North College Hill charter review commission outlines recommended changes to administrator selection, procurement and department roles

The North College Hill Charter Review Commission met March 26 and began consolidating proposed charter amendments that the panel plans to send to city council for possible placement on a future ballot.

Chair Miss Underwood said the committee’s recommendations must go to council and then, if approved, appear as a ballot initiative. “This has to be a ballot initiative,” Underwood said, noting the commission must be mindful of costs and legal process for putting changes before voters.

Commissioners and participants focused on several recurring items: removing obsolete language referring to an elected law director, renaming the finance manager to finance director and adding higher qualifications, specifying how the city administrator would be selected and what qualifications that office should carry, and revising the charter’s purchasing and contracting threshold and transparency requirements.

Why it matters: any changes the commission forwards must be approved by council and then by voters as ballot language. The modifications under discussion affect the city’s executive staffing, procurement controls and the clarity of duties for council leadership and boards — all of which shape how North College Hill’s government runs daily and how taxpayer money is authorized.

Discussion highlights

Law director: Members noted language in Section 8.1 that still describes the law director as an elected official even though the city does not currently elect that position. A member said the sentence referencing the completion of an elected law director’s term should be removed if the commission recommends the position remain appointed.

Finance manager/director and qualifications: Multiple speakers recommended changing the title from finance manager to finance director to match duties currently performed by the position. One committee member suggested adding minimum qualifications—examples mentioned in the meeting included a graduate degree (MBA in finance or accounting) or accounting certifications. Underwood summarized the immediate list-building goal: “So finance manager to finance director and modified duties, modify qualifications potentially, law director remove last sentence re regarding being elected position,” she said.

City administrator selection and qualifications: The commission discussed changing selection language to require “advice and consent” or a supermajority of council for appointment of the city administrator. A committee member suggested a supermajority be defined as five of seven council members. Members also discussed writing minimum qualifications for the administrator to reflect the role as the city’s operational executive (described in the meeting as performing CEO/COO functions for a multimillion-dollar operation).

Purchasing threshold and transparency: The charter’s provision on purchases and contracts (Section 6.05) currently sets a threshold for competitive bidding. Commissioners debated whether to lower the threshold from $75,000 to $50,000 to increase council oversight and transparency. Vice Chair Mister Dieters, serving in an advisory capacity, cautioned that the $75,000 amount aligns with state-level thresholds that are adjusted annually: “You could the 75 would be the the ceiling, so you could always go lower than that by by ordinance,” Dieters said. Several members said their objective was not necessarily the numeric threshold itself but ensuring council and the public have timely access to contracts and purchase records rather than having to rely on formal public-records requests with longer turnaround times.

Roles, boards and other items: The commission also raised whether the charter clearly defines the president of council’s duties, whether recreation should be labeled parks and recreation (and possibly supported by a board), and whether the tree board should be established in the charter as an official board or commission. Term limits for council and participation requirements for removal or disciplinary processes were also flagged for future discussion.

Process and next steps: The commission agreed to produce a consolidated list of items to address and to proceed section-by-section through the charter at future meetings rather than attempting to rework the entire document in a single session. Chair Underwood asked members to use a shared Google Drive for suggested language and materials created by the commission. The group also agreed to meet weekly in April to accelerate completion of the list and to ensure absent members can review recorded meetings on ICRC TV.

No formal motions or votes were recorded during the March 26 session; the meeting produced a working list of potential charter amendments and procedural directions for the commission’s next meetings.

Ending: The commission closed the meeting after confirming the weekly April schedule and directing members and staff to continue refining proposed language and to bring clarified options back to the group for section-by-section consideration.