The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda - City Charter Committee - 02/08/2023AGENDA SOUTH BURLINGTON CHARTER COMMITTEE South Burlington City Hall 180 Market Street SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT Participation Options In Person: 180 Market Street – Library Board Room – 2nd Floor – Room #201 Assistive Listening Service Devices Available upon request Electronically: https://meet.goto.com/SouthBurlingtonVT/city-charter-02-08-2023 You can also dial in using your phone. +1 (872) 240-3212 Access Code: 899-501-741 Wednesday February 8 ,2023 4:00 P.M. 1. Welcome and Introductions 2.Agenda Review and Approval 3.Public comment on items not on the agenda 4. ***Approve minutes from the January 26, 2023 Charter Committee meeting 5.*** Discuss and finalize the advantages and disadvantages of different models to present tothe community 6.Discuss the Committee’s community outreach process 7.*** Discuss the timeline and make any adjustments needed 8.Other Business 9. Adjourn CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE 26 JANUARY 2023 The South Burlington City Charter Committee held a meeting on Thursday, 26 January 2022, at 4:00 p.m., in Conference Room 201, City Hall, 180 Market Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: P. Taylor, Chair; Dr. T. Childs, A. Lalonde, D. Kinville, C. Hafter ALSO PRESENT: J. Baker, City Manager, C. McNeil, City Attorney; M. Emery 1.Welcome and Introductions: Mr. Taylor welcomed members. 2.Agenda Review No changes were made to the agenda. 3.Comments & Questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 4.Approve Minutes from the 14 December 2022 meeting: The spelling of Mr. McNeil’s name was corrected as were 2 typos. Ms. Kinville moved to approve the Minutes of 14 December 2022 as amended. Ms. Lalonde seconded. Motion passed with all present voting in favor. 5.School Board Communications: Dr. Childs suggested that a member of the Committee attend School Board meetings. Mr. Taylor said he was willing to do that if there is a relevant agenda item. Dr. Childs said this would help the public to get a clearer understanding. 6.Review of “Pro and Con” submissions: Mr. Taylor reviewed the process. CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE 26 JANUARY 2023 PAGE 2 #1 Strong Mayor: Advantages: 1.Recognized leader of the city 2.Clear and visible authority 3.Clear point of contact 4.Sets policy vision for the city 5.Identified person to move policy forward 6.A city resident backed by voters 7.Can have his/her own staff which encourages innovation and changes 8.Residents understand “mayor” 9.Better lobbying in Montpelier 10.Easier for residents to understand the system Disadvantages: 1.Chosen from residents, does not necessarily have professional qualifications 2.Potential for governance to be seen as more “political”/potentially partisan 3.Full-time job, so it needs to be a career move which could be a barrier 4.Would eliminate City Manager position 5.Could encourage endorsement by employees or groups, which could be a conflict with city policy 6.Expensive city-wide campaign 7.Campaign donations could have expected payback in policy 8.Possibility of favoritism and nepotism in return for contributions 9.Can become entrenched 10.Veto power can cause conflicts and supersede the Council #2 City Manager Advantages: 1.Selected based on professional qualifications, expertise, experience as a professional manager 2.Continuity 3.Efficiency CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE 26 JANUARY 2023 PAGE 3 4.Elected officials can focus on policy matters 5.Serves at the pleasure of the City Council and can be removed for poor performance 6.Hires and fires professional staff 7. Non-political position, neutral decision maker 8.Adds protection for department heads and other employees from political influence 9.Stays current on managerial and fiscal issues through continual education and professional development 10.Ability to make decisions on a neutral basis 11.Can speak for diverse members of the community who are less represented 12.Available for citizen concerns Disadvantages: 1.Potentially not connected to the community 2.City Council’s ability to remove a manager could incur expense 3.Has unelected authority 4.May not implement policies as set by the City Council 5.May not understand Council’s role as policy setter 6.May try to use the privileged position to manipulate and control the City Council or form favorites on the Council 7.May have conflict with long-term employees. Long term employees may try to “wait out” the City Manager #3 Weak Policy Mayor Advantages: 1.Clear point of contact for residents 2.Can still have a professional City Manager 3.City resident elected by voters 4.Active Chair of City Council 5.Residents understand the term “mayor” 6.Can be the spokesperson or ceremonial head for the city 7.Can help bring consensus to City Council 8.Part time position so more people may be willing to run CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE 26 JANUARY 2023 PAGE 4 Disadvantages: 1.City manager may have less authority 2.Council may not support the policy mayor; potential mayor-council conflicts 3.Nature of position possibly confusing to voters 4.Has little statutory power 5.May not accept limited role and try to act as administrative mayor 6.May not always be available to the public #4 City Council Chair Advantages: 1.Works to build consensus and hear from all Councilors 2.More of a team spirit than having a separate mayor 3.Can be replaced every year by other members 4.Encourages collaboration 5.Can provide support/guidance for City Manager/organization 6.Provides many of the same services as a “weak mayor” Disadvantages: 1.Elected by council rather than by voters 2.Citizen confusion over role 3.May not be clear who is the spokesperson for the city 4.Potential for chair/management conflict 5.May not have political influence to get maximum lobbying, grants, etc. 6.Less of a clear point of contact for residents than with a mayor Members agreed to meet again on 8 February and to use that meeting to finish these categories. Ms. Baker noted there are numerous public contact/input efforts now going on (e.g. Comprehensive Plan). She suggested moving public contact for the Charter Committee out beyond the March election. Mr. Taylor will send the revised draft to all members. CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE 26 JANUARY 2023 PAGE 5 7.Research regarding School Board issues: Mr. McNeil said he looked into State Statutes and the City Charter regarding School Board membership. The City Charter does not address the number of members on the School Board. State law says there can be 5. There cannot be more than 5 without amending the Charter or State law. 8.Other Business: Mr. Taylor suggested that when they reach out to the public, there be 3 meetings, one at City Hall or a school and 2 at Orchard or Chamberlin School. He thought one should be on a weeknight, one on a Saturday, at different times. Dr. Childs suggested a meeting at the school district office. 7.Next meeting: The next meeting of the Committee will be on 8 February, from 4-6 p.m. As there was no further business to come before the Committee, Ms. Kinville moved to adjourn. Mr. Hafter seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 5:52 p.m. Charter Committee Updated: 1/26/23 Key Questions? Options Pros/Advantages Cons/Disadvantages Chief Executive? Strong/ Administrative Mayor Recognized leader of the city, Clear and visibleauthorityA clear point of contact for constituentsSets policy vision for CityIdentified person to move policy forwardCity resident elected by votersCan hire own staff which encourages innovationsand changesBetter “lobbying” in Montpelier and DC.Easier for residents to understand systemAvailable for citizen concernsCan be the spokesperson or ceremonial head forthe CityExecutive chosen from residents – notnecessarily professional qualificationsPotential for governance to be seen as more“Political” / potentially partisanFull‐time job ‐ could be a barrier to entryWould eliminate position of City ManagerCould encourage endorsement by cityemployees or employee groups which couldbe a conflict with City policyExpensive citywide campaignCampaign donations with expected pay backin policyOpen possibilities of favoritism and nepotismin return for contributionsCan become entrenchedVeto power can cause conflicts/supersedecouncilCould hire own staff for reasons other thanprofessional abilityCity Manager Selected based on professional qualifications,expertise, experience as professional managerContinuityEfficiencyElected officials can focus on policy mattersServes at the pleasure of the City Council and canbe removed for poor performanceHires and fires professional staffNon‐political position. Neutral decision makerAdds protection for Dept Heads and otheremployees from political influenceStays current on managerial and financial issuesthrough continual education and professionaldevelopmentAvailable for citizen concernsPotentially not connected to communityCity Council’s ability to remove a managercould incur expenseHas unelected authorityMay not implement policies as set by CouncilMay not understand Council’s role as policysetterMay use the privileged position to try tomanipulate and control the City Council andmay form ‘favorites’ with CouncilorsLack of citizen understanding of City Managersystem.Long‐term employees may try to wait outCity Manager Charter Committee Updated: 1/26/23 Key Questions? Options Pros/Advantages Cons/Disadvantages Manager can speak for less represented membersof the communityPolitical Leader? “Weak”/Policy Mayor Clear point of contact for residentsCity resident elected by votersVisible recognizable leaderActive chair of City CouncilResidents understand “mayor”Can be the spokesperson or ceremonial head forthe CityCan help bring consensus to Council.Still have a professional City ManagerCan be a part‐time position so more people maybe willing to runCan provide support and guidance formanager/organizationCity manager may have less authorityPotential for Mayor/Council conflicts.Council may not support policy MayorNature of the position possibly confusing tovotersHas little statutory powerExpensive citywide electionMayor may not accept limited role and try toact as an Administrative MayorMay not always be available for citizenconcernsCouncil Chair Works to build consensus and hear from allcouncilorsMore of a team spirit than having a separatemayorCan be replaced every year by other membersEncourages collaborationProvides many of same services as a weak MayorCan provide support and guidance formanager/organizationElected by council rather than the votersCitizen confusion over roleMay not be clear who is the spokesperson forthe CityPotential for Chair/Manager conflictMay not have sufficient political influence toget maximum lobbying/grants/etc.Less of a clear point of contact for residentsthan with a MayorCouncilor Composition? 5 Councilors Less expensive for CityVoting logistics simpler – one per wardCompact group.Competent councilorsEffective and efficientEasier to community with 5Easier to arrange meetingsToo much work for each CouncilorMaybe less diverseElected citywide in expensive electionsFor people with money or access to moneyHas become unrepresentative of all the cityHas SEQ perspectiveOnly takes 3 to dismiss managerMajority of Council from same area of town Charter Committee Updated: 1/26/23 Key Questions? Options Pros/Advantages Cons/Disadvantages 7 Councilors More voices at the tableMore people to do work/extra activitiesBroader diversity of perspectiveMore Councilors able to vote if others need torecuse themselvesNot much different than five CouncilorsLegislative duties could get clogged up withmore voices at the table (although more suchvoices could be a pro, too)Sub‐committee possible.Greater expertise among members,specializationAllows members to miss meetings for family oremergenciesDepending on political districts can guaranteediversityMore expensive, Cost per additionalCouncilor including staff supportMore difficult to reach consensusDifficult to find more people to run?Subcommittees take more of Councilors’time and create additional staff workDoes not address the problem of expensivecitywide campaignsDoes not address the problem of equalrepresentation in all areas of the cityWill be even tougher to find people to run tofill seven seats.Legislative duties could get clogged upwith more voices at the table (althoughmore such voices could be a pro, too)there could be trouble procuring enoughcandidates to run.More voices….more conflict Easier to form “cliques”Longer meetings if everyone speaksGeographic Representation? Elected at large All have a city‐wide perspective (though I believethis would be true even if they were elected byward)NoneMore points of contact for residentsSimpler voting systemExpensive to run for at‐large electionIt is tough to find people to run for a five seatCouncil at large.How exactly can someone not have a“citywide perspective”? This is not Texas.There are two main roads, an airport and anice park on the lake.Impossible to represent all residents soloudest voices often prevailTime to campaignElected by ward More affordable to runResidents more engaged with CouncilorsThere are five legislative districts. If we elect twofrom each district there will be four councilorsMay be difficult to find candidates to run inevery wardLess competition, more candidates runningunopposed Charter Committee Updated: 1/26/23 Key Questions? Options Pros/Advantages Cons/Disadvantages from the SEQ and two from each of the three other districts. An even number is not a problem. A tie is a no vote. Councilors will be elected from a small group ofneighborhoods with whom they will have directcontact with neighbors.Hopefully district elections will not requirepostcards, yard signs and full page ads in theother paper.Your neighbor is on the CouncilCouncilors know localized issuesPotential to lose city‐wide perspectiveIf House Districts are used three currentCouncilors could not serve – four live in sameHouse districtIf 7 councilors, confusing to voters to haveone per ward plus two at‐largeThere is already difficulty in finding two,three or four people every year to run forelection to the Council. Perhaps havingelection by district will make running for theCouncil easier and more attractive butperhaps it won’t. It is a big chance to take.To be reelected may have to prioritize yourown ward.South Burlington Board of School Directors Composition? 5 Directors A five‐person Board had served us well for yearsDr. Childs is the first person of color to holdan elected board seat.Perspective is skewed7 Directors More voices at the tableMore people to do work/extra activitiesBroader diversity of perspectiveWill not be diverse, supported by the factthat Dr. Childs is the first person of color tohold an elected board seat.Expanding the Board may result in non ‐competitive elections.In the past, all 3 candidates were unopposed.Elected officials are most responsive to theirconstituents when they know they may bechallenged in the next election.Overall questions for future discussion Should Councilors or a Mayor run representing a political party? Charter Committee Updated: 1/26/23 Other thoughts Can we please stop misusing the word diverse? The common understanding of the word diversity refers to including black and brown people. Somehow we have come to use it to refer to a diversity of professions or occupations or “perspectives”. This is nonsense and insulting particularly from a city that has never had a black or brown person elected to the council. I think we should forget about having a mayor. We do not have much of a problem with having a professional City Manager answering to an elected City Council. We do have a problem with the cost of citywide elections and the lack of equal representation from all areas of the city. This is what we need to deal with as the Charter Committee. Expanding to seven members does nothing to address these two problems. In fact, we’d only make it worse with five or six Counselors from the SEQ all spending tens of thousands of dollars to get elected. Finally, I hope you will share each of our thoughts written here with each of the Charter Committee members. We seem to have little contact with each other and little debate or discussion in meetings. We should go around in the meeting at this point and each share our vision of what we should do. South Burlington Charter CommitteeProposed TimelineUpdated: 1/26/23Charge:Updated Timeline Task/OutcomeSpeakers9/14/2022*Consider and approve a timeline*Review data from other communities*Introduce Planning Commission charge10/12/2022 *Discussion on PC composition and legal options*Panel #1 ‐ Speakers on governance models*Start drafting pros/cons to key questions*"Weak Mayor" ‐ Kristine Lott, Winooski*Council‐Manager ‐ Bill Fraser, Montpelier11/9/2022 *Panel #2 ‐ Speakers on governance models*Continue drafting pros/cons to key questions*Discussion on Council's action on Planning Commission composition*"Policy" Mayor ‐ Anne Watson, Montpelier (unavailable)*"Executive" Mayor ‐ David Allaire, Rutland12/14/2022 *Discuss pros/cons and set public engagement efforts*Helen Riehle, Council Chair1/26/2023 *Discuss pros/cons of different models2/8/2023 *Discuss pros/cons of different models*Discuss public engagement events3/8/2023 *Finalize pros/cons of different models*Finalize public engagement eventsMarch and April4/12/23 regular meeting*Public engagement events*consider governance models, language updates, engage in a community feedback process, and prepare recommendationsfor the City Council no later than July 2023.*conducting a comprehensive public process to solicit feedback from South Burlington residents on governance models.*consider increasing the size of the Planning Commission for Town Meeting Day 2023 5/10/2023 *Review data received*Provide direction to Legal to start drafting6/14/2023 *Review draft *Formulate set of recommendations7/12/2023 *Further discussion and finalize recommendations for public hearing8/9/2023 *Public hearing*Finalize recommendation to Council9/5/2023 *Present recommendations to Council