Charter Review Commission
January 31, 2008
Meeting Notes

Secretary and vice chair to be determined at the next meeting, and Bill Callahan mentioned about the public input process, and look at considering those important items at the front end.  Sub-committees were also mentioned and the Commission will be looking at forming sub-committees, which will be done at the next meeting.

Roberts Rules of order will be used as an informal guideline to the process (KS will supply these at next meeting)

In case individuals cannot make a meeting, they are to contact KS

Coats – how do we make the process inclusive to the public as a whole. 

Cleveland – mentioned that consideration may be given on holding some meetings in the community.

Cleveland – said that recommendations for changes from the Council and from the Administration would be forth-coming (At the next meeting? – Rachel has some recommendations; KS has public suggestions) 

Kelley – an agenda is crucial

Cleveland – the next meeting will also serve to help the commission formulate an agenda, divided into hot topics (residency, Council reduction) and dry ones.

Eaton – mentioned chapter by chapter approach in looking at charter, and raised question regarding how much flexibility would the sub-committees have in seeking out experts on particular topics.  Community meetings could also focus on specific subject matter.

Other experts will be available to the commission.  These should be established as early as possible.

Callahan – reaching out to the public is important and Commission members can also reach out to people as well. Reaching out through rec. center style meetings didn’t work in 1988.  Members should really use their networks to get good feedback. 

Triozzi – we need to determine what is in the charter and how we process different things that are in the charter before we begin to identify what we need to change and before we take this out to the public.

Meeting of the Commission are open to the media and to the public according to Cleveland.

Cleveland – Seattle area, King County Charter Review has a great website.  Council website can be another resource that can be used to communicate information regarding the charter to the public.  Seattle, King County uses this approach.

Agenda will be given to Commission members prior to the meetings of the Commission. 

Rick Horvath will provide the history of the charter review process at the next meeting. 

Kelley – Commission should attempt to jump into the first chapter immediately.  Time is a factor.

The process of reviewing and discussing the charter was raised.  Concern raised that some members deal with these issues frequently, while some other members don’t and would need time to think about those specific items that were discussed.  Commission could come back the following week to talk about the specific item that was discussed.

Callahan – one way would be to identify those topics and issues that the Commission needs to discuss early on, this is something that the last Commission did not do.

Coats – need to put organizational structure in place and then go from there.  Public should be brought in early on.

Gilson – public input requires the creation of a solid agenda.

Eaton – a public process is required even if people do not take advantage of it. 

Education piece should be considered in relation to informing the public on what the purpose of the charter review and the process of doing this really is.

Transparency – it should be up to the Commission to put the information out there. 

Need to spend one session to talk about the process of the Commission in regards to sub-committees, communication to public and identification of hot important topics.

Huth – mentioned that Commission should set a deadline in regards to identifying those issues and topics that are very important.

Timeline – August 1st Commission must submit propose charter recommendations to the Council. Sept 1st, Council must pass ordinance and Sept 4th, ballot language needs to be submitted (filing deadline)

Cleveland – Commission will make recommendation and submit them to the Council.  Once Council receives the recommendations, Council members will review the recommendations and make decision which to accept or reject.

Horvath – mentions that there are some laws that are antiquated and need to be taken out or updated, and the Commission has to look at this as well.  How we enter into contracts, look at the contracting process and even look at the legislative process and how to streamline it, we need to look at these items as well.  Look at how the government can be made more efficient.

Look at the different constituencies that are out there that may be interested in specific issues or topics, which can looked at. 

Huth – would like Horvath to provide a list on those items in the charter that need to be changed or to look at laws that need to be changed or laws that are antiquated.  Callahan suggest that a rough draft list be made as quickly as possible.