Committee to highlight city manager form of government in separate issue paper

The Citizen Government Review Committee decided to separate its findings on the council–manager form of government into a freestanding issue paper and to expand the explanatory statement about that recommendation before presenting to the City Council.

Chair Kalk said committee conferees had given "almost unanimous, support for the city manager form of the government," and the absence of public criticism was notable to members. The chair noted two possible interpretations of silence: satisfaction with the current form or public disengagement.

Member Zach said he had no objection to separating the material and volunteered to prepare a new, slightly longer issue paper that would extract and expand the committee's explanatory language while leaving more detailed procedural recommendations in the existing document: "I honestly have no issue with separating it out or keeping it in, whatever. I don't know if I really have a preference on how it's presented to the governing body." He later volunteered to create a new, freestanding document and said he would ensure the explanatory statement on the form-of-government question was longer than two sentences.

The committee also discussed that conferee testimony tended to favor the council–manager form and that one written public comment opposing it (from Mr. Ledbetter) would be noted in the record. Members agreed to include a concise record of conferees and dates while placing fuller testimony in the minutes and appendices.

The committee did not take formal action to change the city's form of government; the group agreed only to separate and document the committee's observations and recommendation for the City Council's consideration.