A New Lancaster City
To the People of the City of Lancaster,
You may or may not be aware of the possibility now of a Home Rule Charter. This possibility, in my opinion, is more powerful for us as a city than is being discussed. I do not blame the limited discussion on nefarious intent. The Third Class City Municipal Code, The Optional Charter Law, and the Home Rule Laws; they are all very long and complicated documents, and while someone can know the contents of those, it also requires and understanding of not only the United States Constitution, but the Pennsylvania Constitution in order to render a complete opinion when trying to work within the spaces that the superior governments have created for local law.
There has been concern about the fact that the City is pushing for the approval of this study to consider the possibilities, but it does not need to support the charter that is drafted. At this point I don’t think it is accusatory for to say the city has been pushing for a change in taxing powers, but that is not inherently bad. Frankly, it is an ask that can either be fulfilled or not. There is no mandate. Supporting the report that will be produced by the currently yet to be approved commission is a choice yet to be made, if it will even be allowed to be made. [1] We do not have, nor can we say for sure, what a proposed charter will look like. I want to make it clear that this can be a Home Rule Charter OR an Optional Plan. [2] These two have clear distinctions in the Home Rule Charter and Optional Plans Law. [3]
These two distinctions go beyond definition to the extent of existing separately in the §2924 titled “Specificity of recommendations.” [4] The subsection titled “Optional plan of government” has five paragraphs, with paragraph one containing three clauses for the possible structure of government. [5] This first paragraph and its clauses read as follows:
“(a) Optional plan of government.--
(1) If the government study commission report recommends the adoption or the amendment of any of the optional plans of government set forth in this subpart, except the optional county plan, the report of the commission may specify the following:
(i) That the municipal council shall consist of three, five, seven or nine members, except that under the small municipality plan and under the optional county plan the number of council members shall be as provided in sections 3073 (relating to election of council members) and 3092 (relating to county officers).
(ii) That the office of treasurer shall be omitted or that it shall be filled by election by the electors rather than by appointment.
(iii) That the office of controller shall be omitted or that it shall be filled by election by the electors rather than by appointment.”
However, the subsection titled “Home rule charter” is only one simple paragraph that reads as follows,
“(b) Home rule charter.--If the commission recommends the adoption of a home rule charter, it shall specify the number to be on the municipal council, all offices to be filled by election and whether elections shall be on an at-large, district or combination district and at-large basis.”
I would argue this means we have the ability to be very flexible with the amount of offices members beyond nine. At the time of writing I do not know that this prospect has ever been explored by a study commission. Unless this goes against the Federal and/or Pennsylvania Constitution, then it would require the opinion of the courts to determine validity, which as I understand requires the action to occur in the first place to require the court’s involvement.
[1] 53 Pa.C.S. Pt. III Subpt. E §2921(a)
[2] 53 Pa.C.S. Pt. III Subpt. E §2902
[3] Pennsylvania P.L. 242, No. 67 §10102
[4] 53 Pa.C.S. Pt. III Subpt. E §2924(a)
[5] 53 Pa.C.S. Pt. III Subpt. E §2924(b)
