Shelby City Council failed to pass an ordinance on Monday stating that no titled vehicle for the city should be purchased or leased without council’s approval.
Ordinance 3-2015, sponsored by Councilmembers Pat Carlisle and Garland Gates, was originally written in regards to the purchase of a 2012 Ford Escape at the cost of $20,700, used by the Shelby Police Department. However, after further review, Carlisle discovered that the purchase had actually been approved in the city’s appropriations.
“When I went back through appropriations, the particular case that is listed was actually an appropriated purchase,” explained Carlisle. “The decision-making process didn’t involve a councilmember, but council had in essence given its approval through the appropriations. Knowing who was involved in the discussion of which car to buy, it makes more sense to me that this particular situation did follow procedure. I’m not sure myself that this ordinance is necessary.”
Shelby’s Director of Public Safety, then former mayor Marilyn John, purchased the vehicle in September 2013. Police Chief Charlie Roub explained that the vehicle had to be purchased in a very short window of time.
“There were actually two vehicles; the first one we decided to buy, but by the time the decision was made it had already been sold,” said Roub. “We had to take the second choice, and that decision had to be made within minutes, not hours or days.”
Gates explained that the purpose of Ordinance 3-2015 is to provide transparency and accountability to such purchases. Councilmember Nathan Martin argued the appropriations process already provided transparency and accountability.
“I have no problem with those concepts, but the problem lies in that the appropriations process that we go through: meeting together and going through appropriations in March in a public meeting. Everything we do is appropriated in a very transparent, accountable way, said Martin.
“During that discussion we go line by line through appropriations. If we have issues we discuss and vote on it at that time. I’m not trying to minimize the intent of the legislation, I just don’t like the duplication of efforts on council’s part.”
Carlisle also pointed out that the purchase was also below the $25,000 cap, however she noted she was not pleased that council at the time was not aware of the purchase.
“We had approved it already in the budget, but at the time the discussions were going on to purchase the cruiser it might have helped had council known at the time that you had decided to go ahead with the purchase, as a courtesy,” she said. “As opposed to discovering it a couple months later as it drove by.”
With the absence of a fifth member of council due to the resignation of second ward Councilmember Harold Shasky, the vote to pass or fail the ordinance was initially a tie. Councilmembers Martin and Carlisle voting against the ordinance, and Councilmembers Gates and Steve McLaughlin voting for the ordinance. According to the city’s charter, the tiebreaking vote then goes to Mayor Steve Schag.
“I think with the explanations we’ve had, and hearing Mrs. Carlisle loud and clear, I think there’s a better way to approach this ordinance, so I vote nay,” said Schag.
Resident’s concern
Council also heard from Shelby resident Chris Colyer during public comment at Monday’s meeting. Colyer shared that he received backlash after speaking during public comment at the Feb. 2 council meeting.
“I’m an auxiliary police officer; I’ve never broadcasted that,” said Colyer. “I’ve always said I’m the biggest opponent for not cutting police officer, firefighter, and teacher jobs. Someone made a call to my police department and said, ‘Do you know what your officer is doing in our community.’”
According to Wakeman Police Chief Tim Hunker, Colyer is currently a member of the Wakeman Police Reserve Program for the village of Wakeman, Ohio, approximately 36 miles northeast of Shelby in Huron County. Reserve officers in Wakeman are unpaid but have the power to enforce the laws of the state of Ohio, including making arrests.
“That’s a backlash to me, it kind of felt like they were coming behind my back and cutting my throat. I feel they backdoored me,” said Colyer. “I did clear it with my supervisors and my superiors before I did anything, I asked if I could do several things and if there were any policies or procedures I was going against.”
Colyer stated he confronted the individual who made comments at their residence, and the conversation ended by agreeing to disagree.
“There are a lot of people that don’t come [to city council] because they don’t want the backlash or being picked on,” said Colyer. “I think the mayor should know that’s what your subordinates do. I don’t know if you ratify that or endorse that, but that’s what happened.”
Colyer also brought up his belief that an ordinance should be in place that doesn’t allow a person to retire from any city then continue employment with another city.
“I’m all about people continuing their job history, their resume, things of that nature – their skills even – but you can’t go ahead and continue things when you’ve got people that retire and come back into the system,” said Colyer. “They’re going to draw a pension off one city and come back and get another pension. If you’ve worked 25 to 30 years then go out, because it stops people that want to go for those things to actually even pursue the position. And people can’t work for free because city charter says they have to give them the money.”
Colyer also voiced his opposition to council’s passing of Ordinance 1-2015 at the Feb. 2 council meeting. Shelby City Council voted on Feb. 2 to freeze the wages of all elected officials for the years 2016 and 2017 in order to help the city’s General Fund get back on its feet. Wages for the mayor, law director and finance director were frozen in 2016 and 2017, then increased by 2 percent in 2018 and 2.5 percent in 2019.
“How can you look at somebody that works at McDonald’s and say we’re going to take more out of your pay and give it to public officials, when those people haven’t seen wage increases in a while,” said Colyer.
The council does not typically respond to public comment and no response was given during the meeting.
