I have read the proposed changes to the Steubenville City Charter mailed to registered voters in the city, not because none was mailed to me but only because my wife received hers, and certain parts have left me confused.

The proposed amendment to Article II, Section 4 A 1 states that the mayor or members of council can, for certain reasons, be removed from office by “a majority vote of Four (4) members of council …” as opposed to the existing language stating removal “by a majority vote of members of council …” Does this change mean by a majority vote of all members of council, as presently written, or by a majority of 4 members of council, which would be 3. Arguably it can be interpreted either way but there is nothing to explain the intent of the review commission. However, Section 4 A 3 of Article II retains the original language, that the vote has to be by “a majority of all members of council …” Does 3 clarify 1 or is 1 intended to mean how many votes are necessary to begin a removal process which brings me back to my original question as to how many votes are necessary to do this.

Article II, Section 11, contains the same language with respect to the number of votes necessary to pass legislation, but instead of “a majority of all members of council …”, the proposal reads “a majority of Four (4) members of council…” Again, does this mean four (4) or a majority of (4).

Article II Section 12 A and B, which were not mentioned in this paper’s article on the proposed changes raises the salary of a member of council from $100 per meeting attended or a maximum of $5,200 per year to $250 per meeting attended or a maximum of $12,500 per year. The mayor’s salary is raised from $120 per meeting attended or $6,240 per year to $300 per meeting attended or $15,000 per year. The raises would take effect upon the effective date of the charter and was proposed so that those in the middle of a term would get the benefit of the raise. Although not illegal, the practice has not been to give raises during a term of office.

Most of the other proposals, other than perhaps the change in alternative requirements to a bachelor’s degree to be the city manager, that being five years experience as a mid-level or senior level manager, neither term being defined, do not make any material changes to what is now in effect. This changes the present requirement of experience of at least five years as a city manager or chief fiscal officer of a business or governmental entity. This basically lowers the necessary qualifications to be hired.

Unfortunately, the changes to various sections of the charter are to be voted on as a package instead of individually.

Therefore, if a voter likes most but not all of the proposed changes on a particular issue, a yes vote would be a vote for those one does not like. Likewise, if one does not like most, but not all of the proposed changes, a no vote would be a vote against those one likes.

The Ohio Constitution and state statute say proposed changes are to be mailed to every qualified voter not less than 30 days prior to the election.

I did not receive the notice and know of at least two others who did not. I don’t believe this was intentional and don’t know why we didn’t receive the notice, but it does raise a question of complying with the law and the possible invalidation of the election.

(Mascio, a resident of Steubenville, has served the community in many capacities, including as the city’s law director and as a judge on Jefferson County Common Pleas Court.)