REPORT CARD: Brian Lowdermilk - Ward 3
Not Every Question is a Good Question - Some Just Foster Obstruction
Too often Lowdermilk asks the wrong questions at the wrong times, relentlessly pushes misguided insights and votes in lockstep with council leadership, even when his own questions should lead him to vote the other way.
His discussion and protracted questioning of minutiae never seems to help move an issue toward resolution; rather, it delays positive momentum.
Here are a few examples:
Lowdermilk was among several council members who continued to drag out the process of having the city join the regional dispatch center, two years after Stow voters decidedly voted in favor of the plan (58%-42%). Despite numerous council discussions, plus significant input from the police and fire chiefs, and communication with county officials charged with planning the center, Lowdermilk ultimately voted against joining the effort.
See comments from Finance Director Jim Costello who summed up reasons for council to vote in favor of the regional dispatch center:
See Lowdermilk's and the rest of council's discussion on Jan. 27, 2023, before taking the final vote to join the regional dispatch center, which passed 5-1.
Lowdermilk gets stuck on details he doesn't know or understand as reasons to disapprove city plans, ignoring the advice, expertise and experience of city officials whose job it is to handle such details.
During the May 25, 2023 Finance Committee hearing on a proposal from the mayor for a charter amendment to approve a tax levy for a proposed rec center, Lowdermilk asked Chief of Staff and Public Service Director Nick Wren why there wasn’t more visual detail of the pool on a preliminary, conceptual drawing of the proposed rec center and how many pieces of equipment the rec center would have.
Here’s the preliminary plan given to council on March 23. Ultimately, the administration withdrew the legislation from council’s consideration for this year. See the exchange here:
During the July 13, 2023, Committee of the Whole discussion of three new charter amendments proposed by City Council President Jeremy McIntire, Lowdermilk said he agrees that a “State of the City” speech should not be a charter amendment and proposes how that could be better facilitated, but then, 1 minute later, votes to move McIntire’s charter amendment to City Council’s agenda that night for approval.
See Lowdermilk's comments:
During the May 25, 2023, Committee of the Whole discussion Lowdermilk made numerous strange statements and assumptions about the administration’s efforts to update the compensation plan for non-union employees:
He advocated for fewer benefits for city employees, based on what he determined Stow residents get from private employers;
He stated an interest in keeping overall compensation as low as possible in order to be good stewards of taxpayers’ dollars, even though these employees haven’t had merit increases in 15 years and the city of Stow had a carryover of $10 million from 2022;
He dialed into the fact that most of the Stow employees impacted by this compensation plan already earn as much as employees in other cities. The consultant’s report showed that some Stow employees are earning competitive wages while others lag far behind their peers in other nearby cities. That doesn't eliminate the need for a plan that would provide regular review of city employees' wages.
Lowdermilk made the assumption that if the compensation plan outlines a process for annual performance reviews and merit increases of 0%-6% that all employees would receive 6% increases annually; that department supervisors and the mayor would not use discretion in awarding merit raises. The compensation plan does not provide for maximum merit increases each year; rather, it designates that supervisors would have discretion in either awarding merit raises or not based on annual performance reviews.
See Lowdermilk's comments during the May 25 meeting:
Lowdermilk seemed to defend the rights of homeowners who refuse or are unable to maintain or fix their homes to the point of allowing them to be condemned. At a September 14, 2023, Committee of the Whole discussion about legislation requested by the Chief Building Inspector to clean up language regarding the appeals process, Lowdermilk questioned the deputy law director about whether homeowners are given enough time to fix their homes after they are condemned. But, what he missed was how long a home is likely in severe disrepair before it is condemned and the impact on the rest of the neighborhood of allowing these properties to languish perpetually.
See the exchange here:
Lowdermilk no doubt expresses his own opinions on the various matters that come before council. But he lacks the independence to vote his opinion – more often than not, he votes in support of whatever position Council President Jeremy McIntire and Ward 2 Councilwoman Sindi Harrison promote.
Additionally, many of his concerns come from a bias of working in private industry without an appreciation or understanding that city governments do not and cannot function like businesses. City governments are not created to be profit centers; while everyone wants responsible use of their tax dollars, we shouldn’t make determinations of a program based on profit or loss; cities provide services, programs and amenities that residents in many cases would not otherwise have.
Lowdermilk served on council for many years before being term limited out. He sat out for a term and then ran again. He opposed two of Mayor Pribonic’s re-appointments to commissions because he thought they’d been there too long. We feel the same about Lowdermilk. It’s time for a change.
Comments