Charter amendments voted down in Ashtabula

ASHTABULA – The failure of some City of Ashtabula charter amendments that were on the ballot in the Nov. 4 election will likely present some challenges for the city in the future.
A spending limit amendment was on the ballot that would have increased the threshold requiring council approval from $10,000 to $50,000. One for change orders would have allowed the city manager to approve change orders up to $50,000 without a council vote while another would have allowed a 10-percent variance on contracts if costs exceed estimates slightly.
According to the Ashtabula County Board of Elections, the unofficial election results were as follows:
• Issue 2 (spending limit amendment): 740 yes votes, 1,711 no votes
• Issue 3 (change order amendment): 707 yes votes, 1,742 no votes
• Issue 4 (variance amendment): 889 yes votes, 1,544 no votes
Ashtabula City Manager Jim Timonere had spoken about the charter amendments at city council’s Community Development/Economic Development/Parks & Recreation Committee meeting Oct. 1.
Outlining the need for spending limit amendment, Timonere said the city is not permitted to expend anything over $10,000 without council approval, but he noted that the majority of the ordinances presented to council are between $10,000 and $50,000, according to the committee meeting minutes.
The results were a let-down for Timonere.
When asked for comment by the Gazette, he said it was disappointing, “But unfortunately with the amount of misinformation out there, it was tough to overcome this while explaining how the city runs when it comes to these expenditures.”
He added that, on the state and national level with blame being placed on local governments for expenses, he can understand the skepticism people may have.
With the failure of the charter amendments, it’s anything but smooth sailing for the city in the coming years.
And residents – some of whom may have voted against the amendments – may feel the pain.
“As prices increase, it will cause more delays in getting equipment back up and running or making repairs that might be causing problems for residents,” Timonere said. “For instance, the expense of doing lateral repairs on our sewers and storm lines are increasing. We are getting very close to these thresholds and there certainly will come a time in which we need to make a repair due to a basement backup and if the expense is over $10,000, according to the Charter, we could not begin work until Council has the opportunity to pass legislation authorizing me to make the repair. I wouldn’t think this would make a homeowner happy if they have standing sewage in their basement.”
When asked what the city would have done differently to get word out about the proposed charter amendments, Timonere cited a couple things.
“I would have liked to have the time during our meetings to show what expenditures fall between the $10,000 limit now and the proposed $50,000 limit,” he said. “I could have explained these are items like tires, pumps and parts necessary for the Waste Water Treatment Plant, permanent pavement repairs to utility cuts, and other everyday items which could be purchased or performed quicker for our residents rather than sometimes waiting up to three weeks for a Council meeting for approval. Of all these expenditures between these amounts, I cannot recall once where there was not unanimous consent for the expenditures by Council.”
As to whether the city will try again to get the proposed amendments passed in a future election, Timonere was advising against it for now. “This was a decisive defeat and until we would be able to explain and get a sense of understanding from the residents that they recognize why this is needed, I would not suggest we put this on,” he said. “We need to better educate our residents how this will help and hopefully we can get some time during our meetings to do so.”