Charter commission backs five-year residency, debates mayoral appointment and removal powers

At a Charter Commission meeting in North College Hill, commissioners recommended a five-year continuous residency requirement for mayoral candidates and discussed adding specific language to the city charter to clarify the mayor's appointment and removal powers for the city administrator and department directors.

The recommendation on residency emerged after members reviewed public feedback. The commission's chair said, "I just think personally that you need to be around long enough to know what's going on in the city and to know how many quadrants there are," and favored a five-year requirement. Commissioners agreed to include the five-year residency recommendation when they forward their package to City Council; the chair noted the commission's role is advisory and that Council may accept or reject the recommendation.

Commissioners also debated whether the charter should require the mayor to deliver an annual "state of the city" address. The chair and others supported creating a new section to require an annual address; the draft wording discussed would require the mayor to "deliver an annual address no later than March 1 of every year." The commission did not adopt final ballot language at the meeting and said it would return to the item in a later session.

On the city administrator's appointment and removal, Commissioner Cureton recommended changing the charter text so it reads that "the mayor shall be the chief executive officer of the city. He or she shall appoint the city administrator with the advice and approval of council," and that the mayor "may remove the city administrator with the advice and approval of council." The chair described operational problems that can arise when a city lacks an administrator and said she was "happy to make that recommendation" to Council but warned that a requirement for unanimous council approval could create a stalemate.

As an alternative, Cureton proposed a compromise: the mayor would appoint the city administrator "following the mayor's recommendation" and the appointment would require an affirmative vote of a specified number of council members (the commission discussed numbers including four or five). Cureton said the process should include a council interview opportunity and that council already exercises influence through approval of salary. Mayor Nicholas commented on the proposal, saying, "Well, the second part, the second suggestion I'm more favorable of," while warning that large interview panels can produce divided opinions.

Commissioners also raised whether the charter should explicitly give the mayor the authority to terminate department directors (police chief, fire chief, public works director) and the magistrate for mayor's court. Several commissioners said the current charter language does not clearly state which official has hiring and firing authority and recommended that the commission write clarifying language so duties and due-process protections are explicit.

Other items discussed included a recommendation that the city pay for the mayor to attend the annual mayor's conference (to improve networking and access to resources) and debate over whether making the mayor a full-time position should be considered; commissioners noted the city has not had a full-time mayor within living memory and said that proposal was not ready for ballot language.

The commission did not take formal votes on charter changes at this meeting; members repeatedly emphasized they were compiling recommendations to present to City Council. The group agreed to return to unresolved sections, tighten ballot language, and narrow the list of proposed charter changes before issuing a final recommendation to Council.