Ortonville- In a split decision, the village council approved changing the village election schedule to match up with the township, school board, state and federal elections.
The 4-3 vote at Monday night’s council meeting angered some village residents, who wanted an opportunity to vote on the change.
‘I think they’re ignoring the democratic process,? said resident Glennis Hubbard, who presented the council with 25 petition signatures from village residents who supported putting a change of the election schedule to a vote. ‘The old council would never have gotten away with this. What makes them think they are above the process and can get away with it??
Council President Ken Quisenberry, who made the motion to postpone the September 2009 election and move it to November 2010 to be in step with the township, said the move is a statewide trend that makes sense.
‘The sooner we do it, the sooner we save money,? said Quisenberry, who was joined by councilmembers Aileen Champion, Kay Green and Melanie Nivelt in support of the measure, while councilmemembers Harold Batten, Dan Eschmann and Mary Kassuba opposed it. ‘I want the money. We’re representatives of the village and we make these decisions. I’m not trying to deprive them of a vote.?
Oakland County Clerk Ruth Johnson said the village could save approximately $2,600 per election by getting in sync with the township. She notes that consolidation is also more convenient for voters and turnout at the polls is likely to increase.
The extended terms seemed to be the primary concern of opponents of the change.
The change means instead of the planned September 2009 election, the next village council election will not be until November 2010, extending by 14 months the terms of Quisenberry, Batten, Green and Nivelt. Because the village election will now be held on even-numbered years, this also extends by 14 months the terms of the remaining three councilmembers? Champion, Eschmann, and Kassuba? whose terms were due to end in September 2011 and will now be pushed to November 2012.
‘It’s a full extension of 14 months for everyone sitting on the council,? Hubbard noted. ‘How does anyone know we like them that much??
‘I think it’s a shame we’re stuck with the people in there now for an extra 14 months without voting someone in when we would have normally had the election, in September of next year,? said village resident and business owner Robert Flath. ‘I’ve heard people talking about a recall and I would be happy to sign the petition.?
Nivelt said she wasn’t happy about the extension, but said there was no way of getting around it.
‘The same thing would happen whether we did it now or next September,? she said. ‘It shouldn’t be a personal or political decision. The bottom line is, it will save money.?
Green wasn’t sure why residents wouldn’t have voted for it had it been put on the ballot, but she didn’t want to wait and lose more money. She noted this issue was first brought before the council about three years ago.
‘We could be using the money saved for roads, which are the most desperately needed improvement in the village at the moment, in my opinion,? Green said. ‘If we waited (for a vote in September) it would be another three years before we consolidated and could start saving money. This is not because I wanted to extend terms, it was strictly to save money.?
Kassuba explained that she voted no because the residents who spoke at the public hearing and at Monday’s meeting requested it go to a vote of the people and she feels that request should be honored.
‘I feel the residents elected all of us to serve the terms established at the time and date of the previous election,? she said. ‘I don’t think any of our terms should be extended when there are citizens in the village who want to have a voice in it. I don’t think it’s right when the council arbitrarily votes to change their own terms and add to them when the residents have indicated they want a voice.?
Kassuba said she is unsure if she will serve out her now extended term.