Dunkirk council approves referendum to let voters decide whether to abolish elected treasurer

The Dunkirk Common Council voted unanimously Tuesday to place local law 1 of 2025 on the November general election ballot, asking voters whether to abolish the city’s elected treasurer position and transfer its duties to the Department of Fiscal Affairs under council and mayoral supervision.

The question approved by the council will appear on the November 2025 ballot as a yes-or-no referendum on whether to abolish the elected office and transfer its duties to an appointed fiscal department.

The law’s wording drew public comment before the vote on how any successor would be chosen. During a public hearing, resident Tom Olegco of 119 Margay Street said, “My opinion, it should be civil service or nothing and not a mayoral appointment,” arguing that civil-service protection would reduce the risk of politicized hiring. Rosalie Owen of Eagle Street told the council, “Moving the position of the treasurer to the fiscal affairs department is not the answer,” and said publicity around recent events had unfairly harmed employees. Resident Chris Pankoske of 7 Lakefront Boulevard emphasized independence, saying, “The treasurer is responsible for all the city's collections and should be independent and not afraid to say no.”

City Attorney Raimondo told the council the local law itself is simply a ballot question and does not by itself eliminate the treasurer’s duties. “The way the local law is written is that is a yes or no vote to abolish an elected position,” Raimondo said, adding that the text expressly preserves the office’s duties and leaves it to the council to decide where those duties would be reassigned if voters approve. He noted that Dunkirk is one of the few municipalities in Chautauqua County that still elects a treasurer and that most of the day-to-day work is performed by civil-service appointees in other local governments.

Council member Laskowiak moved to take the law from the table; Council member Nichols seconded the motion. The roll-call vote recorded five ayes and no nays, and the measure was adopted.

The council and several residents also urged broader charter review. Mayor Doviaz, speaking during the meeting, framed the question as one best decided by voters rather than the council: the local law “gives voters the opportunity to consider whether the current structure continues to serve our needs or whether it's time to move toward greater oversight, accountability, and alignment with statewide best practices,” he said.

If voters approve the referendum in November, the council will later need to decide how to implement the change, including whether the new position would be a mayoral appointment, a civil-service position, or organized in some other way. That implementation step was not decided at Tuesday’s meeting.