Council votes unanimously to pass legislation to avert city shutdown

by Dan Holland

Dec. 23 special council meeting

Members of Broadview Heights City Council at a special Dec. 23 meeting voted 6-0 to pass an ordinance for a temporary appropriation for current expenses and other expenditures in the city for the period of Jan. 1-15, 2025. 

The meeting, called by Mayor Sam Alai, was necessary to fill a two-week gap in the city’s budget that would have called for a complete shutdown of all city services during the first two weeks of 2025. 

The measure was necessary due to a 4-3 vote cast during a Dec. 16 council meeting to approve the city’s 2025 operating budget, which will not take effect until Jan. 16. 

The vote tally, which included a no vote from councilpersons Glenn Goodwin, Joe Price and Brian Dunlap, failed to meet the threshold of a two-thirds supermajority needed for the budget to take effect in less than 30 days.

Councilperson Glenn Goodwin, who made prior plans to be out of town during Christmas week, was not present at the Dec. 23 meeting.

During a council work session prior to the Dec. 16 regular meeting, Goodwin and Dunlap both expressed concerns regarding the tethering together of the salaries of the mayor, police chief and fire chief. An ordinance passed in 2016 specifies that the mayor must be paid 5% more than the higher paid of the two chiefs, with the chiefs both being paid 14% more than a police lieutenant or assistant fire chief. The salaries, which require council approval, are established through union-negotiated contracts.

According to public records, Alai’s salary in 2024 was $141,648, with both chiefs earning $134,903.

The police chief and fire chief, along with the heads of several departments, during the Dec. 23 meeting stressed the need for council to pass the stopgap measure to avoid a two-week shutdown. A number of Broadview Heights residents in attendance also voiced strong opinions on the matter.

Resident Steve Gwiazda chastised Dunlap and Price for their no vote on the budget. 

“I’ve been part of this city all of my life, and I can’t deal with this; this is out of control,” he said. “You guys are voted in for a reason; the reason is to actually protect our citizens and take care of the city. If you put your personal beliefs in front of the citizens, then you shouldn’t sit in this office. You shouldn’t sit there, because you don’t deserve it. I hope every voter in this room thinks about each one of you guys and looks at [how you voted] in December.”

Marissa Miroglotta, a healthcare worker, told councilmembers she relies on the city’s service department in wintertime to keep the roads plowed and salted in order to be able to safely reach her patients.

“The willingness of [certain] councilmembers to gamble with the lives of its residents and hold its employees hostage for the sake of the quality of some roads, or whatever political games you guys are playing, is shameful and inhumane,” she said. “We are all going to consider what you did in 2025; Councilman Dunlap, Councilman Price and Councilman Goodwin, if he would have had the courage to show his face tonight. People’s lives are at stake, and you should be ashamed of yourselves for the way that you voted.”

Amanda Zemko, a nurse, noted how her profession is consistently ranked as one of the highest from an ethics perspective. She questioned why an email between herself and Dunlap, in which he expressed a desire for the Ohio Ethics Commission to look into the tethering of officials’ salaries together, had not been investigated at an earlier date.

“Why was it not sent to the Ohio Ethics Commission at that time, before it was voted on and approved [in 2016], and why hasn’t it been sent at any time between then and now?” she asked. “If you think that it should be looked at, do it at the right time before the next mayoral terms when you can make changes legally; not at the last minute of the last month of the year triggering a city shutdown.” 

“You serve the people of this city,” Demko continued. “You are supposed to be serving us, and you did not take our safety into consideration when you voted no on this budget.”

Price asked Finance Director David Pfaff if the temporary budget – nearly $2 million – was reflective of a 15-day budget.

“I took one-twelfth of the yearly budget to cover one month,” Pfaff replied. “That’s because some of our bills will be for the whole month, and I have to have the money appropriated for the full month to cover us. After the 15 days, the money that’s left goes away, and the money approved for 2025 goes into effect.”

“So then, we’re not going to overlay and add revenue on top of the revenue that was passed last week?” Price asked Pfaff, to which he responded “No.”

Price asked finance committee chairperson Brian Wolf, who represents Ward 2 on Council, why the budget had not been brought forward to council sooner, adding that he felt Wolf was “unprepared at the time” and accused him of not being “transparent” with other council members regarding the budget process.

“The first time I heard from Mr. Pfaff that we can’t pay any bills starting Jan. 1 was after the [Dec. 16] vote,” said Price.

Wolf asked Pfaff if he seemed to be adequately prepared for budget hearings and whether he had spoken with him about the budget prior to council’s vote. 

“The budget process we followed this year was the same thing we did [in past years] – we did nothing different this year,” Pfaff answered.

Alai referenced comments made during the Dec. 16 meeting.

“It is important to know that [Law Director] Vince Ruffa, Mr. Pfaff and other members of council made it very clear to last week’s three no votes, that the budget approval and discussions about salaries are completely unrelated,” said Alai. “One does not affect the other.”

Alai then displayed a chart showing the date on which the city budget was voted on during the past five years in reverse order: Dec. 16, 18, 19, 28 and 21.

“We are not waiting until the last minute; this is how the budget works in this city,” said Alai. “I was blindsided by the three no votes on December 16.”

“I never challenged what anyone was being paid,” said Dunlap. “But I have to be fiscally responsible …. I’m not looking to take back anyone’s pay, but I truly think if the ethics commission doesn’t take a look at this, it could be a large and improper thing that this city has done.”“Mr. Price and I turned down the budget for two different reasons, and we weren’t conniving and manipulating politically, because I don’t know how to do that, because I’m not a politician. I’m just an old, retired fireman.”