What good public process would look like
I just e-mailed the following to Council, and will testify this afternoon in support of my proposal.
Dear Mayor Potter and Commissioners,
Please don’t send anything to voters after the public hearing this afternoon, except the Potter/Sten agreement on making the City Council PDC’s budget committee. Citizens have not had enough time to review the proposed language the Charter Review Commission is asking you to put on this May’s ballot. The proposal was published less than two weeks ago, and citizens have had no opportunity to point out flaws and suggest refinements.
Here’s what a good public process from this point would look like:
1. Today, thank the Charter Review Commission for their work in formulating the proposal. Acknowledge that’s what it is, a proposal.
2. Send all four proposals out to Neighborhood Associations, Business Associations, unions and other city employees, and other groups and individuals in the community (see the “Community Connect” project for a list). Assign city staff or volunteers to present and explain the proposal. Convene Town Hall meetings and Council worksessions to discuss fine-tuning.
3. Ask the Charter Review Commission to hold public hearings, this fall, before revising the proposal – including suggesting new administrative rules to complement the proposed new Charter language.
4. Have another hearing before City Council in January of 2008, to discuss the content of the revised proposal.
5. Send the “form of government” proposal to the ballot in May 2008. The voters’ decision on this issue should inform and guide all the other proposals.
6. Send any remaining Charter changes to the ballot in November 2008.
Assembling a diverse group to work on the Charter Review Commission was a good start. It is not a substitute for adequate, inclusive public process from this point forward.
Respectfully submitted,
Amanda Fritz, RN, MA