executive qualifications of the City Manager, be adopted?

• Shall the amendments to Sec­tion 5.03(b)(2) of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commission, clarifying that the general duties of the Division of Police be consistent with the duties defined in the Ohio Revised Code, be adopted?

• Shall the amendment to Section 5.04 of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commission, requiring the Law Director pre­pare all resolutions and ordi­nances requested by the Mayor, be adopted?

• Shall the amendment to Section 5.05 of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commission, establishing educational require­ments for the Director of Finance, be adopted?

• Shall the amendment to Section 5.06 of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commission, amending and clarifying educa­tion requirements for the Director of Parks and Recreation, be adopted?

• Shall the amendments to Sec­tion 5.07 and 6.02(a)(3) of the Charter, as proposed by the Char­ter Review Commission, amend­ing the name of Department of Planning and Community Devel­opment to Department of Devel­opment, establishing Divisions of the Department, amending the educational requirements and establishing licensing require­ments of the Development Direc­tor/ Chief Building Official, and clarifying that the Developmental Director/Chief Building Official serve as a non-voting member of the Planning Commission, be adopted?

• Shall the amendments to Sec­tion 6.02 of the Charter, as pro­posed by the Charter Review Com­mission, to clarify that the City Manager or his/her designee shall serve as a non-voting member of the Planning Commission, and establishing public hearing and notice requirements on matters involving the Planning Commis­sion variance powers, be adopted?

• Shall the amendment to Section 6.03 of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commission, clarifying the subject matter of appeals to the Board of Building Code Appeals, be adopted?

• Shall the amendment to Section 6.07 of the Charter, as proposed by the Charter Review Commission, requiring the Mayor to appoint the Charter Review Commission members between January 1st and January 31st in the year of the review, be adopted?