Lancaster’s Home Rule Study Commission made some big decisions as it put the finishing touches on its draft charter Thursday: Increasing the number of City Council members from seven to nine, sticking with at-large elections, capping the amount that tax revenues can increase from year to year and creating a city ethics commission.
As things wrapped up, Gerald Cross, senior fellow at the Pennsylvania Economy League, clarified that some portions of the charter are still under legal review. Nevertheless, commission Chair Brian Adams told his colleagues that their work of writing the charter was substantially complete, setting the stage for the commission to vote on approving it later this month.
“Thank you for all the work that everybody has done,” Adams said. “For all the members of the commission, and the subcommittees. We did it! At least this step.”
City Council
Thursday’s deliberations started with the size of City Council and whether to elect members by district or at large.
During public comment at the start of the meeting, Vickey Wright-Smith said that she understood that the city’s financial challenges were important but the issue of inadequate representation on city council was a “bigger issue.” She commended commissioners Darlene Byrd, Maxine Cook, and Tony Dastra, who make up the commission’s City Council subcommittee, for their work on it.
“I do not believe that all wards and residents of this city are adequately represented on the City Council,” she said. “I really don’t understand, and no one has presented a good argument to me why these wards in the city should not have their own City Council person.”
Wright-Smith’s comments were echoed by the Rev. Edward M. Bailey, the pastor of Bethel AME Church in southeast Lancaster. He said he feels he must show up at City Council meetings on behalf of the southeast because of the lack of representation on council. He urged the commission to “allow those voices to be heard” by endorsing by-district elections.
“People talk democracy, but they don’t live it,” Bailey said. “A few people make decisions for everybody.”
Commission Vice Chair Amy Ruffo said it is unknown whether changing to districts would address the worries about government being unresponsive to certain parts of the city. She said there are two articles of the charter “that provide a lot more power to self-governance” for citizens, allowing them to compel City Council to add agenda items or call a special meeting to address an issue. There are also mechanisms for to increase budget transparency and citizen input into that process.
“I’ve come to the conclusion that those two things are incredibly powerful, and it helps create conditions for all of us to understand the responsibility that we have to self-governance,” Ruffo said.
Byrd said that creating districts is about holding politicians accountable. She objected to arguments that it would make it harder to find qualified people to run.
“I think we’re sitting here in front of a lot of people who are scared about change, people that had their minds made up about where they want to see the city at in a few years from now,” Byrd said. “We can’t be afraid of change.”
She lamented the amount of work the commission had done on the charter only to not make significant changes to the way council members are elected and address the concerns of unrepresented parts of the city.
Her remarks were met with expressions of support from members of the public in attendance, with many applauding and one saying, “Thank you, Darlene.”
Cook, Dastra and Elizabeth Elias all agreed with Byrd. Cook said the people who are against districting don’t understand the need for representation because they already have it. Elias said City Council often seems to be made up of people from the same parts of the city.
Dastra said the home rule commission itself is “way more representative of the city than, frankly, City Council is.”
The board vote on whether to change to a districting model for city council went to a 4-4 tie, with Byrd, Cook, Dastra, and Elias voting yes and Barber, Feldman, McGrann, and Ruffo voting no.
The tie was broken by Adams, the chair, who voted no, defeating the plan.
After that vote, Byrd made a motion that council be expanded from seven members to nine. Elias seconded. Byrd, Cook, Dastra, Elias, and Ruffo voted yes, passing the motion 5-4.
Revenue limit
McGrann introduced language limiting the revenue increase in any annual budget to 6% — an indirect way of limiting tax increases. City Council would be able to override the limit by a supermajority vote.
At the commission’s July 18 meeting, Cross said the 2025 and 2026 budgets would not be subject to the limit, to give city government flexibility as the transition to home rule is being made.
Ruffo endorsed having a limit in the charter because there are concerns about taxes in the community, many of which were expressed at the public feedback session held earlier in the week. Cross said the provision protects taxpayers, making sure that any tax increases are limited.
The language limiting the tax increases was passed with only two nay votes, coming from Byrd and Elias.
City Council benefits
The commission discussed and voted on charter language outlining health care benefits for city council members. The debate was over whether City Council should be eligible for health insurance.
Ruffo argued that if they can get benefits through their employer or spouse, they should have to do that instead of from the taxpayers. Cook said that while she was in favor of providing health insurance to anyone who needs it, the city’s budget should be taken into consideration.
“The reason we’re here is because of the projected deficit in the city budget,” Cook said. “And if there are ways that all departments are cutting down to the bare minimum, looking at their budgets, seeing where they can cut costs, I think, certainly, that that means the benefits for City Council members must also be taken into consideration.”
The commission decided to let City Council pass compensation ordinances that include health benefit eligibility for its own members — with the caveat that council members can’t receive a payment in lieu of health benefits if they decline coverage. (At present, council members who decline coverage receive payments of more than $20,000 a year.)
The commission approved language raising City Council salaries to $12,000 a year, up from $8,000 now. Council members will be able to claim reimbursement for expenses related to their duties, for example, paying for their parking while at a council meeting.
This motion passed seven to one with McGrann the only nay vote.
Ethics commission
The ethics commission was approved unanimously. It would advise City Council as the latter drafts and passes an ethics ordinance; it would then be charged with educating city staff and the public on ethics standards and investigating any infractions.
Public comment
Besides Wright-Smith and the Rev. Bailey, southeast advocate Tene Darby also spoke during the first public comment period. She said she opposes any additional city tax burden, and conveyed a message from Lisa Colon, the Lancaster County controller and chair of the city Republican Committee, saying she opposes home rule.
What’s next
The last of three information sessions on the home rule charter will be held at 6 p.m. Tuesday, Aug. 6, at City Hall. There will be a public hearing at 7 p.m. Thursday, Aug. 8, also at City Hall.
The commission must vote to approve the charter no later than Thursday, Aug. 29, for it to be placed on the ballot for city voters on Election Day, Nov. 5. If that’s what happens, the commission will hold educational events in September and October in neighborhood venues around the city. The dates and locations of those events will be announced later.
The next meeting of the commission is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. Thursday, Aug. 15. There will also be a meeting of the community engagement committee on Wednesday, Aug. 21.
To learn more about home rule, visit the commission’s page on the city website.
