As the 3/5/26 city council meeting progressed and the proposed new charter was cited a few times, I wanted to make some clarifications but figured I would do so in the coming called meeting. Then it occurred to me to simply post my comments here and my CRC colleagues can also weigh in.
Overall, one of the guiding principles for the committee is “less is more” and not to be too specific. We sought to make our city charter analogous to the US Constitution, that’s flexible and only been amended 27 times since 1791 (and one of those was to correct a horrible mistake: 21st repealing the 18th). We did not suggest a highly proscriptive, detailed and restrictive charter similar to the Texas Constitution that has been amended 547 times since 1876.
In many instances, where we could eliminate detail enumerations and potentially conflicting language when “in accordance with State Law” would suffice, we made that recommendation. Example: Article II Powers of the City. Less is More.
Current Council Deliberations in lieu of the Charter
I believe Councilor Prince’s suggestion to tackle the charter in sections is the correct process. The only thing I would add is you should start with a full reading to be familiar with the structure and contents overall before tackling each article individually. It’s important to have an initial overview of how a few of the sections interact with each other. You will likely spend the majority of your deliberations in Article III.
I also echo Councilor Prince in thinking you spend little time on non-controversial topics that were recommended unanimously and focus on topics that are still debatable and curing language the attorneys find legally questionable. It would be highly disappointing for council to frequently substitute its own preferences over the legal recommendations of the appointed citizen committee although we do acknowledge it is council's prerogative to do so.
Fellow CRC members, please comment as well, and please do correct anything I may have mischaracterized.
Overall, one of the guiding principles for the committee is “less is more” and not to be too specific. We sought to make our city charter analogous to the US Constitution, that’s flexible and only been amended 27 times since 1791 (and one of those was to correct a horrible mistake: 21st repealing the 18th). We did not suggest a highly proscriptive, detailed and restrictive charter similar to the Texas Constitution that has been amended 547 times since 1876.
In many instances, where we could eliminate detail enumerations and potentially conflicting language when “in accordance with State Law” would suffice, we made that recommendation. Example: Article II Powers of the City. Less is More.
Current Council Deliberations in lieu of the Charter
- Please don’t delay council action waiting to see what the charter will look like. As was pointed out, we don’t know if a new charter will pass, and if so, what it will look like. Continue to do your business. If this council implements something contrary to the future charter, the next council will be required to bring that topic into alignment with the charter. In the meantime, you have to implement policy as you see fit today.
- Rules of Procedure: In both the existing charter and proposed charter, the language is simply that you will have a ROP and keep minutes. Beyond that, both versions anticipate City Council will establish ROP and the charter does not get into the details. Less is More.
- Proposed § 3.11 Rules of Procedure
- The City Council shall determine, by Ordinance, Resolution or otherwise, its own rules of order and business. The City Council shall provide all persons with a reasonable opportunity to clearly hear and be heard at public hearings and with regard to specific matters under consideration. The City Council shall provide for minutes to be taken and recorded for all public meetings as required by law. Such minutes shall be a public record kept and maintained by the person performing the duties of the City Secretary, posted on the City website, and print copies available for a fee.
- City Council meetings and public hearings will be recorded by audio device and made available on the City's website as soon as practicable after meeting. When feasibly/financially possible, this requirement shall be for video recordings.
- Current Section 3.13 Rules of Procedure. The Council shall establish by ordinance its procedures for conducting Council meetings. Such ordinance shall provide the citizens, or their representatives, a reasonable opportunity to comment on any matter on the agenda of any regular or special meeting of the Council prior to the Council voting on the matter, and citizen communications shall be an agenda item for all meetings for that purpose. In addition to agenda items, any issue over which the city has jurisdiction may be addressed during citizen communications. All persons present at Council meetings or any public hearing and requesting in writing to be heard may address the Council on the subject of the hearing. The City Secretary shall maintain and record all minutes of all proceedings of the Council, except for Executive Sessions, and make these minutes available to citizens of the City for a reproduction fee.
- Proposed § 3.11 Rules of Procedure
- Ethics Policy – Similar to the ROP, both the current and proposed charter do not offer a detailed Ethics Policy, merely that council shall have one. Less is More. Note also that both the current and proposed charters require a Code of Conduct and the recommended changes merely capitalize some terms and add the word “committee” to the current charter language.
- Proposed § 12.08 Ethics Policy and Code of Conduct The Council shall adopt and from time to time modify and amend an Ordinance providing an ethics policy and code of conduct applicable to the Officers, employees, boards, committees and commission members of the City. The ethics policy and code of conduct may provide penalties for violations, up to and including removal from office, on the concurrence of the Council or the City Manager, as applicable.
- Current Section 11.05 Ethics Policy and Code of Conduct. The Council shall adopt and from time to time modify and amend an ordinance providing an ethics policy and code of conduct applicable to the officers, employees, boards and commission members of the City. The ethics policy and code of conduct may provide penalties for violations, up to and including removal from office, on the concurrence of the Council or the City Manager, as applicable.
- Board of Ethics – The CRC did ultimately recommend adding a BOE to the Charter. Our research suggested BOEs are becoming more common either created by Ordinance or mandated by charter. There is a lot of research on BOEs in a separate thread on this board. The CRC felt, that council left on its own to create a BOE by ordinance, never would, so it is necessary to mandate by charter. Accordingly, the CRC was a little more proscriptive in the appointment and scope of authority, but again leaves much of the detail to council to flesh out by ordinance. There is no reason to delay council action on an Ethics Policy pending the contemplation of a possible future BOE.
Proposed § 8.06 Board of Ethics
1. The City Council shall, by ordinance, establish an independent Board of Ethics that has jurisdiction over all matters pertaining to the interpretation and enforcement of the City Charter, Code of Ethics, and the conflict of interest and financial disclosure ordinances.
2. In addition to the qualifications in §8.02, no member of the board may hold elective or appointed office under the City or any other government or hold any political party office.
3. The Board of Ethics shall consist of seven members. The Mayor and each member of the City Council shall nominate one member of the Board. Each nominee shall be confirmed by a majority vote of the City Council. No member of the Board shall serve for more than three full terms. Members shall serve terms concurrent with that of the nominating City Council Member. Appointments made during an existing term shall be for the remainder of the unexpired term.
4. Due to its nature, the Board of Ethics shall interact directly with the City Manager and City Attorney, and shall not have an appointed Council liaison.
5. The members of such board shall be appointed, supervised and removed by the City Council and shall meet upon a complaint or grievance being filed or at the request of the Council, the City Attorney, or the City Manager.
6. Insofar as possible under State law, the Council shall authorize the board to issue advisory opinions, conduct investigations on its own initiative and on referral or complaint from officials or residents, gather and hear evidence, compel availability of City Staff witnesses and documents, refer cases for prosecution, advise and recommend City Council final action, and in the event of a possible conflict of interest with the City Attorney, to hire independent counsel, subject to reasonable budget limitations.
We recognize CA Bullock’s comments regarding the scope of authority to discipline a council member cannot be delegated to a BOE and must reside with city council. What the committee found important is that with a BOE, all allegations, defenses, and deliberations would be in open session (increased visibility), and, the decision to proceed with an investigation is removed from council’s hands so you don’t have the awkward scenario of council voting to investigate its own members. What council would do is publicly accept, reject or amend a recommendation from a BOE and justify its decision if overruling or amending a BOE recommendation.
I believe Councilor Prince’s suggestion to tackle the charter in sections is the correct process. The only thing I would add is you should start with a full reading to be familiar with the structure and contents overall before tackling each article individually. It’s important to have an initial overview of how a few of the sections interact with each other. You will likely spend the majority of your deliberations in Article III.
I also echo Councilor Prince in thinking you spend little time on non-controversial topics that were recommended unanimously and focus on topics that are still debatable and curing language the attorneys find legally questionable. It would be highly disappointing for council to frequently substitute its own preferences over the legal recommendations of the appointed citizen committee although we do acknowledge it is council's prerogative to do so.
Fellow CRC members, please comment as well, and please do correct anything I may have mischaracterized.