Residents not sure about home rule

Commission members say their plan will force Sharon to operate more efficiently.

By LAURE CIOFFI

VINDICATOR PENNSYLVANIA BUREAU

SHARON, Pa. — Lisa Kimpan went with an open mind to listen to the drafters of the proposed changes in Sharon’s city government.

“I’m not real happy with the mayor of Sharon. I don’t think things are working out very well. I want to know about taxes for lower- and middle-class residents,” she said before the meeting, one of several held by the commission that drafted the proposed home- rule charter.

She left that meeting still unsure of which way her vote will be cast Nov. 6 when city residents decide if they want to abandon the current government that includes a mayor and city council, along with an elected treasurer and controller.

Sarah Dowthit also left unsure of the proposed changes but was leaning toward voting for the charter.

“The city of Sharon is in a terrible situation. People are moving out left and right. I think the biggest thing is they need to bring in new business. They need to try something,” Dowthit said.

A study commission of seven people drafted the 31-page home-rule charter that residents will consider.

William McConnell Jr., commission chairman, argues that the current form of government is outdated and ineffective in today’s world.

The current third-class city charter, adopted in 1959, limits the city’s main source of income to property tax revenue and caps earned income tax revenues at 0.5 percent.

With a shrinking population and tax base, combined with rising costs and the highest real estate taxes in Mercer County, Sharon needs a change, he said.

The commission has proposed eliminating the elected mayor, controller and treasurer and only having an elected five-member council. The city’s daily operations will be overseen by an appointed city manager and financial officer.

McConnell believes these changes will save the city money by eliminating salaries and benefits of those elected officials.

The committee also has proposed eliminating health care and pension benefits that city council members are now eligible to receive.

The plan also calls for 12-year term limits for council members and that a majority of council be up for re-election every two years.

The proposed charter would give council the ability to increase the earned income tax that the city collects, but requires that an equal amount of property taxes are lowered to offset it.

McConnell says commission members hope these measures will force the city to operate more efficiently.

Some current city officials, however, say that won’t be the case.

Mayor Bob Lucas and council President Fred Hoffman both say they were in favor of a government study commission. Now, both say, they can’t support the changes the commission has proposed.

“I have great concerns there are no check and balances,” Lucas said.

Lucas said he’s not concerned about the elimination of the mayor’s position, but he worries what will happen if there is no elected controller or treasurer to oversee city finances on a regular basis. The only check would be a yearly audit, he said.

Hoffman notes that even neighboring Hermitage, which went to a home-rule charter in the 1970s, has an elected treasurer to watch over funding spent by their board of commissioners and city manager.

Hoffman also believes that replacing the mayor, treasurer and controller with a city manager and fiscal officer will cost the city more money.

The mayor earns $45,000 per year, while the treasurer and controller are both part time, and each is paid $8,000 per year.

The expected salary of a city manager is about $70,000 annually, while the fiscal officer would likely make about $60,000 annually, he said.

Hoffman adds that another projected savings by the home-rule study commission, the elimination of health care and pension benefits for council members, also is inflated.

Study commission members say that $50,000 per year can be saved by eliminating that option, basing it on the cost of health care for a family of $10,000 per year, and there are five council members.

Hoffman said those benefits have been used only by two council members at any one time in the past 15 years at a cost below $20,000 per year.

But Hoffman’s biggest complaint with the proposed charter is that he doesn’t believe it gives enough specifics.

The home-rule charter gives city council the option to raise the earned income tax, but it must reduce property tax by a comparable amount. It, however, does not restrict council from raising the property tax again in the future.

Commission members have put in a stipulation that any increase in property tax must have at least four council votes. Now only a simple majority is needed to raise real estate taxes.

“If we get in a situation where the real estate taxes remain high and the wage tax is high, why would you move here?” he said.

Hoffman said the average homeowner likely would not benefit from that plan, but large businesses that own property would benefit.

Hoffman believes the commission ignored the opportunity to raise revenue in other areas that could have had less impact on the average home owner.

Among those changes could have been an increase in the real estate transfer tax — a one-time tax paid every time a piece of real estate is sold — and other taxes.

Lucas believes the voters are giving up too many rights by having the city’s daily operations being run by an appointed city manager and fiscal officer.

“Government has to answer to the people. I think what they came up with is taking the people out of the loop,” he added.

cioffi@vindy.com