City of Shelbyville officials discussed a proposed change to the city charter and a separate proposal to add a stronger ethics-review mechanism during the Jan. 2 mayor and city council study session.

City Manager Scott Collins briefed the council on a narrow charter change under consideration that would replace the term “ratepayer” with “account owner,” a change Collins said would allow spouses and other household members to qualify if their names are placed on utility accounts. Collins told the council that staff and Shelbyville Power, Water and Sewer have worked on consistent language and that the city expects to present a resolution for council consideration in the near term. Collins also warned that charter changes typically must be submitted to the state legislature with a clean, unanimous packet to move easily through the General Assembly’s process.

The discussion shifted to an ethics proposal put forward by a councilmember who described recurring rumors and a lack of public trust and recommended adding an outside ethics review board to the charter. The councilmember said the board would provide an independent avenue for handling complaints and “would help the elected officials provide a vehicle for dispelling just rumors and innuendo.” The councilmember cited a model used in Franklin, Tennessee, and asked that the city evaluate language that would add “teeth” and a complaint process beyond the council policing itself.

Planning staff and other council members said they supported further work on the language and timing. Collins and other staff members noted that the city has an existing resolution and ordinances that define the term in practice; several council members said it might be more efficient to resolve some definitions administratively rather than through a charter change. Others argued the ethics reforms deserved careful, public drafting and recommended a months-long review so the city can submit any charter changes to the state on an October–November timeline when the legislature’s counsel is available to review drafts.

No formal motion or final vote on charter language or an ethics amendment was recorded during the study session. Council members asked staff to continue drafting options, to circulate examples (including the Franklin model), and to return with a timeline and recommended language for public discussion. The matter will be revisited in coming months and may be placed on a future council agenda for formal action.