At a meeting of the Mount Vernon Charter Review Commission, members reviewed a draft five‑page policies and procedures document intended to guide how the commission conducts meetings and prepares a final report, and discussed a package of subcommittee recommendations the commission will forward to the mayor and city council for consideration. Commissioners also elected Haley Pilgrim as chair and set a plan to return next month with a revised draft for a formal vote.

The policies and procedures draft lays out foundational items the commission says should guide deliberations and public access. It records that the commission consists of 15 resident members, establishes a quorum as a majority of appointed members, requires minutes and public availability of agendas, and directs that meetings comply with the New York State Open Meetings Law. The document also directs disclosure and recusal for conflicts of interest, states that officers have facilitative roles only and may not act unilaterally for the commission, and specifies that amendments to the procedures must be made by majority vote and circulated at least one meeting in advance.

Commissioners agreed to several clarifying edits before a final vote: add a short, simplified voting procedure (motion/second and majority vote) rather than formally adopting Robert's Rules of Order; explicitly allow the commission to forward recommendations to either the ballot by referendum or to the city council for legislative action; add language that minutes be presented and approved at the start of each meeting; and include a statement requiring periodic financial reporting to the commission so future members can see expenditures. Members asked that proposed changes be circulated to the full commission in advance so all members have time to review before a vote.

In a related discussion, a seven‑member subcommittee reported progress on recommendations drawn from the commission's earlier green‑team work and from meetings with Mayor Patterson Howard and city department leaders. The items the subcommittee said are intended to move forward before the commission legally dissolves this fall include:

- Creating a formal review process by which the planning department would advise on new developments, rezoning and land‑use proposals to ensure alignment with the city's comprehensive plan. Drafts will be prepared by the administration, presented to the commission for comment, and may be recommended to city council;

- Expanding the Capital Projects Board from five to seven members and adding certain staff (the city engineer as an ex officio member was discussed) so planning and building representation is present for capital and planning decisions;

- Recommending a charter change that would require appointed positions'job descriptions and minimum qualifications to be reviewed periodically; subcommittee members suggested tailoring those specifications through civil service or HR so they remain current without embedding detailed qualifications in the charter itself;

- Updating the charter language that requires the building code to be aligned with New York State code updates within six months (a change the mayor's team has already advanced) and similarly authorizing timely fire code updates;

- Recommending that the city codify an interagency working group known locally as the "bricks and mortar" committee to improve coordination among planning, building, water supply and the assessor's office; and

- Proposing restoration of a parking authority in the charter, contingent on New York State approval; the subcommittee described that as subject to state authorization and possible future effective dates tied to that approval.

Subcommittee members noted that some items the commission previously proposed as ballot measures (for example, an appointed comptroller and a city manager) did not pass as referendum items but that many other recommendations can move forward by legislative action at city council. Members and city staff discussed the different tracks for change: charter amendments that require mandatory or permissive referenda, and recommendations the city council can adopt without referendum. Commissioners asked staff and the mayor's office for legal review and confirmation of which items must go to a public vote and which can be advanced by council legislation.

Commissioners debated process issues the draft seeks to resolve. Among the operational clarifications requested were: remove the word "full" where the draft said "vote of the full commission" (to avoid implying unanimity is required), add a short paragraph specifying that minutes be presented and approved at the start of each meeting, require that materials that will be voted on be uploaded with the meeting agenda so the public can review them prior to a vote, and require a simple financial accounting of commission expenditures to be presented to the commission. Members also agreed to add explicit, simplified language around motions, seconds and majority votes and to circulate that language prior to the next meeting.

The commission elected Haley Pilgrim as chair following a nomination, a second and a raised‑hand vote by attending members; the transcript does not record names tied to the nomination, second or the hand‑count tally. The group then moved on to public comment and to scheduling follow‑up: the subcommittee will meet with planning staff this week to refine the planning‑review and capital‑projects proposals, and the mayor's team said it expects to provide drafts to the commission for review ahead of an early‑October meeting so the commission can vote on the finalized procedures and forward recommendations in a timely manner.

No formal adoption of the policies and procedures document occurred at this meeting; commissioners agreed to receive edits, circulate a revised draft in advance and return next month for a possible vote. The meeting closed after a motion to adjourn that was seconded and approved by voice/raised hands; the transcript does not include a numerical roll‑call tally for that motion.

Ending: Commissioners said they view the draft policies and the subcommittee's list of recommendations as foundational guidance to speed the work of future charter commissions and to reduce in‑meeting procedural uncertainty. The chair and subcommittee leaders will circulate revised language on voting procedures, minutes and financial reporting before the next meeting so members can review prior to a formal vote.