Some long-overdue changes could be coming to the Oxford Village charter.
Last week, village attorney Bob Davis informed council he planned to review the charter and present a list of proposed amendments at the Dec. 9 meeting.
‘We’ve been kicking around for almost two years now the concept of getting our charter up-to-date,? he said.
Right now, the charter contains multiple issues, according to Davis, including language that is ‘contrary to law? and the way the village functions. There are also things that ‘just don’t make sense anymore? along with ‘improper wording and typos,? he said.
‘This is something you need to do,? Davis told council. ‘I think it’s something we need to start ASAP. There’s a ton of issues you need to fix.?
For example, he told this reporter charter language concerning the composition of the Downtown Development Authority board is ‘wrong and it doesn’t comport with the law.?
Language covering when elections are to be held is also no longer valid.
‘There are just some things in the current charter that are not consistent with the current law,? he said, adding that ‘the charter, which has an effective date of 1978, has not been significantly reviewed or amended since then.?
Davis is proposing to update language concerning the qualifications to serve on council. ‘We don’t have a provision in our charter that most communities have where if you’re indebted to the village, you can’t run for council,? he said.
Ironically, the charter does deny council ‘the power to make any contract with or give any official position to any person who is in default to the village.?
So, a person who is in debt to the village cannot be appointed to council, but he or she can run for a seat and be elected under the current charter.
He’s also proposing to amend the language so council members who do not wish to accept any payment from the village for their service are able to do so. Right now, ‘the charter prohibits that,? Davis said.
Davis presented council with a six-page memo outlining the entire legal process for amending the charter.
Any amendments must be approved by village voters in a general or special election.
But before that can happen, Davis wrote the proposed amendments must be ‘published and remain on the table for 30 days before any action is taken.?
After that, amendments must be approved by a two-thirds vote of council and submitted to the governor for approval before they can appear on the ballot.
Oxford Twp. Supervisor Bill Dunn told council he would like to see some changes made regarding citizen-initiated petitions.
Back in 2005, he submitted a petition, signed by 358 village residents, proposing an ordinance that would have limited the action the village council and administration could take, without prior voter approval, regarding the pursuit of cityhood.
At the time, the village was in the midst of an effort to break away from the township and incorporate as a city. That effort failed at the ballot box in 2008.
Dunn used the rules and requirements specifically spelled out in the village charter as the guide for his petition.
Ultimately, his petition was shot down in a 4-0 council vote based on an opinion from attorneys Bob Bunting and Thomas Ryan. They listed four reasons to deny it.
One of those reasons was ‘the initiative process? set forth in the village charter is ‘invalid because it is not authorized by state law.?
‘I think it’s kind of silly that a citizen cannot gather (signatures) and petition a local government,? Dunn told council. ‘It just seems like that would be a natural right.?
‘I believe that right is guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution,? remarked village President Dave Bailey.
‘I would think so, but I was denied that (right),? Dunn replied. ‘To deny a right is pretty serious.?