Mount Vernon charter commission introduces outside counsel; members set communication and budget guardrails

The City of Mount Vernon Charter Review Commission introduced Kristen Wilson as outside counsel for its charter revision work at a meeting on April 16, 2025, and discussed how the commission will use the firm, how communications will be routed and how legal bills will be managed.

Wilson, who said she serves as counsel for the commission, told members her role will primarily be legal drafting, advising on procedural steps to place charter amendments on the ballot and ensuring any final language can withstand legal challenge. “If you have legal questions as to how to draft the charter, the actual charter amendments … and the process to move this through the proper procedural steps to ensure that if it does pass, it can become effective,” she said.

The discussion focused on three practical issues: who may contact the firm, how the commission will control costs and the timing and scope of drafting work. Commissioners and staff agreed communications should be managed centrally to limit uncoordinated, direct requests to the law firm. “The communication does need to be a little bit more streamlined,” a city staff member said, explaining that routing questions through the commission chair will control costs.

Wilson said she is willing to speak directly with commission members but recognized budget limits. She described her expected tasks as ensuring internal consistency across the charter if the commission adopts major changes and preparing draft language and ancillary edits that flow from any decision. “One critical component I view as my job is to ensure that the charter, as much as possible, is internally consistent,” she said.

Commissioners raised cost concerns. A commissioner noted the commission’s current operating budget for the charter work is about $35,000. Wilson and her partner estimated typical drafting and review for a focused set of proposals would run about “30 to 40 hours of work,” including drafting and final review, and said they would provide a more detailed cost estimate to staff on request. The commission’s retainer scope was described as covering drafting and reviewing proposed charter text.

On timing and procedure, Wilson said her preference would be to present a final, internally consistent draft to the city clerk before the clerk’s filing deadline; she offered to confirm the legal requirement. Commissioners noted that any change to an elected office (for example, converting an elected comptroller to an appointed financial manager) would require multiple, coordinated edits throughout the charter to avoid internal inconsistency.

Staff told the commission they will prepare paperwork to place the contract on the Board of Estimate agenda for formal approval and that billing will be reviewed by the chair and the controls office to track spending against the commission’s budget.

Next steps: Wilson’s firm will provide a more detailed scope and fee estimate; staff will circulate that estimate and seek Board of Estimate approval. The commission directed members to coordinate requests for legal work through the chair to limit unbudgeted hours.