Mayor John Cranley Aug. 26 vetoed a proposed amendment to the city’s charter that would allow Cincinnati City Council to meet in executive session about specific topics.
The amendment was one of five proposed by the nonpartisan Charter Review Task Force. Other proposals — including one eliminating the so-called mayoral “pocket veto” and another allowing Council to fire the city manager — look unlikely to make it to the November ballot.
At first, Cranley’s veto seemed largely symbolic. Council passed the measure with six votes, enough to overturn the mayor’s move. But on Sept. 1, council member Chris Seelbach, who initially voted in favor of the amendment, signaled he would not do so again to overturn Cranley’s veto. That dims the measure’s chances of appearing on the November ballot.
“Sending only the most controversial of these important reforms to the ballot is simply a tactic to make City Council look self-serving and allow critics to gain political points at the expense of a respected two-year tri-partisan political review process,” Seelbach said via Facebook. “Sending only this proposal was not the intent of the Charter Review Task Force and I will be voting no when the item returns to Wednesday’s Council meeting.”
Cranley said in an Aug. 26 news conference that he hoped his action would cause Council to take another look at the measure and reconsider it. Should Council pass it, Cranley said, he hoped voters would shoot it down when it goes before them on the November ballot.
“I hope by vetoing it, it gives them the weekend to think about it and conclude that the best government is an open government,” Cranley said. “I think the people’s business should be done in public. Your tax dollars, your government, the hallmark of democracy is openness and transparency.”
Currently, the city charter doesn’t allow Council to go into executive session. However, state law allows limited uses of secret meetings for municipal governments to discuss sensitive subjects. Supporters of the measure, including Councilwoman Yvette Simpson, say it will allow Cincinnati’s governing body the ability to talk about issues it otherwise would not discuss. Simpson also pointed out that meetings by the city administration and mayor are also sometimes conducted in private.
“While I respect Seelbach’s perspective on this, we have to address the fact that decisions are currently being made in secret — meetings with developers and the mayor, and the administration packaging up deals and presenting the final package before Council,” Simpson said in a post on social media. “Council doesn’t get to weigh in because it’s already done. Until administrative and mayoral meetings become public, we will continue to see some of the same companies getting very generous deals and others left out if the process altogether.”
Councilman Kevin Flynn, a supporter of the amendment and the chair of Council’s Rules and Audit Committee who convened the bipartisan Charter Review Task Force, has said the measure would clarify what can be done in executive session, forcing all other discussions to be public.
The measure would allow Council to meet in secret about certain sensitive topics, including ongoing court cases, property sales, the city manager’s performance and some economic development deals.
The charter amendment ballot initiative was passed by council Aug. 24 with a vote of 6-3, with council members P.G. Sittenfeld, Charlie Winburn and Christopher Smitherman voting against it.
This article appears in Sep 2-8, 2015.