The Charter Commission met for the first time on Tuesday, November 23. I’m not sure whether to call it their first meeting, since they talk about an upcoming first meeting. At some point, when the Charter Commission’s web page is up, the official recording should be available, but in the meantime, you can listen to Part 1 here, in which they elect a chair by a 5-4 vote, and discuss dates for meetings and the first public hearing. And Part 2 here, where David Olson and Ouida Young explain the Open Meeting Law, which Ouida Young thinks has a “chilling effect” and “imposes a huge burden on boards and commissions.” And which Brooke Lipsitt, who seems to be learning about OML for the first time, thinks means that this or any board that meets every two weeks “is extremely constrained in the amount of work that it can get done.” Yikes!
Thanks to my YMCA buddy Ernie, who was going to the meeting anyway, for recording while I was home nursing a cold. He reports that even sitting at the table, which he was allowed to do with the recorder, it was very hard to actually hear. He hopes that microphones will be utilized in future meetings so the public will be better able to hear, especially if meetings continue to be around a table in the City Hall cafeteria.
Except for the December 9th meeting, Rm 211 (formerly Rm 222) has been set aside for Charter Commission meetings. This meeting was held in the cafeteria because all other rooms were in use.
The nine members of the Commission are committed to following the Open Meeting Law and completing the review of the charter in the next 16 months.
Who was elected chair?
Josh Krintzman, 5-4 over Rhanna Kidwell, then they made it “by acclamation.” And Rhanna was the only nominee for vice chair. They also had to elect a Clerk, and there was some reluctance to be the only one (in the absence of an outside minutes-taker), so that office is shared. They really need an outside note-taker so all the members can fully participate, but with their limited budget, sounds like they’ll need an “intern.” Could actually be a great project for a government major from one of the colleges, if the law permits that.
I hope they push the charter commission rules, so they include a sentence or two (or more) on updating technology.
Congratulations to Josh and Rhanna. This is an excellent beginning.
The political opportunistic operatives of the League are already in play. Listen closely and you will hear the subtle innuendo positioning leadership to back a city councilwoman or 2 in 2 years. Remember the League by its’ own admission cannot back candidates; that defaults in a politically active municipality to strategic economic elitism, behind the scenes opaque transparency. Sure, it’s legal, lawful, but morally bankrupt of community character conscience.
As one who took notes from the 1970 charter reform, the insider politics will serve no one but themselves in the short term. Perhaps it would be foolish to trust that these political operatives will do what’s best for future generations. Member questions are many times purposely stated to eliminate and redirect from the best for all track – it’s not always what the member might say; but what is not stated. This bogs down true progressive change which should be marketable on its own accord to the voter’s final approval.