Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Charter Review Committee approves package of Home Rule charter edits, adopts 45‑day recall filing window
Summary
The committee voted June 3 to approve a series of proposed edits to the Home Rule Charter across Articles 3–4 and advanced changes in Articles 5–8. After extensive debate, members amended the recall provision to require petition filing with the city secretary no later than 45 calendar days after the petitioners’ affidavit and approved that revision.
The Charter Review Committee on June 3 approved a bundle of redlined edits to the Home Rule Charter covering governance, vacancy procedures and administrative language and set a 45‑day filing window for recall petitions.
Chair Haney opened the meeting and led review of the drafter’s redline of Articles 1–4. Jennifer, the city attorney and drafter of the changes, walked members through edits replacing references to “council” with “commission” and consolidating vacancy provisions. “So you should have at your place, a red line version,” Jennifer said as she explained grammatical and substantive updates.
Committee members debated review and voting procedure before proceeding section‑by‑section. Motions to approve amendments to multiple sections passed by voice vote, including 3.01 (redistricting wording), 3.02, 3.04, 3.05 (vacancies and a charter code of ethics provision), 3.08 (emergency powers), 3.09 (budget language), 3.16 (vacancies/forfeiture) and section 4.01 (language clarifying the city manager’s role). Commissioner Falkenbach, Mayor Isbell and Member Hall were among those who moved and seconded motions during the meeting; all reported votes were voice votes and the chair announced motions carried.
The committee devoted its longest discussion to recall procedures in section 3.14. Jennifer said the expanded language was intended to remove ambiguity about signature verification and timing, noting that more detail in a charter helps administrators and the public understand process. Some members worried the draft could be perceived as making recalls harder. “My concern is that this is going to be interpreted by the public as we are making it really hard to get one of us off this dais,” Chair Haney said during debate. Another member argued the original 30‑day filing window would be too short to gather signatures: “Thirty days is not enough time to do squat,” the member said.
After discussing alternatives — including 30, 45 and 60 calendar days and business‑day counting — the committee amended the provision so that filing with the city secretary must occur no later than 45 calendar days after filing the petitioners’ affidavit. The chair then called the motion; Mayor Isbell moved to approve the revisions to 3.14 as amended and the motion carried on a voice vote.
On appointments and administrative staffing in Article 6, members asked the drafter to propose language that allows the city secretary to hire deputies while aligning deputies’ compensation and positions with the commission‑approved budget. The committee also directed the drafter to clean gendered language and make consistent edits where the word “council” remains.
Next steps: Jennifer will prepare revised language reflecting the committee’s edits (including the consolidated recall/initiative/referral language under consideration) and return it for further review before the charter election scheduling is finalized. The committee set its next meeting for June 17 at 5 p.m. and tabled approval of minutes to the following session.
