This coming Tuesday, Cleveland Heights residents should vote no on Issue 26 to keep sound management of our $80 million budget and 600 employees, keep effective safety services for our whole community, and keep our City stable and moving forward.
Issue 26 would throw out our Council-Manager form of government, which has served us well for nearly 100 years, and consolidate power in the hands of one politician. With a multi-year transition period, it could also destabilize our City and halt projects across our community. We cannot take that risk.
Council-manager systems are 10% more efficient with our tax dollars, and are 57% less likely to have corruption than what Issue 26 proposes. Issue 26 could also lead to more government costs and less accountability.
Our Cleveland Heights Firefighters Union agree and unanimously endorsed NO on Issue 26, stating “Issue 26 will negatively impact safety and services in Cleveland Heights, increase politics and partisanship, and impede our progress.”
Stand with our firefighters and your concerned neighbors who agree that we cannot put our City’s progress and future at risk. Vote no on Issue 26.
Michael Bennett says
Unfortunately, this announcement does not give a fair or accurate picture of Issue 26, the charter amendment to create an elected mayor in Cleveland Heights. Below are some of their statements, followed by more accurate info:
“vote no on Issue 26 to keep sound management” – Voting yes on Issue 26 will preserve sound management. It creates the position of mayor, and the position of city administrator – who is a professional manager appointed by the mayor and confirmed by council. The administrator will serve the same role as the manager does now – but only have 1 boss (the mayor) rather than try to satisfy 7 bosses (council) at the same time.
“Issue 26 would … consolidate power in the hands of one politician.” – Not at all. Right now, power is solely in the hands of council. The mayor would add a new position, directly accountable to all voters, who can work with council, staff and residents to move us forward. The mayor can propose legislation; council doesn’t have to pass it. If the mayor vetoes council legislation, council can override with a 5-2 vote. Actually, Issue 26 disperses power; a politically-elected council will no longer control both the executive and legislative branches of government.
“it could also destabilize our City and halt projects across our community” – Pure conjecture that I have trouble imagining. The change doesn’t take effect until the mayor is elected in November 2021 and takes office in January 2022. Until then, the city can run exactly as it has been. If council approves projects or shovels are in the ground, there’s no reason to stop them unless council chooses to. The only possibility of destabilization I fear is one that council itself created. It gave the manager a new contract that offers her a big severance package right away when the issue passes. I’m all for the manager receiving severance if the job is eliminated because of Issue 26 – but the job isn’t eliminated until December 2021, which is when the severance should have bee offered. By the way, we had a manager resign abruptly once before, and council named an interim – for 16 months. Nothing was destabilized.
“Council-manager systems are … 57% less likely to have corruption.” – The same study with that finding also said that cities that change from one form of government to the other are not likely to experience any increase in corruption. So it’s highly unlike corruption will become a problem – and if it does, there are checks and balances. (By the way, we had corruption of our own recently in the housing department … under a city manager form of government.
“Issue 26 could also lead to more government costs and less accountability.” – Again, a wild speculation. The only way it could lead to more government costs is if the council agrees to increase the budget. Issue 26 will not change the fiscal responsibility of council. The only change is that instead of a manager proposing the budget, the mayor word. Council still holds the purse strings and makes budgetary decisions. … As for accountability, the question is accountability to whom? The current manager is accountable only to council; the mayor is accountable to all citizens. We think that means more accountability.
Firefighters endorsement – Only about one third or fewer of firefighter union members were at the endorsement meeting, so this is not approved by ALL firefighters – just by those who could show up and vote (and the fact that there would be a vote was not on the agenda, we’ve been told – the meeting was called to discuss the issue). I have no idea why they think Issue 26 will “negatively impact safety and services in Cleveland Heights.” We have wonderful public safety workers and wonderful staff. No reason they can’t keep doing the great jobs they are doing.
What we do get with Issue 26, which their ad obviously leaves out, is a true and public civic leader who, like other mayors around us, can provide leadership and accountability we don’t currently have. The buck will stop with the mayor – unlike now, when the buck is torn into eight pieces (7 on council, plus the manager) and we’ve heard people say they get a runaround trying to get answers. The mayor will be our public face in a region where 55 of 57 cities in Cuyahoga County have elected mayors and and represent their cities.
Please get the facts. Read articles and The Plain Dealer endorsement at http://www.voteyes26,com Reach out to me personally and I’m happy to answer your questions. Thanks in advance for looking into this more, using ration and reason to cut through the fear, and consider voting Yes on 26!
PS: I write this as both a 30-year city resident and as secretary of Citizens for an Elected Mayor, the group that worked with hundreds of volunteers to place this issue on the ballot.