Pepper Pike council continues second reading of proposed charter changes amid split public comment

The Pepper Pike City Council on Jan. 14 continued a second reading of ordinance 2025-01, the Charter Review Commission—9s package of proposed changes to the city charter, with extended remarks from council members and lengthy public comment both for and against the reforms.

Council President James LeMay framed the revisions as a mix of operational improvement and protection against future risks, saying the commission—9s work was intended "to make the city government function better on a day to day basis and also about strengthening the guardrails, to protect the city under circumstances in the future." He noted the commission—9s goal was not to fix a presently broken government: "The reform commission isn't about something being broken in the city. There's nothing broken in the city."

The proposed charter would, among other changes discussed at length, establish a president of council who presides at council meetings rather than the mayor; change the composition and role of the planning commission to reduce executive representation and add more citizen members; add a removal mechanism by council for elected officials for "gross misconduct, malfeasance, or nonfeasance"; and set residency requirements for candidates (a two-year residency minimum for council and four years for mayor were discussed). The council and the mayor repeatedly said the mayor would retain defined executive powers under the proposed text.

Proponents on council, including LeMay and other members who spoke, said moving the presiding role to a council president would strengthen separation of powers and improve advance coordination between the mayor—9s office and the legislative body. LeMay cited practices in neighboring communities and said the role would provide an additional point of contact for citizens and staff while leaving the mayor as the city's chief executive: "The mayor is still the CEO of the city. None of these reforms affect his chief executive powers."

Opponents raised several objections during council debate and in audience participation. Several residents and speakers said the proposed changes would be disruptive, reduce responsiveness and unnecessarily strip authority from the mayor. Resident Susan Taft said the revisions were "disruptive, destabilizing" and urged more citizen-rooted independence in how a charter review commission is formed. Rick Taft and other commenters urged rejection of the package in its present form, calling the changes "unwise," particularly the council—9s proposed removal power and changes to the planning commission.

Council members and the law director addressed specific technical concerns raised during the meeting. Speakers debated whether council should vote to remove a mayor or whether state-court remedies (complaints in common pleas court, temporary restraining orders) would be more appropriate in extreme cases. Council members also discussed the required threshold for removal (the proposed charter language and commission practice referenced a supermajority requirement; members noted a 3/4 threshold was common in comparable charters).

The planning commission changes drew sustained discussion. Supporters described zoning changes and variance policies as policy questions appropriately advised by a citizen-led planning commission with limited elected-official membership; critics warned that variances are "fact specific" and cautioned against suggesting a single uniform approach in the charter.

Public commenters urged multiple approaches: some said the charter update is long overdue after decades without a comprehensive review; others called for incremental, procedural fixes rather than wholesale structural changes. Several speakers referenced the Charter Review Commission minutes and an executive summary posted on the city website.

No formal vote on ordinance 2025-01 occurred at the Jan. 14 meeting. Council President LeMay said he had called for a third reading at a special council meeting scheduled "a week from tomorrow," giving council members and the public another meeting for final debate and possible action.

Why it matters: The proposed charter would change how Pepper Pike—9s legislative and executive functions interact, alter the composition of boards that advise land-use decisions, and introduce internal removal procedures for local officials —all changes that would be permanent unless voters amend the charter.

Council and administration responses: Council members repeatedly emphasized that the mayor would remain the chief executive and that many changes aim to define and modernize the mayor—9s and council—9s roles in clearer language. The law director and council members said the Charter Review Commission produced a multi-meeting, documented report and accompanying executive summary that are posted online for public review.

Next steps: Council paused the ordinance at second reading and set a third-reading special meeting for further consideration. The Charter Review Commission work product and minutes remain available on the city website per council comments during the meeting.

Sources: Statements on the record from Council President James LeMay, council members, the mayor, and multiple resident commenters during the Jan. 14 Pepper Pike City Council meeting, and the Charter Review Commission executive summary referenced in council discussion.