Charter commission approves multiple Article 5 revisions after long debate over appointments, term limits and transparency

The Lansing Charter Review Commission reviewed and approved a set of proposed revisions to Article 5 of the city charter governing boards and commissions, including language on appointment processes, term limits, and recordkeeping.

The commission approved substitute charter language that would formally create a framework for the Board of Water and Light return-on-equity agreement and moved through multiple Article 5 subsections, including changes to how boards are named and how appointments are handled. The commission also directed staff to return with clarified language on several items, including appointment timelines, public access to applicant lists and potential term-limit wording.

The package of changes drew extended discussion over who should nominate and confirm board members. Commissioner Washington said the current appointment practice gives the mayor broad authority and argued the legislative branch should have more say: "A strong mayor is not a king, we need balance of power." Several commissioners proposed compromise approaches: having ward commissioners nominate candidates to the mayor, publicizing applicant lists, and preserving council confirmation rights.

Kristin Rewa, counsel to the commission, described a version of the return-on-equity language for the Board of Water and Light as a negotiated, attorney-reviewed framework: "This language is language that 3 sets of attorneys have reviewed. It is appropriate to consider their considerations and their input ... the idea is to make sure that the agreement ... continues forth, into the future." Rewa said the language was drafted with input from the city and the Board of Water and Light attorneys.

Public commenters urged additional changes. Randy Dykeis of 18 North Sycamore asked commissioners to add sustainability language and a sustainability advisory board, and to change appointment rules so selection "is a shared responsibility, between the city council and the mayor." Amanda Castillo spoke in support of an "ethical investment clause." Dykeis later repeated that timely appointments matter: "If those appointments aren't made, somebody's boards aren't filled and existing members go on and on and on."

Commissioners also discussed term limits for board members. Commissioner Dowd and others favored a two-consecutive-term limit with a required break before eligibility to return to the same board. Commissioners asked counsel to draft matching language for multiple charter sections to ensure consistency and to account for exceptions where licensure or specialized qualifications apply.

The commission agreed to clarify administrative process items: maintaining a real-time database of applicants, publishing applicant lists, and establishing a consistent procedure for how and when boards file minutes and recommendations with the city clerk. City staff (Chris) said a publicly accessible applicant list is already on the city website and that the clerk provides an annual report of expiring terms; commissioners asked for language that would keep that data in real time and make it available to council and the public.

The commission also voted to rename the "planning board" to the planning commission to conform with state statute and asked staff to confirm which planning duties (for example, master plan development and capital improvement plan review) remain assigned to the commission versus the planning department.

Commissioners flagged the Board of Ethics as a section that requires further work to create enforcement mechanisms. Commissioner Adam Simon and others said the board can issue informal opinions but lacks consistent follow-through: "The board makes recommendations, but there's no teeth behind it." The commission asked staff to return with options to address complaint handling and remedies.

The commission approved the revisions it considered at the meeting and directed staff and counsel to return with amended language on several contested items at a future meeting.

Votes at a glance

- Adopt agenda: approved (voice vote). - Approve minutes with correction (change of recorded nays from 5 to 4): approved (voice vote). - Approve substitute charter language formalizing return-on-equity framework for the Board of Water and Light (Article 5 / section 5-204 substitute): approved (voice vote). Kristin Rewa said the language was reviewed by attorneys for the city and the Board of Water and Light. - Approve multiple Article 5 subsections covering types of boards, appointments, review boards, advisory boards, fire and police commission language, retirement boards, appointment procedures, continuation of existing boards, organization and rules of procedure, and related administration language: approved (series of roll-call/voice votes as recorded). Several sections were approved subject to staff returning with clarifying amendments. - Rename "planning board" to "planning commission" across the charter: approved (voice vote). Commission asked staff to ensure consistency across the charter and confirm statutory duties. - Retain current restriction on city employees serving as voting board members but direct clerk/attorney to examine conflict-language and report back: motion approved (voice vote).

What the commission directed staff to do next

- Draft consistent term-limit language (two consecutive terms) and specify how partial terms count. - Return language clarifying the appointment timeline and what is published about applicants; consider adding charter language that applicant lists be public and updated in real time. - Draft options to address enforcement and remedies related to Board of Ethics findings and to reconcile ordinance-level complaint procedures with the charter. - Clarify whether minutes must be filed within a specific period and propose precise language (staff to check Open Meetings Act or other applicable rules).

Ending

The commission completed its review of much of Article 5 and scheduled follow-up work on term limits, appointment transparency, Board of Ethics enforcement, and precise procedural language. Public commenters repeated requests for a sustainability advisory board and an ethical investment clause; commissioners asked staff to fold those requests into future drafts for consideration.