What I would like to see

A process that would be effective and open for considering citizen proposed changes to the City Charter should have a few basic features.

• Ideas submitted by the public need to be gathered and grouped by the Article/Section of the Charter that is affected by the proposed idea. This list needs to be made public to stimulate other contributions.


• Every idea needs to be voted on to determine if it should be considered. If, as we would expect, there are many more ideas than would be supported by the Commission, it makes sense to vote on the ones that some Commissioners like and then hold a vote to "UnSupport" the remainder. This is a gatekeeping or triage function that will reduce large possibilities to a manageable workload.


• Once an idea has been voted to be considered, the Commission will ask MTAS to comment on its legality and on solutions that other Home Rule Charters have made for the issue that this idea addresses. The Commission will also ask the affected departments of the city and perhaps other experts to also comment. The idea will then be placed on the agenda of the next meeting to discuss the results of these inquiries and vote for further review of the idea.


• At the next meeting, the item is discussed including the requested information from MTAS, the City, etc. The Commission will then vote whether this idea warrants further review. If so, it is placed on the agendas of the next Public Hearing and the following meeting to discuss any public input from the Hearing or from email. If it fails this vote, the idea joins other UnSupported items.


• At the Public Hearing, when the item appears on the agenda, the public will be asked for comments.


• At the following Commission meeting, the original idea is reviewed along with MTAS, City, expert, and Public comments. The Commission decides on the wording and votes for the first time on this as a proposal. If it passes, it is placed on the agenda of the next meeting for a second reading. If not, it becomes UnSupported.


• At the last review meeting, the Commission votes for the second time on this proposal. If it passes, it is added to a list of "Proposals Pending Final Review" which will be taken up at the very end of this process. Once again, if it fails, it becomes UnSupported.


• Successful proposals will have passed two procedural votes and two review votes in its final form. It will also have appeared on 4 meeting/hearing agendas to alert the public of its progress


• The Commission will have adequate input before being required to vote on any item. If the required data is not yet available, the vote should be tabled until the next meeting when the information is available.

I will propose this process to the Charter Commission during their July 10th meeting. If anyone has comments on this, please let me know.