Tuesday, March 29th, 2011 | Posted by David Reid

Committee Urges New City Charter, and a Look the Balance of Powers Between Mayor and City Council

The charter has an antiquated feel that may fit the look of City Hall, but not the needs of a 21st Century city, critics say.

The City Council Has the Authority to Act on the Proposed Charter Changes. Or It Can Do Nothing At All.

NORTHAMPTON – A final report from the city’s Charter Review Committee calls for a new document that clearly defines the relationship between the mayor and City Council, presents information in an understandable way, and tackles problems identified by the committee, the public, and current and former city employees.

CHARTER REVIEW REPORT EXCERPTS

• There are numerous provisions that are outdated and inaccurate in their content, internal inconsistencies, and operational detail more appropriately left to the legislative process.

• A charter should provide the basic framework of a government’s structure, identifying positions to be elected or appointed, the size, term and composition of the legislative body, appointing authority, operating and capital budget responsibilities, and organization of departments.

• A charter, like a constitution, should assure an appropriate separation and allocation of powers between the executive and legislative branches. In particular, review should address the present practices of the Mayor chairing City Council and School Committee meetings.

• The current structure is disjointed, with the charter specifying mayoral authority, and the City Council’s authority being more fully described in ordinances. There should be one integrated document outlining our city government.

• Frequent re-election campaigns do not allow sufficient time to become familiar with and effective in office, pose financial burdens on candidates and city finances, and deter broad participation in city government. A review should include the length of terms for the mayor and councilors, as well as the number of terms which may be served.

(To see the four page letter from the Northampton Charter Review Committee, click here.)

The basic structure of the 1883 charter needs to be reorganized, says the committee, with archaic sections deleted entirely.

And it identifies specific areas that appear ripe for change, including the separation of powers between the mayor and the City Council and School Committee, two bodies which she currently chairs.

The report suggests longer terms of office for the mayor, city councilors, and School Committee members; the possible creation of a vice-president for the City Council; and a change from elective to appointive for “certain professional positions” in city government.

It also recommends increasing the number of signatures required to get on the ballot, at least for certain positions (candidates for all city offices now need only 50 petition signatures).

Any formal charter committee, the report suggests, should be a large, diverse group of citizens appointed by the council. To adequately complete its task, the committee should be provided with staff and a budget, and be allowed to hire consultants, the document states.

Massachusetts law provides two methods for approving charters: one requiring city council approval, a sign-off by the Attorney General, and a special act of legislature (the “special act” charter); and another involving a citizens’ petition, the election of a nine-member commission, an 18-month process, and another city-wide vote on the charter itself (the “home rule” charter).

While the committee recommends the more streamlined special act charter process, it also calls for an OK by voters at the polls.

(To see a description of the “special act” and “home rule” charter processes, click here. To see a city website page offering other explanations, the city’s charter review history and meeting minutes from the current charter review committee, click here.)

Community Input Needed To Forge New Charter, Report Urges

Dated March 7, 2011, the report was addressed to City Council President David Narkewicz and the other city councilors; it was signed by Chairman Alan Seewald on behalf of the entire committee. The seven-member committee included Councilors Narkewicz, Jesse Adams, Marianne LaBarge and David Murphy and city residents Marc Warner, Margaret Striebel and Colleen Currie.

Lawyer Alan Seewald, the review committee chairman, pushed for recommendations that the charter be completely overhauled. (Photo from his website)

After its formal presentation to the council on April 7, the document will likely be sent to committee. At some point, the council can either decide to do nothing, or vote to proceed with a special act or home rule charter process.

The report was based on input from former and current city officials, from committee members and feedback from a public hearing on the charter review.

The committee was created last year in accordance with a new city ordinance requiring a comprehensive look at the charter every 10 years. Two previous attempts to change the charter failed in 1973 and 1995.

Opinions Aired at October Public Hearing

At a meeting of the committee last October, Mayor Mary Clare Higgins, Council President Narkewicz, former council president Michael Bardsley and Ward 3 Councilor Angela Plassmann spoke.

Higgins, who is not seeking a seventh two-year term, and Narkewicz, who announced this month he would run for mayor, said having the mayor chair City Council meetings is something that should be changed in any charter revision.

Council President Dave Narkewicz, a candidate for mayor this year, pushed for the ordinance that required 10-year reviews of the charter. (David Reid photos)

Bardsley, who is also running to replace Higgins, said then that the convoluted charter encourages voter apathy. Plassmann said the mayor’s power is too great, and said councilors should earn more than $5,000 a year.

(See our story on that meeting, “Review of City Charter Underway.”)

Many of those comments are contained in the final report, including questions about whether the mayor’s term is too short, whether her powers chairing the City Council and School Committee are too broad, and whether the two-year term for mayor is too short.

Former council president Michael Bardsley, also running for mayor this year, said the convoluted and archaic charter encourages voter apathy.

“The current charter is opaque and inaccessible, inflexible and inadequate to meet the contemporary complexities of governing well and responsibly,” reads the report. ”It is time for change, and the Committee urges the City Council to take action on our recommendations with a sense of the opportunity charter revision represents for our community now and in the future.”

David Reid can be reached at dreid@northamptonmedia.com