Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assembly begins year of charter review; deputy speaker outlines amendment paths and timelines
Summary
Deputy Speaker Daniel Gessen reviewed the county's periodic charter-review process, explained two amendment paths (periodic review with voter referendum versus a charter commission and state-legislative route), and reminded delegates 2025 is a mandated review year with a roughly 10-month timetable.
Deputy Speaker Daniel Gessen briefed the Assembly on Article 9 of the Home Rule Charter and the two formal processes for changing the charter: periodic charter review and the charter commission route that involves the state legislature.
Gessen said periodic charter review is mandated every five years in years ending in 0 or 5 (2025) and noted the assembly created a Charter Review Committee last year by Resolution 24-4. Under the periodic-review path, the charter-review committee develops recommendations: if a recommendation does not change the composition, election or appointment of delegates or commissioners, the Assembly may place the proposal on the ballot by a two-thirds Assembly vote and the change goes to voters at the next biennial state election.
For recommendations that would alter how delegates or commissioners are elected or appointed, Gessen said the committee's report must be approved by a majority of the Assembly and then be submitted to the Board of Regional Commissioners; if the commissioners approve, the proposal then proceeds to the state legislature as a special-law request before going to the voters. "Arguably," Gessen said, "charter review is one of the most important things that we're gonna embark on in the year 2025 as an assembly." He encouraged delegates to identify low-hanging, antiquated provisions and to participate in the committee process.
Clerks and leadership also told delegates the assembly is seeking legal counsel to support charter review; the clerk said a procurement process for an attorney completed that morning and the assembly expects to engage counsel for the review. The deputy speaker noted that charter review and resulting amendments have two distinct procedural tracks and that substantial changes historically have required voter approval.
Delegates asked procedural questions about whether the Assembly may petition the state legislature directly and about the timing and composition of the charter-review committee. Leadership reaffirmed that a charter commission (a more involved route) is available by petition and that the assembly's charter-review work is expected to conclude within roughly 10 months of inception, per the charter procedures discussed.
The Assembly did not vote on charter changes at the meeting; delegates were reminded of the charter-review timeline and invited to propose amendments and to participate in the committee work.
