Commissioners back votes

Seven commissioners split 4-3 on city manager's firing
Andy Ouriel
Mar 29, 2014

But the scales barely tipped to one side, severing any notion of a united front among these seven elected officials amid a controversial decision.

Each commissioner offered a unique perspective as to why they did or didn’t vote to fire Ard:

Yes votes:

“With the difficulties the city has had over the past two years, it’s better for the community that we select another city manager” — Wes Poole

“Nobody on our side is spiking the football. This is not a great day for the city of Sandusky. This is a painful thing for all of us to go through. For our city to move forward and for our vision to be implemented, we need a change at the top” — Dick Brady

“We just decided that the job wasn’t being done the way we wanted it, and we needed to have someone else in there” — Dennis Murray Jr.

“It’s a difficult decision for me. When I was elected, I was elected to represent all the citizens of Sandusky. My decision is based upon what I feel is best for all the citizens” — Naomi Twine

No votes:

“I have seen no reason to terminate Ms. Ard. I don’t think she has done anything to deserve a termination to this point” — Jeff Smith

“I supported her from the beginning. I feel that the big thing lacking here is support for our city manager” — Julie Farrar

“I do feel the city manager has done all she can do in the time between her latest evaluation and her latest performance plan. I am not sure what more we can expect from her” — Scott Schell

Watch the vote in the player below

Comments

Ralph J.

To quote Murray "“We just decided that the job wasn’t being done the way we wanted it, and we needed to have someone else in there” — Dennis Murray Jr." WE?? What does WE mean?

Julie R.

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Personal attacks (including: name calling, presumption of guilt or guilt by association, insensitivity, or picking fights).

FantasticFred

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Personal attacks (including: name calling, presumption of guilt or guilt by association, insensitivity, or picking fights).

Steve P

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Personal attacks (including: name calling, presumption of guilt or guilt by association, insensitivity, or picking fights).

sandusky2012

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Personal attacks (including: name calling, presumption of guilt or guilt by association, insensitivity, or picking fights).

Steve P

Why was my comment removed, when it only stated that she was dismissed because she did not have the management of this newspaper. on speed dial. How is that in any way a violation of the newspaper's policy, unless any criticisms of management is a violation.

Matt Westerhold

The comment was removed because it was an inaccurate statement, Steve P. The reasons for the termination were documented by the commission and reported by the Register. The vote taken was shown live at sanduskyregister.com and is available for demand viewing. The Register is under no obligation to provide a platform for inaccurate statements, or a platform for attacks on the Register, or others. I hope that assists you in having a better understanding.

Steve P

Matt, thank you for your reply. My mistake I thought this was an opinion forum for the readers that allowed disagreement with the management as long as it was in a civil manner. Why wasn't Sandusky2012 comment at 10:18PM removed, it appears to be defamation?

Nemesis

Sorry, Matt, but that dog won't hunt. Your own editorial board is seldom shy about questioning the official reasons given by the commission for their actions. Steve's observation that Ard might have benefitted from courting the favor/support of the local media (i.e. the Register) is a perfectly valid and debatable assertion.

If you really believe his statemend was factually, empirically, and provably inaccurate, then why are you in business, since the implicit corollary to that position is that the press is ineffectual in affecting the outcome of important matters in the community.

sandtown born a...

Farrar seemed a little steamed, I guess things didn't go her way, nice comforting touch on her way past Ard AWWWWWWWWWWW.

Just a Girl

Seems to me like they're personal friends. Farrar needs to judge her work performance and vote as her boss, not her friend. Or abstain for conflict of interest.

Julie R.

Why was my comment removed? All I did was answer the question as to who Murray meant by "we" when he said: "WE just decided that the job wasn't being done the way WE wanted it, and WE needed to have someone else in there."

Truth hurt or what?

Matt Westerhold

See the reply to Steve P., Julie R. You're going to have to be more careful observing the guidelines if you want to continue commenting as the Register will be moving to a new platform that will enable an improved commenting format. 

SamAdams

By "improved," are you planning to remove anonymity? You know, the anonymity that the vast majority of posters here have said they don't intend to operate without?

Tell you what, Matt: You're a private business. You can refuse anonymity all you want because it's within your rights to do so. But the next time y'all have a "confidential source," I expect full identifying information to be published with every story! And if you DON'T intend to do that, ask yourself why you don't. The answer to THAT question is exactly the same answer you ought to be giving when anonymity from posters here is considered!

T. A. Schwanger

###

@ M. Westerhold.

Can we expect that the Register will report on the details of Ard's exiting agreement--especially financial terms?