Although it was signed by 358 Oxford Village residents, a petition seeking to stop cityhood spending and require voter approval before council takes any further action was denied 4-0 by village officials Oct. 25.
‘We have received an attorney/client privilege letter regarding those petitions and determining them to not be valid,? said village Manager Joe Young.
‘Yeah, I’m pretty upset,? said village resident and township Supervisor Bill Dunn following the council meeting.
‘I’ve got 358 signatures from village residents who want this,? the Dennison Street resident told this reporter. ‘It’s not right that all these people’s opinions are just dismissed by one vote of the council. That’s not democracy.?
Using the rules and requirements specifically spelled out in the village charter as his guide, Dunn initiated and circulated a petition proposing a village ordinance that would have limited the action the village council and administration could take regarding cityhood without prior voter approval.
A petition containing 346 signatures to incorporate the Village of Oxford as a city was received by the State Boundary Commission office on Oct. 17, according to Nicole Sunstrum, administrative support for the State Boundary Commission.
However, Sunstrum noted it cannot be considered an ‘official petition? until it’s been reviewed and okayed by the Commission Manager Christine Holmes. If it gets ‘stamped as official,? the petition must then go before the Boundary Commission who will determine it’s legal sufficiency.
In its motion to ‘deny any further action regarding the petitions filed by William Dunn,? the village council cited four reasons that were ‘based on legal counsel advice, opinion and recommendations? from its cityhood attorney Thomas Ryan and village attorney Bob Bunting.
The reasons were as follows:
n ‘The initiative process set forth in Chapter VIII of the Village Charter is invalid because ‘it is not authorized by State Law.??
n ‘The proposed ordinance does not purport to codify the voter’s preference regarding incorporation as a City.?
n ‘The proposed ordinance includes subject matter that is not appropriate for an ordinance because it does not directly address any public health, safety or welfare concerns and purports to control the discretion of the Village’s elected officials.?
n ‘The proposed ordinance directly conflicts with the Home Rule City Act, which specifically authorizes Villages to incorporate into Cities.?
No one on council commented or elaborated on any of the reasons during the meeting. Copies of the legal opinion on which the petition denial was based are not available to the public because it’s protected by attorney/client privilege, officials said.
Repeated attempts to contact attorney Ryan via telephone were unsuccessful. Ryan also did not answer questions repeatedly e-mailed to him.
‘I do want the council to realize there are a lot of people out there who think that state law (Home Rule City Act) is goofy,? Dunn told village officials. ‘Having people spend all their money up front on attorneys, engineers, surveyors and then the final thing (is) to ask the people if (cityhood’s) what they want.?
‘I purposely, when I went around to get these petitions (signed), didn’t ask people if they wanted to become a city, village or township. I specifically asked that common sense take over here and that you just have the decency to ask the people before you go through all this spending of money, especially my money.?
‘There are a lot of people out there that feel just like I do,? Dunn told village officials. ‘And these may be people that would want a city, but they don’t want to waste the money. All we’re asking is to ask the people before you spend any more money.?
On a personal note, Dunn told council cityhood ‘was voted down before (in the village) and I hope it’s voted down again.?
Dunn later told this reporter he’s looking into the validity of the village’s reasons for denying his petition.
‘They haven’t heard the last of this,? he said. ‘The 358 people who signed it aren’t going away just because the council wants to ignore the petition.?