Isn't this hard to do?

Is it difficult to implement a process to take ideas submitted by the public, select the few that that the Charter Commission thinks may have merit, gather the supporting material to make a decision one way or the other, give the public a chance to a formal review, form an acceptable proposal, and vote on it twice in public meetings?

The short answer is, "No!" You do it with lists.

The Charter Commission already has a list of the ideas submitted on the Articles in the Charter that they are focused on. And that list is a great starting point. Think of it this way: the list is an ordered set of items and each of those items is a suggestion for a change to something in the Charter.

In an electronic form like this blog, we could make each suggested idea be a separate post. A better example would be a word processing document where we could give each idea a separate page (or more if it required more space than a single page). The next idea would start on a fresh page. This is important because each idea will travel through the process depending on its own value and the support that this value generates among the Commissioners. Think about printing this document where the list is now a stack of pages. You can pull out the page(s) for an idea while considering that idea without affecting any other ideas. If it has support it, moves to the next list. If not, it goes to the UnSupported list.

It turns out that this process can be implemented with just 6 lists. The first is the list of suggested ideas that the public contributes. You can see this list on the Charter Commission web site. Currently, they have the parts of the list for the Articles of the Charter that they are examining.

The second list would be for those ideas that are not supported by a majority of the Commission. Some may not be supported from the beginning and some may lose support as more information about the problem raised or the solution offered becomes known.

Let's look at the process again to identify the other lists:





The first procedural vote separates the collected ideas into those that are UnSupported and those that are Under Consideration which is the third list. This also triggers input on this topic from MTAS and the City and puts this idea on the next agenda.

The second procedrual vote separates ideas Under Consideration into those that are UnSupported on the basis of the new information or they may become Under Review which is the fourth list. Being added to the Under Review list triggers the idea being added to the agenda of the next Public Hearing and the following regular meeting to review what was heard at the Hearing.

At that next regular meeting after the Public Hearing, the Committee discusses everything known about this idea including the original information from its submission, the input provided by MTAS and the City, and the input from the public at the recent Public Hearing or from other communications. They may reword the idea to their liking and reform it into a proposal which is put to a vote. As a result of that vote the idea/proposal is either UnSupported or it becomes a Proposal Under Review Pending Second Vote which is the fifth list. Going on this list triggers putting the proposal on the agenda of the next meeting for a second reading and vote.

At the following meeting, the proposal faces a second review vote and if successful, it is moved to the Proposed Changes Pending Final Review list which is our sixth and final list. If it fails to show support at this second reading, it moves to the UnSupported list.

To sumarize, there is a list to collect ideas and a list to hold UnSupported ideas. Successful ideas face 4 votes and each of the favorable outcomes of those votes will move it along the path to becoming a proposed change to our City Charter by putting that idea on the next list.

Here is a more formal accounting of the lists and their contents. Most often went an idea moves to the next list, we will add the date of the vote and any information gathered that is needed for the next vote.

List of Lists
1. Ideas Collected
2. UnSupported Ideas
3. Ideas Under Consideration
4. Ideas Under Review
5. Proposals Under Review Pending Second Vote
6. Proposed Changes Pending Final Review

Ideas Collected List Contents
1. Section of Charter Original Language
2. Section of Charter Proposed Language
3. Who Submitted
4. When Submitted
5. Reasons for Submission

UnSupported Ideas List Contents
1. Data from Ideas Collected List
2. Date Voted to UnSupported Ideas List

Ideas Under Consideration List Contents
1. Data from Ideas Collected List
2. Date Voted to Ideas Under Consideration List

Ideas Under Review List Contents
1. Data from Ideas Under Consideration List
2. Material Supplied by MTAS, Affected City Organization, etc
3. Date Voted to Ideas Under Review List

Proposals Under Review Pending Second Vote List Contents
1. Data from Ideas Under Review List
2. Material from Public Review Meeting
3. Wording Supported by Commission
4. Date of First Review Vote

Proposed Changes Pending Final Review List Contents
1. Data from Proposals Under Review Pending Second Vote List
2. Date of Second Review Vote

Six lists to track the outcomes of the four votes is not tough. In the end, all ideas will either wind up on the UnSupported Ideas list, or a few will survive to the Proposed Changes Pending Final Review list. The only real issue is that single ideas must be able to be taken from one list and moved to the next without affecting other ideas along the way.