DOWNTOWN YOUNGSTOWN Council moves to end arena panel

A vote to eliminate the arena board is expected to follow a roundabout path.
By ROGER G. SMITH
CITY HALL REPORTER
YOUNGSTOWN -- A year of infighting has culminated with city council's moving to eliminate the civic center board.
Whether that movement will succeed should become clearer after a special meeting Friday.
Council has called a meeting for 5 p.m. Friday at which it is to vote on legislation dissolving the board, said Ron Sefcik, D-4th, who opposes the move.
Most of council and the civic center board have been at odds for a year. At issue is who should have final decision-making authority over the proposed downtown arena project and the $26.8 million secured so far.
Neither side has backed down in contract talks in recent months.
Steps needed: Sefcik outlined this roundabout path that the legislation, which wasn't developed as of late Wednesday, is expected to follow:
Six of seven votes are needed to approve the measure on the spot Friday. There won't be six votes, however.
Sefcik won't be there to vote, although he would oppose it if he were. John R. Swierz, D-7th, will add his no vote, too, Sefcik said.
It's unclear if all five other council members will vote to eliminate the board. Sefcik said as of Wednesday, he expected the vote to be 5-2 to eliminate the board. Other council members couldn't be reached to comment.
Lacking six votes, the legislation will move to a second of three readings.
Another special meeting then will be called for Monday. Presuming the legislation still lacks six votes, the item will move to a third and final reading at Wednesday's regularly scheduled council meeting.
There, the item would need just four votes to pass.
What council wants: Council wants final decision-making power and the arena board to be an advisory panel. The main reason is that council -- not the board -- ultimately is responsible to the federal government if money is misspent. Therefore, the city must have final authority over spending, officials say.
Mayor George M. McKelvey said he "sincerely regrets" that the arena board didn't accept council's proposed contract. The contract would have created a productive partnership in developing the project, he said.
McKelvey said it's premature to comment on how the project would proceed without the board. That is better left until after council ultimately makes its decision, he said.
"I can't presume anything," he said.
Board's view: Arena board members say they need the freedom to run the project. Most cities create such agencies to build and manage arenas because government doesn't have the expertise.
Robert VanSickle, the arena board's chairman, said council's "punitive action" demonstrates the difficult negotiating climate.
"I didn't want to see it get that far. I really wanted to work something out," he said.
VanSickle wondered why council hasn't taken other routes, such as face-to-face meetings or even arbitration.
"They've not done any of those things," he said.
The board will talk with its lawyer about its options, he said. One avenue might be seeking a court injunction to stop council from dissolving the board.
Council didn't create the nonprofit corporation that the board operates under. Nonetheless, VanSickle concedes there probably is no need for the corporation if city council won't provide the board funding.
Disappointed: Leonard Schiavone, who was board chairman the past year until a mandatory change in officers last week, called the scenario disappointing.
"The board has dedicated itself to the project. I don't think there can be any question of that," he said.
It would be unfortunate if council made its final decision before talking directly with the board, or even just its three appointees, said Schiavone, who is one of them.
U.S. Rep. James A. Traficant Jr. of Poland, D-17th, who secured the $26.8 million, pushed council hard for several months last year to create the group. His spokesman could not be reached to comment.
rgsmith@vindy.com