News
Nelsonville voters overwhelmingly said they want a new government. What happens next is less clear
By: David Forster
Posted on:
ATHENS, Ohio (WOUB) — Now that Nelsonville voters have called for a new government, they need to elect people to run it. That’s supposed to happen next year.
The city’s attorney says the City Council has no authority to call for an election.
Officials with the Athens County Board of Elections say they cannot simply schedule the election on their own.
But if the city cannot direct them to do so, who can?
“It’s all very vague, it’s all very unclear,” said Tony Brooks, the board’s deputy director.
What is clear is Nelsonville’s charter, which created its current form of government, is set to expire at the end of next year.
And if elections are not held next year, there may be no one in place to run the city at the start of 2026. That’s the worst-case scenario.
Meanwhile, the City Council may vote soon to continue its legal challenge against the ballot initiative that passed with overwhelming support last month.
The council fought for months to keep the initiative off the ballot in the first place but lost that battle in a state court of appeals.
The initiative returns the city to the form of government it had 30 years ago, when the city’s administration was run by an elected mayor who is independent of the council instead of a city manager who is hired, and can be fired, by the council.
The council’s Judiciary Committee voted earlier this week to recommend the council appeal its case to the Ohio Supreme Court. The council is expected to make a decision when it meets on Monday.
Jonathan Robe, the city’s attorney, cautioned committee members it is highly unlikely the Supreme Court would agree to hear an appeal. He also said the city’s insurance company might not cover the legal costs.
Councilmember Opha Lawson, who sits on the committee, said an appeal was worth a try, especially if the court could provide the council with some guidance on making the transition to a different form of government.
“Right now it’s going to be a cluster and there is no guidance,” he said.
But any such guidance also seems unlikely. If the Supreme Court were to agree to take up an appeal from the city, the only question before the court would be whether the court of appeals made the right decision.
Ohio residents have a constitutional right to choose their form of government and change it if they want. The City Council’s argument is the people behind the initiative went about it the wrong way.
The initiative was proposed under the city’s charter, which was adopted 30 years ago and established its current form of government. The charter allows for initiatives, but the council argued this cannot be used to abolish the charter itself — in other words, the charter does not provide for its own demise.
The council argued instead that the proper way to abolish a charter is under a section of the state constitution that specifies how to amend charters.
The appeals court disagreed and allowed the initiative to go on the ballot.
Robe said this is the main reason it’s so unlikely the Supreme Court would agree to hear an appeal from the city. “The election is already over,” he said.
But even if the city appeals and court were to take the case, it’s unlikely any decision would extend beyond upholding or overturning the appeals court decision, Robe said.
The council and the Board of Elections are in need of guidance because, as Robe explained to the Judiciary Committee, there is no roadmap for making the change the initiative calls for.
Ohio cities have two basic options when it comes to their government: They can follow one of the templates spelled out in state law — a statutory form of government. Or they can draw up a charter creating their own government.
Plenty of cities have gone from a statutory government to a charter. But Robe said he could find no examples going the other way.
“We’re in totally uncharted territory in terms of where to go from here,” he said. “It’s never been done before in the history of our state. It doesn’t mean it can’t be done.”
Robe said that under his reading of the law, there’s little the council can do to help with the transition.
For example, the initiative calls for an election next year of all city officials that were elected positions before the charter. This would include a mayor and all council members. And the council positions will now be partisan, which means there would need to be a primary election first.
Robe said the council, which still operates under the charter, has no authority to make any of this happen.
“Under the charter, council does not have authority to pass an ordinance telling the Board of Elections there are partisan primaries that need to be held in May for council seats,” he said.
Municipal elections will be held in Ohio next year as they are in all odd-numbered years. But this doesn’t mean the Nelsonville elections would just automatically happen, said elections board officials.
“I’m assuming that they will have an election,” said Debbie Quivey, the board’s director. “They have to go back to a statutory government whether they want to or not. That charter is gone.”
However, she added, “I don’t know 100 percent that Nelsonville will have an election next year.”
This is because someone needs to direct the board to schedule Nelsonville elections and for what positions.
“We’re not sure what the city needs to provide to us to hold an election,” said Tony Brooks, the board’s deputy director.
The board has reached out to its attorneys for guidance, including what to do if the Nelsonville council, given the advice of its attorney, does nothing.
Another issue is some of the new council members will represent wards and will be elected by the residents of those wards.
Robe told the Judiciary Committee he doesn’t believe the council has the authority to draw ward boundaries.
“They would have to tell us what their wards are,” Quivey said. Without them, the board would not be able to certify candidates for council seats because it wouldn’t know what wards they are running in.
It was clear at the Judiciary Committee meeting that some council members remain highly critical of the ballot initiative.
Members Opha Lawson and Tony Dunfee both said they believe the city’s residents did not understand what they were voting for.
“People were duped, thought it was going to be an easy thing for us just to throw everything back and move over to the statutory and things will go all hunky dory and all that,” Lawson said.
Greg Smith, a former council member and one of two residents who sued the city to get the initiative on the ballot, said he believes council members are still focusing on ways to block it.
“In my opinion,” he said, “the (Judiciary Committee) meeting was just political cover for council to vote to spend more tax dollars to appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court, even though the citizens have voted by 71 percent for what they desire.”