Change of Government

Published on 20 August 2024 at 11:59

I started writing this with the anticipation of the September council meeting as I believed the change of government would be on the agenda due to the election in November and the requirement of two council readings. I was going to give an overview of all three forms of government because one of the mayor’s campaign promises was to change the form of government so that all the power is not in just one person.  She has referred the city should be under a council-manager form of government.  In the March council meeting, a representative from the Municipal Association of South Carolina (MASC) gave a presentation to council providing information on changing the form of government. (See Council Meeting 3-11-2024 on City of Easley You Tube) There was not an opportunity for the council to have a discussion on how to proceed with this since it was never on the agenda.

On July 9th, 2024, I requested via email to the mayor for the council to discuss changing the form of government.  I did not get a reply to that email. The subject of changing the form of government was not on the August agenda either.  

I was curious and called the election commission on Friday Aug 16th and found out Thursday Aug 15th at noon was the deadline for submitting referendums to get on the ballot for the November vote.  I immediately had concerns since the window of opportunity was closed to get the referendum on the November ballot which would have been a cost savings to the city. I sent an email to the mayor stating the deadline has passed and what was Plan B. Again, I did not get a response from her.

Imagine my shock to learn via Facebook last night, the mayor has made a decision and is not pursuing changing the form of government. (Why was the council not informed of any of the information she was gathering and not notified of her decision before posting on social media?  She stated various reasons, one being the "choice belongs to the YOU the people of Easley. It belongs to more than a majority of 7 people.”  Those seven people were elected by the voters putting their faith into those who won to do what is best for the city of Easley. 

 

For those who do not have Facebook, here is the text from the mayor's post:

Easley friends, most of you know I am a person of faith, and feel called to this service to the community I love. After seven months of working on the goals of my platform, one remains: Form of Government Change. After much work, study, and prayer, I finally feel led to this decision:

This choice belongs to YOU, the people of Easley. It belongs to more than a majority of 7 people. Here’s why:

As a candidate, I had limited knowledge of the detailed process, results, and cost to the taxpayers to enact a change. I had no access to state Municipal Association assistance, education, or information. What I knew was that we had a mayor that we perceived as taking a hard line of control with limited transparency in many areas. I also knew that there was a state statute allowing a referendum to change government, which I saw as a solution. However, the voters ultimately provided a simple solution. We changed mayors and three council seats. Our current system of checks and balances proved effective without incurring any costs. In the past six months, I have met with our MASC field representative. We invited her to speak and provide education and information to the public at a council meeting. I also took a class for elected officials on different forms of government, met with MASC state representatives to discuss it, and participated in a Mayor's Association conference and discussion on forms of government. I was advised that the form of government does not matter as much as the quality and intent of the elected officials. I no longer believe that it’s in the best interest of the city for me to advocate for a change via council ordinance in our current structure for three basic reasons:

• EXPERT/PEER ADVICE: None of the numerous experts I've spoken with—including municipal executives who have experience with all three forms—think it's necessary or advantageous. When our elected officials failed to meet the expectations of "we the people," they were voted out. Collaborating well for the sake of the city is essential in any of the three forms, and all forms, including our current one, enable people to make changes through voting when they are dissatisfied. What matters is the quality of elected representatives.

• LACK OF SUPPORT: Since the information forum, several residents have contacted me and asked me to reconsider my previous position. They no longer feel it’s a worthwhile endeavor in either time or money and no longer believe it’s necessary. Those originally most vocal have changed their minds. (Our MASC field representative shared that after she spoke at the city council, she was confronted repeatedly in the foyer by citizens with a change of mind after hearing the details and cost.) Which brings me to the biggie:

• EXPENSE: The city would pay for the referendum ($15,000 minimum). We also will be required to review and update every single ordinance to reflect the “new” form of government. That’s very costly. An example: a neighboring city ran out of money at $110,000 and is out of compliance currently, awaiting further revenue to finish. We were advised we could realistically expect a quarter of a million-dollar expenditure or more, and MASC officials have assured me that even after spending that money, voters would likely not notice any difference, especially if the current administration is functioning well. This course of action could result in a 3 mil increase ALONE. If the people feel an elected official, or elected officials, are not performing as expected, voting is the quickest and cheapest ‘remedy.’

Should enough people desire to proceed, despite the details listed above, there is the petition option. Meaning, this change should come from the citizens as outlined by state statute with 15% of registered voters. It would be the responsibility of the people after they are fully informed, as I now am. This step belongs to YOU.

Please feel free to reach out to me with any questions: LTalbert@cityofeasley.com

Add comment

Comments

Lisa MCadams
4 months ago

I called the MASC Field Representative for the Upstate, Naomi Reed, and after leaving 2 messages, she returned my call on the 2nd day. Mr. Charlie Barrineau who is the Low Country Field Rep. returned my call shortly afther I called his number. You DON'T have to be on the City Council or Mayor to speak with them. They offered for me to contact them anytime I had questions. Mr. Barrineau sent me a copy of the Form of Government rules and regulations. He also said Cheraw in Chester County is in the process of changing form of goverment from a Mayor/Council to a Council/Mgr. FOG. He seemed surprised at the $250,000 that Mayor Talbert is telling people it could cost. Ms. Reed said there is a lot of work involved in making the change. She used to work in Fountain Inn when these changes were being made. I plan to call the Mayor of Cheraw soon to find out more about this process. Contact # is 803-354-4750 for Ms. Reed and 803-354-4751 for Mr. Barrineau.