BY MARK J. CRAWFORD
Telegraph Editor
STARKE – An ordinance to hold a referendum in March on the future of the Starke police chief’s job failed on a 2-2 vote Aug. 15.
If approved by voters, the city charter would have been amended to remove the police chief as an elected official. Power to hire a police chief would have been placed in the hands of the city commission.
In the absence of an elected police chief, the city commission could have contracted with Sheriff Gordon Smith for law enforcement services.
Mayor Scott Roberts and Commissioner Shannon Smith voted to pass the ordinance. Commissioners Danny Nugent and Janice Mortimer voted against it. Commissioner Andy Redding was not present at the meeting to break the tie.
Citizen Markleyann Cash provided something rare from the public at a city meeting — vocal support for police consolidation.
She said the city was presented with a plan to save more than $1 million a year by contracting with Sheriff Smith, but three commissioners previously voted to “pass the buck” to voters who don’t know the city’s utility and transportation infrastructure is in such bad shape.
“You commissioners were elected to address and correct these problems, which sometimes may not be the popular thing to do, but necessary,” she said. “A taxpayer in one of the poorest counties in the state does not need you raising taxes and water and sewer rates to fix what’s been allowed to go unattended for years and years.”
“You need to save money when you can get the public service for less,” she said.
But when it came time to vote on the ordinance to call for the referendum, there wasn’t even enough support on the board to “pass the buck,” as Cash put it.
Commissioner Danny Nugent moved to reject the ordinance based on the language included stating the city commission would receive the power to hire a police chief if the chief is no longer elected by popular vote.
Commissioner Shannon Smith also asked for clarification, since the commission’s intention had been to eliminate the position. The commission receiving authority to hire a chief following the vote made the referendum seem like a “power grab,” he said.
Attorney Clay Martin explained there was no need to vote to reject the ordinance. If there was no motion to approve the ordinance, it would die and there would be no referendum. As for the language, Martin explained that unless the charter specifically calls for the appointment of a police chief by popular vote — which is not the case in most small cities — then the power to hire a police chief or not automatically lies with the commission. The ballot language must be clear on the question being posted to voters, and so it explains what would happen if they voted to change the charter.
Commissioners who’ve expressed support for consolidating law enforcement services first wanted to deal with the police chief charter issue. The implication would be if voters removed the chief’s position from the charter, they would also support consolidation.
Following some discussion on whether additional changes were needed, there was a vote to pass the ordinance on first reading. It failed on a tie vote.
It would appear the time to place a referendum on the March presidential primary ballot has run out. Martin said the supervisor of elections would need the ballot language by early September. A new ordinance would need to go through two readings to be adopted.
