Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Review Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council member urges caution on frequent charter reviews, cites cost of mayoral primary
Summary
Council Member Schnetzer told the Charter Review Commission there is no clear evidence one form of local government outperforms another and recommended reconsidering the automatic five-year commission requirement; he cited a $300,000 cost tied to a recent mayoral primary as an example of unexpected expense from charter changes.
Council Member Schnetzer, speaking at the Gahanna Charter Review Commission meeting on March 26, said his experience in municipal finance and local government leads him to recommend restraint in how often the city opens its charter for amendment.
"There is frankly no objective conclusive evidence that form of governance yields any measurable difference in community success or financial performance," Schnetzer said, arguing the city’s current strong-mayor structure and accompanying organizational chart serve residents well. He said governance choices are often subjective and that the current charter strikes what he called an "elegant" balance between executive and legislative functions.
Schnetzer urged the commission to consider eliminating the automatic five-year requirement to convene a charter review commission or, alternatively, to narrow the mandatory commission's scope. He offered targeted or ad hoc reviews as options and suggested that council should be able to define which sections or topics a commission will examine.
Schnetzer also warned that frequent charter revisions can produce costly unintended consequences. He said a recent change that created a mayoral primary "unnecessarily cost the city over $300,000 in 2023," and suggested that fewer, more targeted charter changes could reduce systemic risk and expense.
He raised narrower drafting issues as well, pressing for consistency between provisions (for example, cross-referencing section 4.12 on abstentions and removal with section 4.07 on due process) and recommending performance audits as an alternative to embedding a full strategic plan in the charter.
Commissioners followed with questions about evidence comparing forms of government, how ad hoc review authority might work, and the practical mechanics for council-initiated amendments; the city attorney clarified that amendments can be advanced via citizen initiative, council action, or the five-year commission.
