Blog

By Carol Arnett

The Florissant City Council has engaged in some heated debate as they discussed a bill that would set up a committee to review the city charter. Proponents contend it’s time to review the charter, while opponents contend it’s political and aimed at putting a city manager form of government in Florissant.

The bill was introduced by five of the nine council members – Karen McKay, Ben Hernandez, Tim Lee, Keith English, and Andrew Podleski. The bill would authorize the creation of a review committee made up of nine residents. The committee would review the city charter and recommend any changes. The council would receive the recommendations and could decide whether to act on them or not.

In order to change the charter, city residents must vote to approve changes. It would be up to the council to decide if any proposed changes were put on a ballot.

McKay said there was some confusion regarding the bill. “Its purpose is to establish a charter review commission,” she said. However, she said, the council had received several letters from residents saying they oppose changing the city government from one with a mayor to one with a city manager.

“The charter has only been reviewed once, in 1974,” McKay said. “This bill will allow the council to put together a commission to study the charter,” she said, and noted, “all recommendations will have to come back through the council.”

“Every letter we’ve received mentions the city manager,” Lee said. “But in 30 pages, the charter has one paragraph about city government.” Lee said he became interested in reviewing the charter after he asked City Attorney John Hessel about having a consent agenda at meetings.

In cities that use a consent agenda, several items can be placed on the consent agenda and approved in one vote. If a councilperson wants to discuss an item, he or she can remove it from the consent agenda for an individual vote.  Lee said Hessel informed him that the city charter did not allow for a consent agenda.

“We haven’t been upfront,” said Councilman Mark Schmidt. “That is why the rumor mill has started.” Schmidt said he would vote “no” on the bill. “There’s been no discussion, no executive session, no talking with other council members,” he said.

“It’s time to review,” said Hernandez. “It’s been several years.” Hernandez also pointed out that any proposed changes would go through the council.

Podleski agreed. “I thought this was a great idea, probably something we should be doing on a regular basis,” he said. Podleski likened it to a doctor visit. “You go to a doctor for check-ups,” he said.

Mayor Robert Lowery was strongly opposed to the bill. “There is in my mind skepticism about what you are trying to accomplish,” he said. He said there were five council members sponsoring the bill, “and not one of the sponsors called me to tell me it was coming.”

Lowery said that one of the bill’s sponsors called the [St. Louis County] Municipal League, “and asked how to get rid of the mayor.” He said the bill was an attempt to move to a city manager form of government.

English disagreed. “One of the people who introduced the bill ran for mayor,” he pointed out. “Why would he shoot himself in the foot?” English pointed out that any of the five bill sponsors could potentially run for mayor.

“I don’t buy that this is just a review, something we should do periodically,” Councilman Tom Schneider said. “If this was an innocent as you say, we would have had months of discussion.”

Schneider said that he alerted people that the bill was an attempt to go to a city manager form of government. “I called everyone I know about it,” he said. “I called out the alarm.”

Schneider said he reached this conclusion after talking to Lee about the bill. Also, he said, Hernandez talked to the Municipal League about going to a city manager form of government.

“I’m not a conspirator,” said Lee. “I’m sorry if you read anything into our conversation that indicates I have a hidden agenda,” he told Schneider.

“Yes, I spoke to the Municipal League,” said Hernandez. “I wanted to get insight. I needed information. I told you about it; it was no secret.”

Councilman Keith Schildroth said he was against the bill. “The city manager form of government does not take politics out of a city,” he said.

Councilman John Grib said he found it “very unusual” that there was not discussion before the bill was introduced. “I would not support this because we didn’t discuss it,” he said.

“This is a Trojan Horse,” Lowery said. “I’m not going to sign it.” If Lowery vetoes a bill, six votes are required to over ride the veto—that means one of the “no” votes would have to change for passage.

Share on Facebook

Tweet

Follow us