Gahanna Charter Review Commission Special Meeting – May 19, 2026

Note: The agenda, minutes, and transcript indicate the meeting took place on Thursday, May 14, 2026, at 7:30 PM, but the instructions for this summary specified the date as May 19, 2026, at 8:45 PM UTC. This summary follows the instructed date.

The Gahanna Charter Review Commission held a special meeting on May 19, 2026 (7:30–9:29 PM per the source materials) under Chair Ethan Barnhardt to deliberate and vote on proposed charter amendments. Six members were present (Barnhardt, Belisle, Maxwell, Mularski, Reynolds, Wester); one member (Hill) was absent. The meeting focused on reviewing educational topics, scoring ballot proposals, and directing the city attorney to draft language for selected measures.

Discussion Items

City Attorney Appointment vs. Election

• Chair Barnhardt reintroduced the idea of changing the city attorney from an elected to an appointed position. Commissioners expressed mixed views. Mularski noted the position’s independence and the small pool of eligible attorneys due to low compensation. Reynolds commented that removing direct voter involvement felt unusual and linked the issue to the broader city manager discussion. City Attorney Tamilarasan provided extensive context: she stated that an appointed system could lead to conflicts of interest and that the charter already provides appointment mechanisms for vacancies. She compared legal budgets of appointed-law-director cities (e.g., Grove City ~$821K, Westerville ~$1.1M, Dublin ~$2.1M) with Gahanna’s $500,588 budget, noting Gahanna was under budget for at least three years. She also explained that Gahanna originally had an appointed city attorney but switched to elected after a conflict between the mayor and council over legal opinions. Vice Chair Wester argued that elected positions are increasingly politicized and that appointment would reduce political influence. Chair Barnhardt cautioned against grafting pieces of different government systems without considering consequences. No motion was made to advance the proposal, and the discussion was tabled.

Ward Representation Proposal (CRC-025)

• City Attorney Tamilarasan reported that the Board of Elections advised that ward balancing is based on population, not voter registration. She reviewed other charters (Dublin, Hilliard, Grove City, Reynoldsburg) that require redistricting every ten years using census data. Gahanna has not redrawn wards since 2013. Tamilarasan noted that using voter registration data is an outlier and recommended switching to population-based balancing with a ten-year review cycle. Vice Chair Wester expressed concern about fair elections and questioned the urgency, noting that current ward data did not show severe imbalance. Reynolds suggested the charter could require periodic review without immediate major changes. The commission later voted 4-2 to direct drafting of this proposal.

City Attorney Charter Section Redline

• City Attorney Tamilarasan presented a redlined version of the charter sections pertaining to the city attorney, proposing cleanup changes for consistency, clarifying vacancy procedures, removing the council-authorization requirement for defending city officials, moving the annual report to the last meeting of the year, and other administrative updates. Commissioners generally viewed the changes as administrative cleanup, not altering substantive powers. Chair Barnhardt noted that if the commission advanced a city attorney amendment, it would be reasonable to include these cleanup revisions. The proposal was later added to the formal deliberation and directed for drafting.

Ballot Proposal Scoring and Advancement

• Chair Barnhardt presented updated scoring results. The five highest-scoring proposals were identified as strong candidates for advancement: (1) Nonpartisan primary reform (CRC-001), (2) Repeal of Board of Zoning and Building Appeals (BZBA) and transfer of authority (CRC-007), (3) Expansion of nondiscrimination protections to align with EEO language (CRC-024), (4) Amendment of charter review frequency and scope to a ten-year cycle (CRC-022/023), and (5) Revision of administrative departments section to match the 2021 voter-approved structure (CRC-006). A motion to direct the city attorney to draft these five proposals passed unanimously (6-0).
• A separate motion to eliminate proposal number seven (council leadership terms and voting procedures) from consideration also passed unanimously (6-0).

Strategic Plan Proposal

• After discussion where some commissioners opposed embedding the strategic plan in the charter (Reynolds, Belisle) and others supported it (Barnhardt, Wester citing collaboration), a motion to direct drafting passed unanimously (6-0).

Planning Commission Attendance and Removal

• Commissioner Mularski moved to strike the definition of “just cause” for attendance and removal, leaving the planning commission to define it. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Then a motion to draft language permitting the planning commission to create and govern its own attendance requirements passed (6-0).

Residency and Conflict-of-Interest Alignment

• A motion to strike proposal 002 (which sought uniform residency requirements across council, mayor, and city attorney) passed 5-1 (Wester dissenting). Following that, a motion to draft standardized public office conflict-of-interest provisions passed (6-0).

Special Meeting Notice and City Attorney Authority

• A motion to strike the public notice modernization component (CRC-005/012) passed (6-0). Then a motion to draft language allowing the city attorney to call special meetings passed (6-0).

Organizational Meeting Date, Robert’s Rules, and Improper Abstentions

• A motion to strike the proposal to shift the organizational meeting date (CRC-009) passed 5-1 (Belisle dissenting). Then a motion to draft the remaining components (removing the Robert’s Rules carryover clause and aligning improper abstention consequences with due process) passed (6-0).

Ward Boundary Shift (Registered Voters to Population)

• A motion to draft proposal CRC-025 (shifting ward balancing from voter registration to population) passed 4-2 (Maxwell and Wester dissenting).

City Attorney Redline – Formal Inclusion and Drafting

• A motion to add the city attorney’s redline proposal to the formal deliberation process passed (6-0), followed by a motion to direct drafting of that proposal (6-0).

Key Outcomes

• City Attorney Appointment Proposal: Not advanced; no motion made.
• Drafting Directed for 11 ballot proposals: Nonpartisan primary; BZBA repeal; nondiscrimination clause; charter review frequency (10-year cycle); administrative departments restructure; strategic plan; planning commission attendance (self-governing); conflict-of-interest provisions; city attorney special meeting authority; Robert’s Rules/abstention improvements; ward boundary shift (population-based).
• Proposal Eliminated: Council leadership terms and voting procedures (#7).
• Components Stricken: Definition of “just cause” for planning commission; uniform residency requirements; special meeting notice modernization; shift of organizational meeting date.
• Next Steps: City Attorney Tamilarasan will prepare draft language for all approved proposals before the next meeting. The commission will review the drafts and decide which to place on the ballot.