Yesterday, I learned one thing very clearly: You do not mess with older women voters.
Or maybe just women, in general.
I went to a forum on the proposed amendments to the Memphis City and Shelby County charters (and sponsored by the League of Women Voters, Hadassah, and The Public Issues Forum). If you're interested in the proposals or, I don't know, going to be voting anytime soon, you should go to Change Memphis and read the explanations of each proposed change.
(I know that Flyer senior editor Jackson Baker has also written about some of the charter proposals, but I can't seem to unearth them on our website.)
The city charter amendments have to do with the sale of MLGW, instant run-offs, city residency requirements, and possible ethics violations by elected or appointed officials. Important stuff.
And the crowd at the forum was, for the most part, very respectful during the event. (There were a few people passing notes back and forth, which I take to be the exception.) But most people wrote their questions on index cards, passed them to the front, and listened quietly as forum organizers read them aloud and tried to answer them.
But then, when organizers tried to end the forum, all Hades started to break loose. Apparently, the index cards — once they made it to the front — were being sorted to weed out any duplication.
And one woman, not hearing her question asked, wanted it read and answered. Now. She was told she could come up to the front and ask it privately, but I guess she wanted all of us to hear the answer.
There was quite the hubbub. It was like the Picadilly had run out of lima beans during early bird hour.
Council AND Charter Commission Chair Myron Lowery, being a veteran of listening to the public, suggested her question be taken ... which, luckily, it was.
And then another woman spoke up to say that her question hadn't been read aloud or answered.
Finally, they decided to extend the forum to take any other questions. I'm not faulting these women: They had questions; the event was designed to answer questions; and dangit, their questions were going to be answered.
But I, for one, am not going to look at public forums the same way ever again.
Showing posts with label charter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label charter. Show all posts
Monday, October 13, 2008
Monday, August 4, 2008
Power Struggle
Last week, the Charter Commission held their third-to-last meeting and, though they didn't vote on anything, power — and who should have it — seemed to be the question of the day.
The commission discussed whether they needed the City Council to approve their recommendations. Commission members were concerned that there was not enough time to do so and that the City Council might not approve their recommendations.
"There's no reason to suggest that the council will challenge our actions," said charter commission chair and city council member Myron Lowery. "You're giving hypotheticals I don't see any reason for."
Former judge George Brown also wanted to restrict future charter commission members from holding other elected offices. Brown said that Lowery's knowledge and expertise was invaluable on certain issues, but seemed to suggest there could be a conflict of interest by serving on the two bodies.
For instance, Brown also wanted to discuss a provision that would prevent the City Council from altering the powers of the mayor.
"We spent a lot of time on the contracting authority of the mayor, only to have at their next meeting a City Council ordinance that would have undone what we put before the voters," Brown said.
There is currently a move by the City Council to require council approval for mayoral appointments to deputy directorships. The council has to approve division directors, but both types of positions are appointed by the mayor.
"Explain the matter presently before the council," Brown told Lowery. "You can take Poplar or Union to Germantown, but it seems to me the council is trying to get to Germantown one way or the other.
"The charter should determine the office of the mayor as well as the other two branches of government. Of the three branches, your branch is the only one that has the power to put anything before the public for a vote."
Lowery held that the council does not have the authority to alter the powers of the mayor and that restricting the powers of the council would be unconstitutional.
The commission discussed whether they needed the City Council to approve their recommendations. Commission members were concerned that there was not enough time to do so and that the City Council might not approve their recommendations.
"There's no reason to suggest that the council will challenge our actions," said charter commission chair and city council member Myron Lowery. "You're giving hypotheticals I don't see any reason for."
Former judge George Brown also wanted to restrict future charter commission members from holding other elected offices. Brown said that Lowery's knowledge and expertise was invaluable on certain issues, but seemed to suggest there could be a conflict of interest by serving on the two bodies.
For instance, Brown also wanted to discuss a provision that would prevent the City Council from altering the powers of the mayor.
"We spent a lot of time on the contracting authority of the mayor, only to have at their next meeting a City Council ordinance that would have undone what we put before the voters," Brown said.
There is currently a move by the City Council to require council approval for mayoral appointments to deputy directorships. The council has to approve division directors, but both types of positions are appointed by the mayor.
"Explain the matter presently before the council," Brown told Lowery. "You can take Poplar or Union to Germantown, but it seems to me the council is trying to get to Germantown one way or the other.
"The charter should determine the office of the mayor as well as the other two branches of government. Of the three branches, your branch is the only one that has the power to put anything before the public for a vote."
Lowery held that the council does not have the authority to alter the powers of the mayor and that restricting the powers of the council would be unconstitutional.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Possible Charter Changes
During its executive session today, the City Council discussed putting two charter changes on the November 4th ballot.
The first would give the council approval over mayoral appointments to deputy director positions. The second would give the council approval of all contracts over $100,000 or spanning more than 24 months. Both were presented by longtime council member Barbara Swearengen Ware.
"There has been discussion back and forth whether or not the council should approve deputy directors the same way it does directors," Ware said. "Because there will be significant changes made to the charter, I thought that this would be an ideal time to add this item."
The administration is not in favor of the change and said the council was attempting to manage the day-to-day workings of the city.
"Since there's no problem, we don't think [the change] is necessary," said CAO Keith McGee.
The average salary of a division deputy director is about $100,000. McGee said that the people directly under the deputy directors often make around $100,000, as well.
After Mayor Willie Herenton began his last term, he appointed former bodyguards and a former City Council member to deputy directorships, but Ware said her proposal wasn't in response to any specific issue.
"I don't think everything should be reactive," Ware said.
The administration was also not in favor of the contract oversight proposal.
"We believe the current process works," McGee said.
Council and Charter Commission member Janis Fullilove told her colleagues that both Herenton and former mayor Dick Hackett had appeared before the Charter Commission to oppose the very same issue.
"The city mayor signs so many contracts on a daily basis. They have to go through a process and the mayor is the last one to sign them," Fullilove said. "If the City Council became involved in the signing and approval of contracts, then we'd probably be here well into the morning."
Other council members shared her concerns, especially when McGee told them the number of contracts that would come before them would be between 2,000 and 4,000 a year. Ware said she envisioned the council's oversight of the contracts similar to the way it handles MLGW contracts.
Another option was for contracts to be reviewed not by a dollar amount or a time limit, but if they involved the lease or sale of city property.
"I don't want us to get bogged down in contracts," Ware said, "but I do think we have a fiscal responsibility. We would not be here until 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning. I don't know why anybody would make that kind of statement."
The first would give the council approval over mayoral appointments to deputy director positions. The second would give the council approval of all contracts over $100,000 or spanning more than 24 months. Both were presented by longtime council member Barbara Swearengen Ware.
"There has been discussion back and forth whether or not the council should approve deputy directors the same way it does directors," Ware said. "Because there will be significant changes made to the charter, I thought that this would be an ideal time to add this item."
The administration is not in favor of the change and said the council was attempting to manage the day-to-day workings of the city.
"Since there's no problem, we don't think [the change] is necessary," said CAO Keith McGee.
The average salary of a division deputy director is about $100,000. McGee said that the people directly under the deputy directors often make around $100,000, as well.
After Mayor Willie Herenton began his last term, he appointed former bodyguards and a former City Council member to deputy directorships, but Ware said her proposal wasn't in response to any specific issue.
"I don't think everything should be reactive," Ware said.
The administration was also not in favor of the contract oversight proposal.
"We believe the current process works," McGee said.
Council and Charter Commission member Janis Fullilove told her colleagues that both Herenton and former mayor Dick Hackett had appeared before the Charter Commission to oppose the very same issue.
"The city mayor signs so many contracts on a daily basis. They have to go through a process and the mayor is the last one to sign them," Fullilove said. "If the City Council became involved in the signing and approval of contracts, then we'd probably be here well into the morning."
Other council members shared her concerns, especially when McGee told them the number of contracts that would come before them would be between 2,000 and 4,000 a year. Ware said she envisioned the council's oversight of the contracts similar to the way it handles MLGW contracts.
Another option was for contracts to be reviewed not by a dollar amount or a time limit, but if they involved the lease or sale of city property.
"I don't want us to get bogged down in contracts," Ware said, "but I do think we have a fiscal responsibility. We would not be here until 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning. I don't know why anybody would make that kind of statement."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
