Lucerne County Council voted against the question of the self-government study committee vote

The question of whether the Lucerne County Home Rule Government should be reviewed will not be on the ballot for the May 16 primary, as the majority in the council decided on Tuesday.

Councilor Stephen J. Urban proposed a ballot question asking voters if they would like to convene an elected seven-citizen commission to evaluate the Home Rule charter and recommend whether to leave it as it is, revise it, try a different structure, or revert to the old three-commissioner system .

The current charter replaced a system that had been in place for over 150 years and placed 11 elected part-time councilors and a council-appointed manager responsible for decisions previously made by the three elected commission members and several elected officials.

Only three of the 11 board members supported the inclusion of the study group question in the upcoming primary vote: Kevin Leskevage, Brian Thornton and Urban.

The question was voted against by Carl Bienias III, John Lombardo, LeAnn McDermott, Tim McGinley, Matthew Mitchell, Chris Perry, Kendra Radle, and Gregory S. Volovich Jr.

Council members who voted against the study committee argued that the council should be able to communicate proposed improvements to self-government directly to voters through voting questions, stating that such an approach would not entail the committee recommending a return to the old structure.

Supporters of the commission argued that an external commission was the best way to address the shortcomings of self-government in one go, and stressed that the commission could choose to retain self-government. Citizens interested in service would run simultaneously in the upcoming primary, and the top seven voters would take office if the ballot was passed.

Bienias questioned the rush to include the study group’s question in the upcoming primary vote, saying the board should have time to discuss possible amendments and examine their legality. He and others are proposing an amendment to reduce the board’s size as part of a package of possible changes.

Bienias and several of his colleagues said Tuesday they would support putting the Study Group question on the ballot for November’s general election, when voter turnout is higher, if the council receives legal data indicating the council cannot proceed with the elected amendments.

Urban urged his colleagues to continue considering the issue of the primary, saying he did not think the Council should “put things aside” in search of a study group.

Commissioners have had up to 18 months to study the current structure and decide how they want to proceed, officials said. Any changes recommended by the study committee must be approved by prospective voters in order for them to take effect, which happened prior to the county’s transition to self-government in 2012.

In response to calls for public participation, Volovich showed a copy of the 69-page charter and said that, in his personal opinion, people would be better off digesting and voting on individual issues “on every issue” rather than another brand new lengthy document. .

Lescavage said something needs to be done because some of the biggest conflicts on the board involve disagreements over whether or not the bylaws are against state law. He believes that the appointed manager has too much power.

Lombardo stressed that voters would have the final say on any changes.

Citizen’s contribution

Public comments on the proposed study group ruling were made during pre-vote hearings, and several citizens expressed differing views on how the council should operate.

County District Attorney Sam Sanguedolce urged the council to include an exploratory committee on the ballot.

The district attorney said he heard a lot of comments about the charter ending corruption, but he argued that it was achieved by the elected, not by the form of government.

Sanguedolce said that all citizens should have a say in whether to convene a study group, not just those who sit on the council or attend meetings. He supported some bylaw amendments individually proposed by the board, but said he could not believe such changes could legitimately be put to a vote without forming a study group.

According to the district attorney, the district must recognize the fact that there are serious flaws in the bylaws that need to be corrected.

Former council member and charter drafter Rick Morelli opposed the creation of an exploratory commission, saying that there could be politically motivated commissioners in the district recommending a return to the three-commissioner system.

The county government received a credit rating and significantly reduced debt under self-rule, Morelli said. He noted that the charter has an 8 percent cap on property tax increases and contains provisions for checks and balances and accountability to protect the public.

Morelli argued that some are trying to campaign against self-rule, thinking it will help them gain better access to contracts and jobs.

Former county commissioner and councilman Stephen A. Urban said he agreed to put the study committee issue on the ballot when he was commissioner, and he believes the council should do the same.

Urban said any citizen can run for the study committee, including board members. He said the self-government charter should have retained the pay board as a check on the manager’s creation of jobs. The charter also abolished the prison board, the body it says is empowered to oversee the county’s largest budget spending.

Contact Jennifer Learn-Andes at 570-991-6388 or tweet @TLJenLearnAndes.