Council debates charter review commission timeline, membership and safeguards

Pepper Pike’s City Council spent a substantial portion of its March 1 meeting discussing Ordinance 2024‑4, which would establish a Charter Review Commission to examine the city charter and recommend changes to council and, if applicable, voters.

Sponsor Tony outlined a proposed redline that increases the commission budget to $10,000 and sets a target completion date of Dec. 18, 2024. The ordinance’s schedule would solicit statements of interest from residents in late March, use a ranked-choice compilation of council preferences in April–May, form the commission in June, charge three subject committees with two meetings per month through September and hold public town halls in November before any ordinance drafting in December.

Council members expressed differing views about scope and membership. Some urged limiting the work to technical edits that council could make directly; others argued for a full review, noting safeguards built into the process and the ultimate role of voters. A recurring concern was whether current elected officials should serve on the commission: several speakers warned that including council members could create adverse optics or perceived influence, while others said council liaisons can provide needed government knowledge. Legal counsel confirmed that appointment discussions may be discussed in executive session when appropriate.

Council emphasized several safeguards: strict vetting to ensure ‘‘serious, sober’’ citizen members; rank-order selection by council to compile an overall panel; flexibility to scale the commission if insufficient qualified applicants apply; and public engagement via town halls and survey opportunities. Residents who spoke during public comment urged council to identify technical corrections that could be advanced separately and to ensure the commission’s membership reflects a cross-section of the community.

No final vote on Ordinance 2024‑4 was recorded at the meeting; the council continued deliberation and scheduled follow-up discussion. The sponsor said staff would circulate the application, selection criteria and a revised redline for further consideration.