HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Charter Committee - 05/31/2022CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE MINUTES 31 MAY 2022
The South Burlington City Charter Committee held a meeting on 31 May 2022, at 4:00 p.m., in
the 3rd floor conference room and by remote participation at 180 Market Street.
MEMBERS PRESENT: P. Taylor, Chair; P. Engels, D. Kinville, Dr. M. Boyer, C. Higgins
ALSO PRESENT: J. Baker, City Manager; C. McNeil, City Attorney
1. Welcome and Introductions:
Ms. Baker welcomed new and continuing members who then introduced themselves.
2. Agenda Review and Approval:
The agenda was approved as presented.
3. Public comment on items not on the agenda:
No public comment was received.
4. Review minutes from 21 September 2021:
Mr. Engels moved to approve the minutes of 21 September 2021 as written. Ms. Kinville
seconded. The motion passed with all present voting in favor.
5. Review the Charge from the City Council and the Charter Change Process:
Ms. Baker reviewed the City Council Resolution convening the City Charter Committee. She
also drew attention to the links to the current City Charter and to State Statute 24 and the VLCT
Quick Guide to Charter Procedures. She then explained that Vermont is a Dillon Rule state (as
opposed to a Home Rule state), which means that a municipality can do only what State
Legislation allows it to do (Title 24). In order to amend the City Charter, the Committee must
recommend the changes to the City Council. The Council can approve or amend the
recommendations which then go to the voters. If the voters approve the recommendations,
they then go to the State Legislature for approval (or denial) and then to the Governor for
signature.
The charge given to the Committee included expanding the Committee to include 2 members
from the School Board, to consider governance models, make appropriate gender language
updates, and engage the community in a public process.
CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE
31 MAY 2022
PAGE 2
6. Discuss timeline and project plans:
Ms. Baker outlined some of the things the Committee should be looking at including:
a. Section 13.302 of the City Charter, which limits City Council and School Board
membership to 5 members each and whether that number is still viable
b. The election of City Council and School Board members at large and whether that
system is still appropriate
c. The possibility of a “ward” system
d. The possibility of a “strong” or “weak” mayor system
Ms. Baker noted that each City Councilor and School Board member now represents the highest
number of people of any community in the state, more than 20,000. Four City Councilors
currently live within a mile of each other. One consideration for the Committee is whether that
system should be changed so that different areas of the city are represented on either or both
of those boards.
Ms. Baker then outlined several types of governance systems:
a. A Town Administrator (usually for smaller communities)
b. A City Council/City Manager system (currently the South Burlington model)
c. A City Council/City Manager system with a “weak mayor” who serves as City Council
Chair but has no executive function (currently the system in Winooski and
Montpelier)
d. A “strong mayor” system where the mayor is the CEO of the city (currently the
system in the City of Burlington)
Any or all of these options could be explored by the Committee. Mr. Taylor asked if it would
help to hear from the City of Burlington as to how their system is working. Ms. Baker noted
that in a Council/Manager or “weak mayor” system, candidates do not run on a political party
basis, but in a “strong mayor” system, it becomes a political process which infuses politics into
city government which, Ms. Baker said, she personally feels it does not belong.
Ms. Baker noted that the State Legislature, via S181, recently gave municipalities a little more
local control. She suggested the Committee review this legislation to see if any/all of it would
be appropriate to add to the City Charter. She also noted that Section 13.305 of the Charter
CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE
31 MAY 2022
PAGE 3
contains language that the City Council should meet in a school building. That should be
reviewed for possible amending as should meeting remotely be considered as an addition.
Ms. Baker also noted that the City Council will be appointing liaisons to all city committees.
That person may have other thoughts as to what the City Charter Committee should consider.
That liaison is not a voting member.
Ms. Baker advised that City Attorney Colin McNeil will be attending Committee meetings and
will draft any changes the Committee recommends.
Mr. Taylor asked if there has been any discussion on the School Board regarding at large vs.
voting by district (ward). Dr. Boyer said she has not heard that in her time on the Board. It is
not an active issue. Mr. Higgins said he was sure the School Board would appreciate
information on what the Committee is doing, but he had not heard any “Charter talk) during his
time on the School Board. Ms. Baker stressed that the City Council did not want to have a
Charter discussion without input from the School Board. Dr. Boyer said if they can target
representation that the now do not have, that would be relevant.
7. Discuss Time Line and Project Plans:
Ms. Baker asked members in what “chunks” they would want to address their charge. She
suggested spending about 9 months researching governance models to bring to the City Council
or possibly spending a month looking at models and then asking for community input and
drafting language based on that input. Ms. Baker said she would provide possible time-line
options.
Ms. Kinville asked if there would be a vote in March 2024. Ms. Baker said the City Council asked
that the Committee finish its work by July 2023. After that, the Council would receive any
possible amendments and vote on them by March 2024. This would provide time if a ward
system is being considered as this would have budget implications that would need to be
explored and explained to the public before a public vote. Ms. Kinville noted that the March,
2024 election would also include the Presidential Primary.
Mr. Taylor noted that Legislative approval does not always happen quickly, so implementation
could be delayed.
CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE
31 MAY 2022
PAGE 4
Mr. Taylor asked how many public meetings are envisioned. Ms. Baker replied that the
Committee should make that decision. She suggested the Committee meet once a month to do
its work. She added that the public process could include a survey, a “tabling” at a city event, a
public gathering or other method decided upon by the Committee.
8. Discuss data and information requests to move this work forward:
Ms. Baker asked what kind of information they would find helpful. Mr. Taylor said he would
like to see an outline of the Charter vs. State law, especially in those areas the city relies on. Dr.
Boyer said that relevant updates from the State would also be helpful and possibly a white
paper on various governance models with “pros” and “cons.” This would also help in the public
process. Mr. Taylor said it could be helpful if the School Board had a discussion on any changes
they might like to see.
9. Next Meeting Time – Regular meetings to be set after new members are appointed:
Members agreed to hold the next meeting on Tuesday, 28 June, from 4-6 p.m. There will be an
orientation for new members at that time and a regular meeting schedule will also be
considered.
10. Other Business:
Mr. Engels cited the problem of having 4 of the 5 City Councilors coming from the Southeast
Quadrant and having only one other part of the city represented. He noted people are now
spending $15,000 in a City Council election campaign when he spent a total of $148.00 when he
was elected to the Council. He questioned how they might go about changing that.
Mr. Engels was also concerned with the appearance of a “guaranteed job” in City
administration and that people feel they have a position for life. He felt there is no avenue if
one has an issue with a city employee.
Dr. Boyer cautioned care in defining terms. It was noted that since 2009, there have been 3
City Manager and a turnover on the City Council. Staffing is not controlled by an electoral
model. Ms. Baker said structures are in place to address issues; the question may be whether
they are working and, if not, why not. Ms. Baker also stressed that discussion should focus on
roles, not on individuals.
CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE
31 MAY 2022
PAGE 5
Ms. Kinville noted that there are “pros” and “cons” to all governance models and also the
possibility of a “hybrid” model.
Mr. Taylor asked that members send any thoughts/ideas, etc. to Ms. Baker.
As there was no further business to come before the Committee, Dr. Boyer moved to adjourn.
Mr. Engels seconded. Motion passed with all present approving. The meeting was adjourned
at 5:11 P.M.
____________________________