On Tuesday, Cincinnati voters take to the polls in what will be the city's most important election in more than 75 years. They won't just be electing a mayor and city council. They'll be launching the new “stronger mayor” system that was approved three years ago. And they'll decide on reforms that could change that system even more.

        So it shouldn't be difficult to find a good reason to get out and vote Tuesday. Here are five:

1. A stronger mayor

        Why vote for the next mayor?

        Because it's been 76 years since Cincinnatians could act like grown-ups and directly pick their mayor. He's going to be in office twice as long — a four-year term instead of two. He'll have more power. The winner will be the one person in charge instead of nine bosses, and he can set a clear agenda for the city — and this region.

        The new mayor can propose and introduce legislation. He no longer can vote, but for the first time he can veto legislation — harebrained schemes or wasteful pork. It will take six council votes to override his veto. That's power. And there's more.

        He appoints committee heads. He appoints the vice mayor.

        The next mayor will appoint the new city manager, and can start the process to fire the manager. The mayor still needs five council votes to hire or fire the manager. The power isn't absolute, as in New York, Chicago or Indianapolis. But it's the mayor's choice. The new mayor will be more involved in operations.

        Cincinnati's first stronger mayor could set precedents and define the office for years to come. A weak or clueless mayor could defeat hopes for accountability.

        If Issue 5 passes, 98 top city posts will be removed from civil service and opened up to national searches. The new mayor will have a stronger say in those choices. He will need to push for the best candidates and resist pressures to reward party members or scapegoat the police and fire chiefs.

        The mayor still runs council meetings. He should keep them civil. He “reviews and comments” on the budget. Armed with a veto, he can make his “comments” pack a wallop.

        Direct election means that a mayor can finally be held accountable for the city's performance.

2. A new council

        More than ever, the new mayor needs five votes on council and council members will need the mayor. Cooperation, if not peace, could break out at last — if voters pick a smart mix of candidates.

        This council also can redefine itself. Charter changes could make for more thoughtful policy-making and less micromanaging; less pandering to narrow interest groups and more focus on the city as a whole.

        City managers have complained for years that council members bombard city departments with requests for reports. But the city manager also has been caught withholding information from council. A more sensible balance is needed for sharing information. If the new council doesn't exercise voluntary restraint, the new mayor and manager should apply the brakes.

        The new council needs to get beyond votes split along racial lines. Respect starts with each other, and it should be required at council sessions.

        The next council faces costly decisions that could determine if Cincinnati recovers or fades: police reform, redesigned neighborhood housing and economic development departments, perhaps a new development authority, the Banks riverfront project and convention center expansion.

        The city has lost 9 percent of its population since 1990. Any candidates who think that's an occasion for pork and polarization don't belong on council. Voters should elect the best and brightest who can be resourceful in tight-budget times.

3. The city manager

        The last time Cincinnati hired a new city manager was September 1993. The new mayor will pick a new manager, with council's advice and consent. The 1999 Charter change shifted power from the manager to the new stronger mayor.

        But the Charter here hasn't been abolished, and the city manager remains a powerful post. The next manager will set precedents. That hiring could be the mayor's most important move.

        In May, City Manager John Shirey agreed to leave in December, but he was a lame duck even before that. The policy drift this year has been costly. The new mayor, council and manager need to act fast to make Cincinnati more competitive and resolve volatile issues.

        The new manager will answer to one boss instead of nine. That alone ought to make the job easier.

        If Cincinnati is to regain its place in the ranks of the best-run cities, it still needs a manager who is more than just a mayor's aide or political operative. Rival cities have been picking off conventions and corporate offices from Cincinnati. We need a manager who can make city departments more responsive to developers, businesses and taxpayers.

        Some urge voters to lower their expectations. Why? We want action. We should expect results.

4. City hiring

        Although some voters may think otherwise, Issue 5 is not just about firing the police chief. It has the potential to change city government profoundly.

        The proposed Charter amendment would remove civil service protection from 98 top city positions, including the police and fire chiefs. That allows nationwide hiring searches and makes it easier to fire those who do not measure up. The 98 positions include department heads and assistants, plus all professionals in the housing and economic development departments.

        Opponents say it will politicize the police chief, who would be vulnerable to pressure from the mayor, or could be fired as a scapegoat when problems arise. They point to examples such as Cleveland, which has had eight chiefs in seven years. They say it would increase the chances for corruption.

        That's a concern to be watched, but ultimately, elected officials have to answer to the voters. The value of Issue 5 is in reforming a fat and complacent bureaucracy. It would encourage competition, innovation and accountability.

5. Campaign finance

        Listening to all those city council candidates' campaign pitches is one thing. Paying for them is quite another. If Issue 6 passes, that's just what Cincinnati taxpayers will have to do.

        Billed as campaign finance reform, it would limit contributions to mayor and council candidates — a notion that already has been ruled unconstitutional — and would give public campaign funding to candidates who limit their spending.

        Proponents equate campaign contributions to “bribes,” but the Supreme Court has said they are an exercise of free speech.

        Issue 6 advocates also say it's needed to keep big contributors from “buying” candidates, and to make elections more fair by allowing the “little guy” to run for office.

        But there's no lack of candidates being heard this year — 26 for council. Why force taxpayers to fund campaigns of candidates they oppose? Why add a budget item the city can ill-afford right now? Issue 6 is a costly mistake that will make local politics worse, not better.

Incumbent delivers subtle message as race winds down
Challenger hopes winds of change carry him to win
EDITORIAL: Why this election matters
Local races have close-up impact
Officers' acquittals the norm nationally
Program asks parents to promote diversity
Tristate A.M. Report
Troupe dances circles around its disabilities
BRONSON: Sticking point
HOWARD: Some Good News
PULFER: Suburbs watch
Block party rules upset some residents
Council race no contest in growing city
Mill Creek gets trees, shrubs
Killer gets rare chance to be heard
Boone Co. GOP rethinking Alexander
Fans' own rubber meets pavement
Growth stirs land debate
Jailbreak site now history HQ
Kentucky News Briefs
Ludlow officials get ready to pick a new police chief
Tighter lid on 'open records'