Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Review Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mount Vernon council member and public call for clearer budget rules and earlier start for Charter Review Commission
Summary
A public commenter and council members criticized the Charter Review Commission for unclear spending practices, late scheduling and insufficient outreach; the council said it would examine commission timing and seek clarification on appointment language.
Mary Kingsley, a Mount Vernon resident and member of the public, told the City Council she and others want clearer budgetary processes and structural changes for the Charter Review Commission. Kingsley said the current commission started late this cycle — "we didn't start up till April or May, which cut us a good six months of working time" — and that the timing left insufficient opportunity for vetting and public input.
Kingsley raised concerns about expenditures made on the chair’s signature without the broader commission’s approval and said there is no adopted internal spending policy governing how the commission uses public funds. "We have now voted that no further expenditures will take place unless there is approval of the majority of the commission," she said, and asked the council to consider requiring clearer budget lines and accountability.
Kingsley also said outreach efforts had not adequately reached the city’s non‑English‑primary population (which she cited as 26 percent) and questioned the effectiveness of spending on items such as the National Civic League report and public forums.
Council members responded in the council‑comment segment. Councilwoman Kaitlyn Gleason said she agreed with the need to review the commission’s structure and that she would be willing to invite the Charter Review Commission to appear earlier in the cycle — potentially in November — to give the body more time. Gleason noted the charter language referenced in the meeting, saying, "in the legislation as it was written, it says that the mayor shall appoint seven commission members selected from the available pool, and then the city council shall appoint," and suggested the council could raise the timing question with the administration.
No formal council action was taken at the meeting. Council members asked for follow‑up clarifications from the commission and indicated willingness to examine a formal mechanism for budget approvals and earlier scheduling of the commission in future cycles.
Kingsley's comments were presented as opinions and requests for process change; she said she was not alleging malfeasance but sought transparency and formal spending rules.
