CHILLICOTHE, Ohio — As the November elections loom, the atmosphere at Monday’s Chillicothe City Council meeting was palpably charged. Central to the debate was a measure proposing dedicated parking for local law enforcement, a topic that shed light on deep-rooted political divisions.
Ever since liberal Mayor Luke Feeney introduced paid surface lot parking meters two years prior, law enforcement officials, ranging from dispatchers to administrators without take-home cars, have been beleaguered by parking citations outside the law enforcement complex in downtown. Sheriff George Lavender came to a recent council meeting and noted that even vehicles with law enforcement plates have not been immune. “I do not think that law enforcement is above the law,” Lavender said, “but the deputies’ duties sometimes impede them from stopping every two hours to feed the meters.”
Safety committee chairwoman Julie Preston, who is challenging Feeney in the upcoming November election, advocated for the plan to allocate parking for police. With her history as a retired city police officer, Preston understands the inherent parking challenges, especially given the shared downtown complex between the city and county. In a post-council interview, Preston remarked, “Parking has long been an issue since the county and city started sharing the building. The legislation doesn’t favor one agency over another. It’s not just a Sheriff issue; it’s also an issue for the police department.”
Preston added that the spots are “first come, first serve” and if the public are using them, then the spots are therefore spoken for until someone leaves.
The evening’s vote, however, laid bare party lines. Republicans rallied in favor of the parking allocation for the dedicated men and women in uniform, while Democrats, including Deidre Nickerson, Jamie Brown, and Dustin Proehl, voiced their opposition, seemingly in alignment with Feeney’s liberal stance.
Sixth ward councilman Jamie Brown said, “I think our number one duty as council members is to express the best interest for the city. I believe it is in the best interest of the city to develop plans that are not reactionary… I think it prioritizes the county’s interest and, as city council members, I think that is problematic.”
Upon deeper inspection, the legislation appears balanced, with ten spots each earmarked for city police officers and deputy Sheriffs. Preston expressed her confusion post-meeting, noting the 50/50 split for both agencies and questioning the accusations of bias. When asked for rebuttal, Brown tried to formulate a cogent and coherent sentence but stumbled.
The partisan divide, emerging just days before a pivotal election — with early voting already under way — holds potential implications for voters, offering a lens into the core beliefs of key figures and their approach to city governance.
Notably, another contentious point was the proposed $1.65 million allocation for the renovation of a building at 400 East 7th Street. Mayor Feeney envisions transforming a former Pepsi factory into a consolidated city hall. However, Dr. Allison Henderson, Fifth Ward councilwoman who is running for at-large staunchly opposed this initiative. She criticized the project as financially imprudent, advocating for the more cost-effective use of existing city-owned assets.
The meeting wasn’t solely about parking or renovations. The packed agenda also included bond issues like:
- Extending the Chillicothe Municipal Court Victim Witness Assistance program and accepting related grant monies.
- Creation of three new sub-funds of the Sewer Fund.
- Funds allocation for street repairs, the Belleview Avenue project, and more.
- Appropriating an insurance reimbursement for Fire Department vehicle repairs.
- Issuing bonds for city parking lot improvements, city building renovations, and acquisition of equipment like backhoes, plows, and police vehicles.
Importantly, a consolidated bond issue proposal also featured on the list. Dr. Henderson’s opposition to the 7th Street project especially drew attention, as she critiqued Mayor Feeney’s vision as wasteful, emphasizing alternative, cost-efficient options available to the city.
With such heated debates, the next council meeting is held after the election, and the temperature in the room is expected to be starkly different.
