The Charter Review Advisory Board and city commissioners used a Saturday town-hall to discuss proposed updates to Panama City's charter, last fully revised in 1963, focusing on election timing, mayoral duties and whether the charter should require advance agenda posting.

The board chair said the advisory group has divided the charter into interrelated topic areas and has received a League of Cities presentation about governance models including strong-mayor and council-manager systems. Commissioners and board members stressed they will ask citizens for feedback and promised a memorandum listing citizen requests that might be handled by ordinance rather than by charter.

Why it matters: changes to the charter determine who controls agenda-setting, how elections are run, the length of terms and the formal separation between policy (elected officials) and management (the city manager).

Commissioners expressed differing views on election timing. Some members argued aligning municipal elections with state or federal general elections would raise turnout; others said that a separate municipal election better focuses voters on city issues. One commissioner described the cost and time of running for office and warned changes that lengthen campaign seasons could raise barriers to entry: "My campaign took 6 months, spent a $100,000," he said, arguing longer or citywide campaigns could favor better-funded candidates.

The board and commissioners debated term limits. Several members said Panama City does not show patterns of decades-long incumbency and questioned whether term limits would achieve intended turnover. The advisory board recommended weighing pros and cons and consulting data from other municipalities.

A repeated concern was agenda control and notice: residents and some commissioners urged a formal requirement that agendas be posted in advance (examples cited included a 48' to 72'hour rule used by condominium boards). City staff and the manager said the city currently posts agendas the Wednesday before a Tuesday meeting in practice but that the charter contains no formal posting requirement. Commissioners were split: some favored adding notice rules to the charter to increase transparency, while others worried that rigid notice requirements could slow urgent work or create administrative delays.

On the balance of power, multiple speakers described the city's current commission'manager system, noting commissioners set policy but rely on the city manager and staff to prepare items and implement decisions. Several commissioners asked the charter review board to consider language clarifying annual priorities and a recurring (board-recommended) 10'year charter review cadence to avoid long gaps between reviews.

The advisory board said it intends to deliver a consolidated draft to commissioners in a form the bodies can review and to encourage public input before any final action. Citizens can send written input to charterreview@panamacity.gov and are invited to advisory-board meetings and future public workshops.