1. Northampton Charter
Review Committee
Councilor Jesse M. Adams (Vice-chair)
Colleen Currie (Secretary)
Councilor Marianne L. LaBarge
Councilor David A. Murphy
Alan Seewald (Chair)
Margaret Striebel
Marc
Warner
NOVEMBER 10, 2010 - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 7 P.M.
PRESENT: JESSE ADAMS, COLLEEN CURRIE, MARIANNE LABARGE, ,
ALAN SEEWALD, MARGARET STRIEBEL (ARRIVED 7:55), MARC
WARNER
ABSENT: DAVID MURPHY
ATTENDING: ADAM COHEN - VIDEOTAPING MEETING;
? - YOUNG WOMAN - WE NEGLECTED TO ASK HER NAME;
SHE LEFT EARLY
MINUTES
AGENDA
1. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
2. REVIEW AND APPROVE MINUTES FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010
MEETING
COUNCILOR LABARGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
COUNCILOR ADAMS SECONDED THE MOTION. MR. SEEWALD NOTED
PAGE 2, “TALKED A LOT” - SHOULD BE “THE COMMITTEE HAS
TALKED A LOT” . ASKED FOR FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO MOTION TO
APPROVE MINUTES. COUNCILOR LABARGE MOVED TO AMEND AND
TO APPROVE AS AMENDED. COUNCILOR ADAMS SECONDED. THE
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
1

2. 3. REVIEW OF INPUT FROM CURRENT MAYOR AND CURRENT
AND FORMER CITY COUNCILORS
MR. SEEWALD - COULD PERHAPS USE AS JUMPING OFF POINT FOR
WRITING REPORT. WE MAY HAVE GUIDED DISCUSSION, BUT
BELIEVES THERE IS CONSENSUS THAT ISSUES DISCUSSED ARE
SOME OF THE LARGE ISSUES PROBLEMATIC WITH CURRENT
CHARTER. MAYBE COULD GET LIST OF ISSUES DISCUSSED AT LAST
MEETING, AND ADD ISSUES COMMITTEE MEMBERS THINK OUGHT TO
BE SUBJECT OF REPORT.
MR. WARNER - DO YOU WANT TO DO AS DISCUSSION OF INDIVIDUAL
ISSUES OR AS DISCUSSION OF ISSUES RAISED BY INDIVIDUAL
SPEAKERS? LISTED ISSUES: TERM LIMITS, ROLE OF MAYOR ON CITY
COUNCIL, BUDGET PROCESS, APPOINTED POSITIONS/ELECTED
POSITIONS.
MR. SEEWALD - SINCE SPEAKERS ADDRESSED MANY OF THE SAME
ISSUES, HE THOUGHT WE’D TAKE IT ISSUE BY ISSUE. THINKS FIRST
BIG ISSUE WAS WHETHER THERE OUGHT TO BE GREATER
SEPARATION BETWEEN EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCHES.
COUNCILOR LABARGE - THINKS MAYOR’S COMMENTS RE MAYOR
CHAIRING CITY COUNCIL WERE HELPFUL. ALSO TALKED ABOUT
VALUE OF MAYOR ON SCHOOL COMMITTEE BECAUSE OF BUDGET.
WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. BUT MAYOR SAID SHE BELIEVED IT
WOULD BE IN BETTER IF MAYOR DID NOT CHAIR CITY COUNCIL.
WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. FOUND THAT VALUABLE. NOTED IN
MINUTES - ONLY NORTHAMPTON AND TAUNTON HAVE MAYOR
CHAIRING COUNCIL.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - SEEMS NEARLY UNANIMOUS, IF NOT
UNANIMOUS THAT THERE SHOULD BE A CLEAR, MORE SIMPLE
MODERN CHARTER, AND WE SHOULD SUGGEST A CHARTER
COMMISSION.
MR. SEEWALD - EARLIER MEETINGS - AT LEAST SOME MEMBERS HAD
SAID WE WOULD NOT BE FULFILLING OUR MISSION IF WE SIMPLY
SAID TO COUNCIL THEY OUGHT TO DO WHAT IT TAKES TO GET A
CHARTER COMMISSION TOGETHER TO GET A NEW CHARTER, BUT WE
OUGHT TO ALSO GIVE THEM A REPORT ON THIS CHARTER THAT A
COMMISSION OUGHT TO TURN ITS ATTENTION TO IN CREATING A
NEW CHARTER. PERHAPS I JUMPED THE GUN. IS THERE ANYONE
2

3. HERE WHO DOES NOT AGREED THERE OUGHT TO BE A NEW
CHARTER? [NO RESPONSES.] IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO DOES
NOT AGREE A CHARTER COMMISSION IS THE PREFERABLE WAY TO
DO THAT?
COUNCILOR ADAMS - I AGREE, BUT WOULD ALSO POINT OUT
EVERYONE WHO ATTENDED LAST MEETING WAS IN AGREEMENT
WITH THAT. AT LEAST I DIDN’T HEAR ANY OPPOSITION .
MR. SEEWALD - MY ONLY RETICENCE IS THAT CHARTER COMMISSION
PROCESS LEAVES GREATER LIKELIHOOD OF FAILING AND LEAVING
US WITH WHAT WE HAVE THAN A DIFFERENT PROCESS.
SPECIAL ACT CHARTER ULTIMATELY NEEDS TO BE APPROVED
BY VOTERS, BUT DOESN’T REQUIRE VOTERS TO ELECT
COMMISSIONERS AND HAVE INCREDIBLE STRUCTURE THAT CHARTER
COMMISSION PROCESS HAS. RETICENCE GROWS OUT OF FACT THAT
LAST TIME WE TRIED TO HAVE A CHARTER COMMISSION IT FAILED.
MR. WARNER - TWICE, ISN’T IT. WASN’T THERE ONE IN THE 1970'S?
MR. SEEWALD - DOESN’T RECALL, BUT THE LAST ONE FAILED. AND
AS I BELIEVE I SAID LAST TIME, MY INTEREST IS IN GETTING NEW
CHARTER.I’D LEAVE IT TO PROCESS PEOPLE – THE COUNCIL AND
MAYOR, WHO HAVE A BETTER SENSE OF THE POLITICS, TO GUIDE US
THROUGH APPROPRIATE PROCESS.
EITHER PROCESS REQUIRES APPROPRIATION. LAW REQUIRES
APPROPRIATION FOR CHARTER COMMISSION. VERY FORMAL -
BELIEVES HE REMEMBERS FROM EXPERIENCE IN AMHERST - OFFICE
SPACE, CLERICAL ASSISTANCE, BUDGET, HIRE CONSULTANT.
MR. WARNER - DO PEOPLE KNOW WHY PRIOR ATTEMPTS FAILED?
PARTICULAR ISSUE OR WAS IT JUST NOT WANTING TO MAKE
CHANGE.
COUNCILOR LABARGE - PERSON FROM HER WARD ON COMMISSION.
TOLD HER HE FELT THEY DIDN’T HAVE/DIDN’T SPEND ENOUGH TIME.
MR. WARNER - WAS THE IDEA TO APPOINT A COMMISSION OR WAS
IT PUTTING FORTH IDEAS OF WHAT CHARTER WOULD BE?
MR. SEEWALD - DID IT FAIL AT APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSION OR
DID IT FAIL AFTER THE COMMISSION DID ITS WORK?
3

4. [NO ONE HAD ANSWER. MR. WARNER NOTED INFORMATION ALSO ON
WEB.]
MR. SEEWALD - WORST OF ALL WORLDS IS FOR CHARTER
COMMISSION TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND THEN FAIL AFTER
IT HAS DONE ITS WORK.
MS. CURRIE - ASKED ABOUT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROCESSES FOR
CHARTER COMMISSION AND SPECIAL ACT. FIRST ASKED FOR
CONFIRMATION - CHARTER COMMISSION WOULD WRITE NEW
CHARTER AND VOTERS WOULD DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT TO
ACCEPT IT. WHO WRITES CHARTER IS DONE AS SPECIAL ACT?
MR. SEEWALD - TYPICALLY MAYOR AND COUNCIL WOULD APPOINT A
GROUP TO ACT IN ROLE OF CHARTER COMMISSION, BUT IT WOULD
NOT HAVE STRICT TIME LINES, REQUIREMENTS FOR PRELIMINARY
REPORT, FINAL REPORT, ETC. THAT STATUTE PROVIDES FOR.
MS. CURRIE - THIS COMMUNITY IS IN THE MOOD FOR MUCH MORE
INVOLVEMENT, MUCH MORE ACTIVE PARTICIPATION. WHETHER OR
NOT IT ACTUALLY HAPPENS, THERE’S A LOT OF TALK ABOUT THAT.
IF THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL APPOINT A GROUP, I CAN
JUST HEAR, “OH, WELL. THEY’RE DOING THAT AGAIN.”
MR. SEEWALD - THAT MAY HAVE BEEN THE MOTIVATION FOR THE
MAYOR’S UNEQUIVOCAL POSITION THAT A CHARTER COMMISSION
WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. THAT’S HIS RECOLLECTION OF WHAT
MAYOR SAID.
MR. WARNER - MAYBE SOMETHING COVERED BEFORE HIS
INVOLVEMENT WITH COMMITTEE, BUT IT SEEMS THERE WOULD BE
GREAT OVERLAP WITH WHAT THAT COMMISSION WOULD BE
CHARGED WITH AND WHAT WE’RE CHARGED WITH.
MS. CURRIE - WE’RE NOT CHARGED WITH DEVELOPING A NEW
CHARTER. WE’RE CHARGED WITH RECOMMENDING WHETHER THERE
SHOULD BE A NEW CHARTER.
MR. SEEWALD - OR WHETHER THERE WERE PARTICULAR FIXES THAT
COULD BE MADE TO THE CURRENT CHARTER. THIS IS A COMMITTEE
APPOINTED EVERY TEN YEARS. A CHARTER COMMISSION IS ONLY
APPOINTED WHEN THE CITY DEEMS IT APPROPRIATE.
4

5. COUNCILOR ADAMS -WE’LL BE DONE EARLY NEXT YEAR. IF IT
OCCURS, IT WOULD BE AFTER THAT. THERE WOULD BE NO OVERLAP.
WE’D BE DEFUNCT AT THAT POINT.
MR. WARNER - WASN’T THINKING ABOUT OVERLAP IN TERMS OF
TIME, BUT OVERLAP IN TERMS OF MISSION.
MR. SEEWALD - OUR MISSION IS A VERY SMALL PIECE OF WHAT A
CHARTER COMMISSION WOULD DO. THERE HAS TO BE A PETITION
DRIVE TO GET AT LEAST 15 PERCENT OF VOTERS REGISTERED AT
PRECEDING SPECIAL ELECTION REQUESTING THAT THE QUESTION OF
A CHARTER COMMISSION BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT. ELECTION
ORDER OF 60 DAYS THAT PASSES. SPECIFIC LANGUAGE ON BALLOT
RE WHETHER COMMISSION IS FORMER. NOMINATION OF
COMMISSION MEMBERS. (READING HOME RULE CHARTER
ADOPTION REVISION - FROM COUNCILOR NARKEWICZ )
FIRST VOTE TO DETERMINE WHETHER YOU’RE GOING TO
NOMINATE AND HAVE AN ELECTION FOR CHARTER COMMISSION
MEMBERS. IF THAT PASSES, YOU HAVE ELECTION OF CHARTER
COMMISSION MEMBERS. CHARTER COMMISSION GETS ORGANIZED
AND FUNDS. A CITY OF 12,000 TO 49,999 WOULD REQUIRE AN
APPROPRIATION OF AT LEAST $5000, WHICH CERTAINLY WOULD NOT
BE ENOUGH TO DO THIS WORK. COMMISSION HOLDS PUBLIC
HEARINGS. ISSUES A PRELIMINARY REPORT WITHIN 16 MONTHS OF
ITS ELECTION. LONG, MULTI-YEAR PROCESS. THIS COMMITTEE
COULD NEVER HAVE DONE THAT WORK.
MS. CURRIE - WASN’T OUR JOB.
MR. SEEWALD - NO IT WASN’T. THEN WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF ITS
ELECTION, THE COMMISSION HAS TO FILE A FINAL REPORT. THAT
GOES TO ATTORNEY GENERAL. THAT GETS PLACED ON BALLOT.
THERE’S ANOTHER ELECTION. PROBABLY TWO YEARS.
MR. WARNER - IF OUR RECOMMENDATION IS THERE BE A
COMMISSION, IS IT BECAUSE WE BELIEVE CHARTER IS SO POORLY
WRITTEN AND UNCLEAR AND NEEDS TO BE REWRITTEN, OR BECAUSE
WE FIND SOME PARTICULAR THING WHICH REALLY NEEDS TO BE
CHANGED IN THE GOVERNANCE OF THE CITY? SHOULD WE BE
DEALING WITH THESE ISSUES OF WHETHER THE MAYOR CHAIRS THE
CITY COUNCIL.
MS. CURRIE - WE’VE TALKED ABOUT THAT - WHETHER ISSUES GET
TOO MINUTE. BUT THERE WERE ISSUES IN THE BEST PRACTICES
5

6. COMMITTEE’S RECOMMENDATIONS OF THINGS WHICH NEEDED TO BE
LOOKED AT. IT’S NOT OUR ONLY MANDATE. BUT THAT’S WHY WE’VE
ASKED THOSE QUESTIONS, WHY THEY WERE ASKED OF MAYOR AND
COUNCILORS LAST MEETING, AND PRESUMABLY WILL BE ON THE
AGENDA FOR THE PUBLIC FORUM. BUT I THINK WE DON’T WANT TO
MAKE TOO MANY OF THOSE KINDS ... WE CAN REPORT WHAT PEOPLE
HAVE SAID. I DON’T KNOW WHETHER WE WANT TO MAKE
PARTICULAR RECOMMENDATIONS.
AT BEGINNING I THOUGHT WE WOULD GO THROUGH CURRENT
CHARTER AND MAKE RECOMMENDATION SECTION BY SECTION.
COMMITTEE DECIDED ABSOLUTELY NOT. CHARTER NEEDED TO BE
TRASHED. WE WERE GIVEN EXAMPLES OF OTHER CHARTER, WE
ASKED MARILYN CONTRERAS TO COME BECAUSE OF HER EXPERTISE,
AND TO GIVE US EXAMPLES, AND THERE THEY WERE. THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MICRO-MANAGING THAT OUR CHARTER
DOES, AND THE BROADER CONCEPT OF A STRUCTURE, AND LET THE
WORK HAPPEN WITHIN THE VARIOUS PIECES.
MR. WARNER - AND THE CLARITY OF THE ORGANIZATION IS EVIDENT
IN THE OTHER CHARTERS, TOO.
MS. CURRIE - THAT’S WHERE WE’RE HEADED. TO SOME EXTENT I
AGREE WE SAY TRASH IT AND HERE’S A GOOD EXAMPLE, OR HERE
ARE PARTS OF OTHER CHARTERS, BUT THAT’S NOT OUR JOB.
MR. SEEWALD - DECISION TO PICK PARTICULAR PARTS OUT OF A
CHARTER HAS POLITICAL RAMIFICATIONS. EXAMPLE - IS THE MAYOR
ON THE SCHOOL COMMITTEE? IF SO, DOES THE MAYOR CHAIR THE
COMMITTEE? THOSE ARE STRUCTURAL THINGS WHICH WE DO NOT
HAVE TIME OR ABILITY TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT
POLITICAL RAMIFICATIONS.
MR. WARNER - DO YOU HAVE A SENSE WHETHER THE EXPECTATION
WAS THAT WE PROVIDE GUIDANCE ON THESE ISSUES?
MR. SEEWALD - I DON’T.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - WE HAVEN’T TAKEN POSITION RE WHETHER
ANYTHING WAS A PARTICULAR NECESSITY FOR A COMMISSION OR
SPECIAL ACT GROUP. HAVE TALKED ABOUT WANTING A NEW
CHARTER. MAYBE POINT OUT PARTICULAR CHARTER(S) AS
EXAMPLES. BUT NOT SPECIFIC ISSUES AS BEING MANDATORY.
6

7. COUNCILOR LABARGE - WE HAD PUBLIC HEARING. SPOKE TO MARY
MAZZA - DISCUSSION RE HER OFFICE AT THAT HEARING - DID NOT
KNOW OTHERS WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT HER DEPARTMENT.
ASKED WHEN NEXT MEETING WAS. WOULD LIKE TO SAY WHAT SHE
FEELS ABOUT HER DEPARTMENT.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - TOLD HIM SAME THING. TOLD HER IF SHE
COULDN’T ATTEND, COULD SUBMIT SOMETHING IN WRITING.
MS. CURRIE - WAS CLERK’S OFFICE AMONG DEPARTMENTS ASKED
ABOUT CHARTER?
MR. SEEWALD - NOT SURE WHETHER THERE WAS A RESPONSE.
WOULD HAVE TO LOOK BACK. ANYTIME SHE WANTS TO COME –
PUBLIC FORM NEXT MONTH. BUT NEEDS TO BE ASSURED NOTHING
WE DO HERE IS GONG TO EFFECT HER ROLE IN CITY GOVERNMENT.
MS. CURRIE - HER OFFICE JUST CAME UP AS AN EXAMPLE OF
APPOINTMENT VS. HIRING. PROFESSIONAL POSITION.
MR. SEEWALD - MAYOR BROUGHT IT UP. SAID MS. MAZZA DOES AN
EXCELLENT JOB. SHOULD BE PART OF PROFESSIONAL STAFF.
COUNCILOR LABARGE - SHE DISAGREES WITH THAT.
MR. SEEWALD - THE WAY I ENVISIONED REPORT – MAY BE BLEEDING
INTO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 5 –
1. ALL REVIEWED CHARTER, HEARD FROM MARILYN
CONTRERAS,
READ SEVERAL OTHER MORE MODERN CHARTERS. ALL AGREE A
NEW CHARTER NEEDS TO BE DEVELOPED (ALTHOUGH NOT SPEAKING
FOR COMMITTEE).
HEARD FROM OTHERS LAST MONTH AND PERHAPS A MAJORITY OF
THIS COMMITTEE AGREE THAT CHARTER COMMISSION IS BEST OR
MOST APPROPRIATE PROCESS FOR DOING THAT.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF MAJOR ISSUES BEYOND FUNDAMENTAL
STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS OF OUR CHARTER THAT ISN’T JUST
FORMING SKELETON OF A GOVERNMENT AND DIVIDING POWERS
AND ALLOWING DETAILS OF EACH OF THOSE DEPARTMENTS TO BE
7

8. FORMULATED THROUGH CITY COUNCIL’S PROCESS OF PASSING
ORDINANCES.
HERE ARE THE BIG ISSUES WE’VE SEE - AND THESE WERE BIG
ISSUES DISCUSSED IN 70S AND 90S:
BETTER SEPARATION OF POWERS SO MAYOR IS NOT CHAIRING
COUNCIL MEETING. WE COULD SAY THERE IS A CONSENSUS
AMONG COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND MANY WE HEARD FROM
THIS IS AN ANTIQUATED MODEL AND OUGHT TO BE CHANGED.
MAYOR’S ROLE ON SCHOOL COMMITTEE - MEMBER? CHAIR?
LENGTH OF TERMS
TERM LIMITS - ADDRESSING COUNCILOR ADAMS, I KNOW
YOU’RE A BIG SUPPORTER.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - AS I HEAR AND THING MORE ABOUT THIS, NOT
SURE COMMISSION NEEDS TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE.
MR. SEEWALD - COMMISSION WILL ADDRESS WHAT IT DECIDES TO
ADDRESS. NOTHING WE SAY BINDS COMMISSION EITHER WAY.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - IF WE HAD A MORE SKELETAL CHARTER,
COUNCIL COULD DECIDE WHETHER IT THOUGHT TERM LIMITS WERE
APPROPRIATE. AND FRANKLY, DURING ALL THE DISCUSSION, THINK
I’VE BEEN TALKED OUT OF THE IDEA TERM LIMITS ARE THE WAY TO
GO.
MR. WARNER - IT DOES SHOW UP IN OTHER CHARTERS, THOUGH.
MR. SEEWALD - WE HAVE CONSENSUS ON CERTAIN THINGS, MOST
NOTABLY THE MAYOR NOT CHAIRING CITY COUNCIL, AND HAVING A
BETTER SEPARATION OF POWER. WE CAN INDICATE THAT. OTHER
ISSUES THAT WERE DISCUSSED - LENGTH OF TERMS - PERSONALLY
FEELS TWO YEARS FOR MAYOR TOO SHORT. NEEDS TO START
CAMPAIGNING FOR NEXT ELECTION SHORTLY AFTER TAKING OFFICE.
COUNCILOR LABARGE - EVEN TWO YEARS FOR COUNCILOR - A
LEARNING PROCESS, JUST AS FOR MAYOR. HAS BEEN A COUNCILOR
THIRTEEN YEARS. ALWAYS LEARNING. BELIEVES IT SHOULD BE
FOUR YEARS FOR MAYOR AND FOR COUNCILORS.
8

9. RE: HOW LONG A COUNCILOR SERVES - BELIEVES VOTERS
SHOULD DECIDE. IF DOING A GOOD JOB, RE-ELECTED; IF NOT,
YOU’RE OUT.
MR. SEEWALD - ANOTHER ISSUE THAT CAME UP - AT-LARGE/WARD
MIX. THESE ARE ISSUES THAT CHARTER COMMISSION NEEDS TO
LOOK AT AND MAKE DECISION WHETHER CURRENT DIVISION IS
APPROPRIATE.
COUNCILOR LABARGE - ALSO TALKED ABOUT PRESIDENT AND VICE-
PRESIDENT FOR CITY COUNCILOR. SPOKE TO COUNCILORS IN
SPRINGFIELD AND EASTHAMPTON. WENT TO MEETING IN
EASTHAMPTON. RUN THE WAY IT SHOULD BE. LIKES THAT SYSTEM.
MR. WARNER - STILL STUCK RE OUR ROLE. HAD SENSE WE WERE TO
OFFER GUIDELINES ON HOW WE THOUGHT THIS FUTURE CHARTER
OUGHT TO LOOK. WOULD OFFER POSITION ON ALL THESE ISSUES -
TERM LIMITS, SEPARATION OF POWERS, COUNCIL OFFICERS.
COUNCILOR LABARGE - DON’T KNOW WHY WE CAN’T STATE A
RECOMMENDATION.
MR. SEEWALD - HE’D LIKE TO HAVE LIST OF ISSUES WE’D LIKE TO
ADDRESS IN REPORT. NEXT MEETING WE HAVE IS PUBLIC FORUM.
MEETING AFTER THAT WOULD NEED TO TAKE POSITION ON THESE
VARIOUS ISSUES IF THAT’S WHAT WE’RE GOING TO DO. THEN WE
NEED TO PUT TOGETHER A REPORT. MAY BE DIVIDED ON A NUMBER
OF THESE ISSUES, AND WE CAN REPORT THAT.
WOULD REALLY LIKE TO MAKE LIST OF ISSUES WE SHOULD BE
PREPARED TO DISCUSS AND TAKE A POSITION ON AT OUR JANUARY
MEETING. I’VE GOT FIVE ITEMS ON MY LIST.
SEPARATION OF POWERS
MR. WARNER - COULD YOU EXPAND ON THAT?
MR. SEEWALD - ESSENTIALLY, ISSUE OF MAYOR CHAIRING CITY
COUNCIL.
MR. WARNER - SURE, BUT COULD BREAK IT DOWN FURTHER TO
WHAT ARE THE POWERS ...
(VARIOUS VOICES) - COULD WE JUST GET LIST?
MR. WARNER - SURE.
9

10. TERM LENGTH
WARD/AT-LARGE DISTRIBUTION
CITY COUNCILOR OFFICERS INCLUDING VICE-PRESIDENT
ELECTION VS. APPOINTMENT OF POSITIONS
MR. WARNER - TERM LIMITS?
MR SEEWALD - EVEN IF WE HAVE UNANIMITY OPPOSING IT, IT MAY
BE AN ISSUE A CHARTER COMMITTEE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - ARE WE GOING TO TAKE A VOTE OF THIS
COMMITTEE ON EACH OF THESE ISSUES RE WHETHER THEY SHOULD
BE SOMETHING THE COMMISSION SHOULD CONSIDER? IF WE VOTE
NO, THEN COMMISSION WOULDN’T CONSIDER.
MR. SEEWALD - BELIEVES MR. WARNER’S IDEA WAS TO RECOMMEND
WHETHER COMMISSION SHOULD ADOPT A PARTICULAR POSITION,
AM I RIGHT?
JUST AN EXAMPLE, NOT NECESSARILY WHAT
RECOMMENDATION WILL BE - WE THINK THE COMMISSION SHOULD
CONSIDER TERM LIMITS, BUT WE DON’T BELIEVE TERM LIMITS ARE
APPROPRIATE.
SCHOOL COMMITTEE - MAYOR’S ROLE
MR. WARNER - I’VE GOT OTHERS. THESE CAME UP AT LAST
MEETING.
NUMBER OF SIGNATURES TO GET ON BALLOTS
PROCESS FOR INITIATIVE PETITIONS AND REFERENDUMS
COMPENSATION FOR COUNCILORS’ STIPEND
COUNCILOR ADAMS - NOT A CHARTER ISSUE.
MR. SEEWALD - THAT’S AN ORDINANCE ISSUE.
MR. WARNER - NONE THE LESS, IT IS SOMETHING THAT DOES SHOW
UP IN SOME OF THE OTHER CHARTERS.
MR. ADAMS - YOU WOULDN’T FIX AN AMOUNT.
MR. WARNER - NO, WOULDN’T FIX AN AMOUNT, BUT SOME OF THE
OTHER CHARTERS SAY SPECIFICALLY .. NOT FOR COUNCIL ONLY, BUT
10

11. FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AS WELL - THERE SHALL BE NO
COMPENSATION.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - HOW IS THAT NOT AN ORDINANCE ISSUE?
MR. WARNER - CAN USE AN ORDINANCE TO SET WHAT THE
COMPENSATION WILL BE. BUT IN THE GENERAL SENSE THAT YOU
WOULD SET UP A CHARTER AS TO HOW YOUR CITY GOVERNMENT
WORKS, THIS LAYS OUT A FRAMEWORK THAT’S MUCH FOR DIFFICULT
FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO CHANGE.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - WHAT WOULD BE IN THE CHARTER THAT
WOULD DO THAT?
MR. WARNER - IT SAYS THERE SHALL BE NO COMPENSATION IN
TERMS OF SALARY, MAYBE FOR EXPENSES. EASTHAMPTON,
GREENFIELD - NO COMPENSATION.
MR. SEEWALD - NOT REFERRING TO MAYOR OR CITY COUNCILOR,
BUT TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
MR. WARNER - BUT DOES SAY WITH REGARD TO MAYOR, IT’S A FULL
TIME JOB AND THE MAYOR SHALL HAVE NO OTHER JOB.
MR. SEEWALD - NOT A BIG ISSUE THAT WE NEED TO POINT OUT.
MR. WARNER - JUST SAYING THESE WERE THINGS BROUGHT UP BY
PEOPLE LAST TIME. OTHER THINGS WERE INDEPENDENT BOARDS
AND AUDITS.
MR. SEEWALD - INDEPENDENT BOARDS AND AUDITS. WHAT’S THAT.
MR. WARNER - TWO SEPARATE THINGS - WHAT BOARDS ARE
IDENTIFIED IN THE CHARTER, OR WHAT PROCESS WOULD BE FOR
CREATING NEW BOARDS AND HOW THEY WOULD FUNCTION
INDEPENDENTLY OF OTHER BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - SEVERAL BOARDS IN THE CITY, FOR EXAMPLE,
CULTURE AND RECREATION, WERE CREATED PURELY BY ORDINANCE
AND OTHERS ARE REQUIRED BY CHARTER AND MAYBE STATE LAW.
ARE YOU SAYING WE SHOULD REVIEW THAT?
11

12. MS. CURRIE - THESE ARE ALSO THINGS YOU’RE SAYING CAME UP AT
THE LAST MEETING, AND THEY ARE NOT COMING TO MY BRAIN
WHATSOEVER.
MR. SEEWALD - THERE ARE CERTAIN BOARDS THAT HAVE TO BE
CREATED BY STATE LAW.
I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THE ROLE OF BOARD OF PUBLIC
WORKS
MR. WARNER - AND WHETHER THE WATER BOARD SHOULD HAVE
CONTROL OF THEM.
MR. SEEWALD - I THINK RAISED AS AN EXAMPLE BECAUSE CHARTER
IS UNCLEAR. PEOPLE SOMETIMES THINK COUNCIL HAS THAT
CONTROL AND WHEN YOU WADE THROUGH THE CHARTER, ACTUALLY
BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS HAS THAT.
BUT WHAT I THINK WHAT WE’RE LOOKING FOR – AND I’M OPEN
TO HEARING DIFFERENTLY – ARE THE RED FLAGS IN OUR CHARTER.
ANY CHARTER IS GOING TO BREAK DOWN THE BRANCHES OF
GOVERNMENT AND WHAT THEIR ROLES ARE, AND CREATE A SCHOOL
COMMITTEE, AND PROBABLY A BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS TO
CONTROL STREETS, SEWERS, WATER.
MR. WARNER - BUDGET - BECOMES BUDGET EVEN IF COUNCIL
DOESN’T APPROVE IT. WAS THAT A SUGGESTION THAT IS A
PROBLEM, OR WAS THAT SOMETHING ELSE? OTHER CHARTERS HAVE
CLEAR SENSE OF FISCAL PROCEDURES
COUNCILOR ADAMS - ISN’T THAT STATE LAW?
MR. SEEWALD - I DON’T KNOW.
COUNCILOR LABARGE - ONLY POWER IS TO REDUCE, NOT TO
INCREASE.
MR. SEEWALD - IF YOU REJECT MAYOR’S BUDGET, WHAT HAPPENS?
COUNCILOR ADAMS - IT BECOMES THE BUDGET.
MR. SEEWALD - IS THAT AN ISSUE FOR A CHARTER COMMISSION TO
LOOK AT – THE BUDGET PROCESS.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - I DON’T THINK SO. NOT AS IF THE COUNCIL
HAS RESOURCES TO DEVELOP ITS OWN BUDGET.
12

13. COUNCILOR LABARGE - HAVE NEVER SEEN COUNCIL DECREASE
BUDGET.
MR. WARNER - IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WORKS? SHOULD THERE
BE A LINE ITEM VETO?
IS THIS ANOTHER AREA WHERE IT MAY BE HELPFUL TO LOOK
AT WHAT OTHER PEER CITIES AND TOWNS ARE DOING. IF 97
PERCENT OF OTHERS ARE DOING IT DIFFERENTLY, IS THIS AN AREA
FOR IMPROVEMENT.
COUNCILOR LABARGE/MR. SEEWALD - ARE YOU VOLUNTEERING?
MR. WARNER - OF COURSE! I THINK WE SHOULD DIVIDE THE TASKS,
GO THROUGH HALF A DOZEN OTHERS ...
MS. CURRIE - NOT OUR JOB TO GO INTO THAT MUCH DETAIL. I
KNOW YOU CAME INTO PROCESS LATE. BUT THAT’S WHAT I
THOUGHT WE WERE DOING AT THE BEGINNING. YOU CANNOT GET
THE FLAVOR OF THE REACTION BY READING THE MINUTES, BUT THE
REACTION WAS INTENSE. NOW I GET IT. OUR JOB IS BROAD, NOT
DETAILED. WE HAVE THE OTHER EXAMPLES FOR THE PURPOSE OF
GIVING GUIDANCE, BUT NOT TO DO SECTION BY SECTION. THIS IS
NOVEMBER. FEBRUARY IS OUR LAST MEETING. MARCH WE HAVE TO
PRESENT OUR REPORT.
USING THIS LIST AS FRAMEWORK FOR PUBLIC FORUM, SEEING
WHAT ELSE COMES UP, WE MAY ADD TO THE LIST.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - JUST DEVELOP LIST AND MOVE ON TO NEXT
AGENDA ITEMS.
MR. SEEWALD - THINKS WE ALREADY DID AGENDA ITEM #5.
AFTER DECEMBER PUBLIC FORUM, ARE WE GOING TO TAKE
VOTES ON THESE ISSUES IN JANUARY?
COUNCILOR ADAMS - I THINK THAT’S THE WAY TO GO.
MR. SEEWALD - THEN ASSIGN SOMEONE TO DO DRAFT TO REVIEW
AT FEBRUARY MEETING. WOULD LIKE A REPORT TO REVIEW IN
FEBRUARY, AND GET IT TO THE COUNCIL BY MARCH.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - WOULD BE GREAT. RIGHT ON TIME.
13

14. MS. CURRIE - DON’T WANT TO DO REPORT ONLY ABOUT PARTICULAR
ITEMS. WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE/HOPE WE’RE TALKING ABOUT
INCLUDING THE BROAD RECOMMENDATION TO SCRAP WHAT WE
HAVE.
MR. SEEWALD - I THINK IT STARTS WITH A RECOGNITION OF THE
STRUCTURAL PROBLEM WHICH THIS CHARTER HAS AND THE
INABILITY OF A COMMITTEE SUCH AS OURS TO MAKE MEANINGFUL
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CONTINUE TO PATCH UP WHAT WE HAVE.
WE NEED A NEW CHARTER FROM GROUND ZERO UP. AND, BY THE
WAY, HERE ARE SOME OF THE MAJOR ISSUES THAT HAVE
PERSISTENTLY ARISEN WITH CHARTER WE HAVE, AND WE WOULD
HOPE A CHARTER COMMISSION WOULD CONSIDER THEM IN ITS
DELIBERATIONS.
MS. CURRIE - I DON’T KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE POSITIONS ON
THE ISSUES. I THINK WE CAN IDENTIFY THEM AS HAVING BEEN
BROUGHT UP IN BEST PRACTICES RECOMMENDATIONS, BY
COUNCILORS, AT LAST WEEK’S MEETING, IN PUBLIC FORM. NOT
SURE WE HAVE TO TAKE POSITIONS ON THEM. CAN STATE OTHERS’
POSITIONS, BUT I DON’T KNOW WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THEM. OUR
JOB WAS TO RECOMMEND, NOT TO TAKE POSITIONS.
MR. SEEWALD - IF WE LOOK BACK, THESE ARE ISSUES WHICH CAME
UP 30 YEARS AGO AND 10 YEARS AGO.
MS. CURRIE - AND STILL PEOPLE COULD NOT BRING THEMSELVES TO
VOTE TO MAKE CHANGES.
MR. SEEWALD - THAT’S MY BIG CONCERN HERE, MY CONCERN ABOUT
THE CHARTER COMMISSION. I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE NEED
FOR VOTER PARTICIPATION, THERE’S JUST SO MUCH VOTER
PARTICIPATION. THERE’S ALSO A GREAT DEAL OF EXPENSE
INVOLVED. EVERY TIME THERE’S AN ELECTION... COUNCILOR
LABARGE, I THINK YOU TOLD US HOW MUCH ONE COSTS.
COUNCILOR LABARGE - A SPECIAL ELECTION - 15 TO 20 THOUSAND
DOLLARS.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - THESE WILL BE DURING GENERAL ELECTION.
WON’T REQUIRE SPECIAL ELECTION.
14

15. MR. SEEWALD - WELL YOU’LL NEED A SPECIAL ELECTION TO DECIDE
WHETHER COMMISSION MEMBERS WILL BE NOMINATED. THEN A
SPECIAL ELECTION TO ELECT COMMISSIONERS.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - IS A SPECIAL ELECTION REQUIRED? THAT’S
NOT GOING TO FLY SO WELL.
MS. CURRIE - IF YOU ONLY HOLD AN ELECTION WHEN YOU’RE
HAVING AN ELECTION ANYWAY, IT WOULD TAKE FOUR YEARS.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - BETTER OFF DOING IT THAT WAY THAN
ADDING THE EXPENSE OF A SPECIAL ELECTION. WENDY WILL KILL
US. TAXPAYERS WILL TOO.
MS. CURRIE - THAT’S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT THEN, WHETHER
WE DO SPECIAL ACT AND LET YOU FOLKS PICK THE GROUP WHO ARE
GOING TO BE THE COMMISSION.
MR. SEEWALD - THEN IT JUST GOES ON BALLOT AT THE END. I’LL
PROBABLY GET SKEWERED FOR SAYING THIS BECAUSE IT IS NOT IN
KEEPING WITH ...
MS. CURRIE - BUT THE COUNCIL DECIDES THAT, DOESN’T IT?
COUNCIL DECIDES WHETHER COMMISSION OR SPECIAL ACT?
MR. SEEWALD - COUNCIL HAS TO DECIDE THAT. WHETHER YOU’RE
GOING TO SPEND THE MONEY AND HAVE THREE ELECTIONS...
MR. WARNER - IS THERE AN ALTERNATIVE TO USING A CHARTER
COMMISSION?
MR. SEEWALD - YES. THE STATE LEGISLATURE CAN PASS SPECIAL
ACTS IF A COMMUNITY VOTES TO ASK THE LEGISLATURE TO DO SO.
MR. WARNER - SPECIAL ACT WOULD BE ESTABLISHING AN ENTIRELY
NEW CHARTER?
MR. SEEWALD - EXACTLY. MANY, MANY COMMUNITIES HAVE SPECIAL
ACT CHARTERS. AMHERST HAS A SPECIAL ACT CHARTER. UNDER
HOME RULE AMENDMENT THE LEGISLATURE CANNOT VOTE A LAW
THAT APPLIES TO ONLY ONE CITY OR TOWN UNLESS THAN CITY OR
TOWN HAS ASKED FOR THAT.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - WHEN WAS THE HOME RULE AMENDMENT?
15

16. MR. SEEWALD - MID-SIXTIES. BEFORE THAT LEGISLATURE COULD
VOTE TO MAKE CITIES OR TOWNS DO WHATEVER THE LEGISLATURE
WANTED THEM TO DO. THERE WAS NO LIMITED. THE HOME RULE
AMENDMENT CREATED THIS LIMITATION. THERE IS NO ‘UNIFORMITY
IN MUNICIPALITIES” REQUIREMENT.
SO IF THERE IS A REQUEST FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, SIGNED
BY THE MAYOR, TO THE LEGISLATURE TO APPROVE A SPECIAL ACT
CHARTER, THE LEGISLATURE CAN DO IT. THE LEGISLATURE WOULD
GENERALLY LIKE TO SEE THE SPECIAL ACT CHARTER GO ON A
BALLOT. USED TO BE THE LEGISLATURE WOULD JUST PASS THEM,
BUT IN MORE RECENT YEARS THE LEGISLATURE HAS BEEN LIKING TO
SEE A MUNICIPAL ELECTION AT THE END OF THE PROCESS AFTER
THE LEGISLATURE HAS APPROVED IT, AND IT DOESN’T BECOME
EFFECTIVE UNLESS AND UNTIL THE VOTERS PASS IT. THAT’S
ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE.
MR. WARNER - WHAT’S THE DOWN SIDE TO THAT?
MR. SEEWALD - THE DOWN SIDE TO THAT, AT LEAST IN PERCEPTION,
IS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR CAN APPOINT PEOPLE
TO THIS COMMITTEE WHO WILL MAKE THOSE DECISIONS. THE CITY
COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR WILL THEN ENACT IT, AND SEND IT TO
THE LEGISLATURE. IT DOESN’T INVOLVE AS MUCH CITIZEN
PARTICIPATION AS A CHARTER COMMISSION DOES.
MR. WARNER - EVEN IF YOU ASSURE THAT IT WOULD HAVE A
REFERENDUM.
MR. SEEWALD - DON’T FORGET THAT CHARTER COMMISSION
MEMBERS ARE ELECTED BY THE VOTERS, SO THE VOTERS ARE
ELECTING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE CREATING THE NEW CHARTER.
MR. WARNER - SEEMS MORE EXPEDIENT.
MR. SEEWALD - BUT MUNICIPAL PROCESS IS OFTEN NOT ABOUT
EXPEDIENCE, AND PARTICULARLY THE WAY THINGS HAVE GONE IN
THE CITY, THE DESIRE TO INCREASE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND
OPENNESS IS PALPABLE. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU AND THE
OTHER COUNCILORS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DECIDE.
MS. CURRIE - IN SPITE OF ALL THAT WAS SAID IN LAST MONTH’S
MEETING, YOU NOTICE THE ROOM, EXCEPT FOR MR. COHEN, IS A
LITTLE EMPTY. THERE WAS ONE PERSON HERE, AND THERE WAS NO
SPEAKING.
16

17. MR. SEEWALD - I’LL BE VERY CURIOUS TO SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE
SHOW UP NEXT WEEK. I DON’T THINK THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT’S
REALLY RALLYING PEOPLE OUT THERE, AND I’M REALLY CONCERNED
THAT A CHARTER COMMISSION PROCESS IS JUST GOING TO WITHER.
MR. WARNER - WOULDN’T IT BE APPROPRIATE TO GET FURTHER INTO
WHAT HAPPENED IN 1994 AND IN 1972 WHEN THIS PROCESS WHEN
THIS PROCESS HAPPENED BEFORE? WHY DID IT FAIL?
COUNCILOR ADAMS - IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT, GIVE DAVID
STEVENS A RING.
MR. WARNER - WHO’S DAVID STEVENS?
COUNCILOR ADAMS - HE WAS ON ONE OF THESE THINGS.
COUNCILOR LABARGE HAS TALKED TO HIM
COUNCILOR LABARGE - WASN’T MICHAEL BARDSLEY?
MR. SEEWALD - PAT GOGGINS WAS ON THE LAST ONE.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - THOSE WOULD BE THE PEOPLE TO TALK TO.
MS. CURRIE - DOESN’T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE TO WHAT’S GOING TO
HAPPEN NOW. THAT WAS THEN, THIS IS NOW. DIFFERENT PEOPLE,
DIFFERENT TIMES. IF YOU WANT TO DO IT FOR YOUR OWN
CURIOSITY ..
MR. WARNER - I’LL DO IT FOR CURIOSITY PURPOSES. BUT IF IT WAS
A MODEL THAT WAS DONE TWICE... LET’S SAY WE’RE WALKING
DOWN THEO THE SAME PATH THAT PEOPLE WENT DOWN THIRTY
YEARS AGO AND SIXTEEN YEARS AGO ...
MS. CURRIE - THAT’S WHAT MR. SEEWALD IS SAYING. DON’T DO
THAT AGAIN. DON’T DO THE COMMISSION. DO THE SPECIAL ACT
MR. WARNER - WELL, I DON’T KNOW. WAS THAT THE PATH THEY
WENT DOWN IN THE PAST? WAS IT THE COMMISSION? I KIND OF
LIKE THE IDEA .. THE CITY COUNCIL APPOINTING A BUNCH OF
PEOPLE...
17

18. MR. SEEWALD - (LAUGHING) YOU HAVEN’T BEEN PAYING ATTENTION
TO THE WAY THINGS HAVE BEEN GOING IN CITY GOVERNMENT
LATELY. IT’S A LOT MORE CHARGED THAN IT SEEMS ON ITS FACE.
I THINK WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO THINK ABOUT WHETHER
WE’RE GOING TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL - IF WE’RE
GOING TO MAKE ANY RECOMMENDATION - WHETHER IT’S A CHARTER
COMMISSION OR HOME RULE.
MS. CURRIE - O.K. YOU’VE CONVINCED ME. IT’S HOME RULE. BUT
DO WE HAVE TO DO THAT TONIGHT, OR DO WE DO THAT IN
JANUARY.
MR. SEEWALD - WE DO THAT IN JANUARY.
(MS. STRIEBEL ARRIVED. MR. SEEWALD UPDATED HER ON
DISCUSSION TO THIS POINT.)
4. PLANNING FOR DECEMBER PUBLIC FORUM
MS. CURRIE - HAD TALKED AT AN EARLIER MEETING - GETTING IT
INTO THE GAZETTE, GETTING IT ON THE RADIO - CHAIR GOING ON
RADIO.
MR. SEEWALD - HOW DO YOU GET IT ON THE RADIO
COUNCILOR LABARGE - CHRIS COLLINS
MR. SEEWALD - WILLING TO DO IT. JUST WONDERING – IS THIS AN
HOUR LONG SHOW?
COUNCILOR ADAMS - FIFTEEN MINUTE SEGMENTS.
MR. SEEWALD - BILL NEWMAN HAS A SHOW.
COUNCILOR LABARGE - DOES HE?
COUNCILOR ADAMS - THAT MINUTE THING?
MR. SEEWALD - NO. I HEARD HIM INTERVIEWING JOHN OLVER - A
LONG INTERVIEW.
COUNCILOR LABARGE - I THINK IF YOU CALL WHMP RADIO AND ASK
FOR CHRIS COLLINS, AND YOU TELL HIM YOU’D LIKE TO COME ON
18

19. AND TALK ABOUT OUR COMMITTEE, AND WHAT YOU’D LIKE TO
ANNOUNCE, IT SHOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM.
MR. SEEWALD - HOW ELSE DO I GET THE WORD OUT?
COUNCILOR LABARGE - ADAM COHEN, ON HIS WEBSITE.
MR. COHEN - IF YOU COULD MAKE A ONE PAGE FLYER WITH THOSE
FIVE KEY ISSUES, PEOPLE COULD PUT THAT OUT.
MR. SEEWALD - WHO’S GOING TO MAKE A FLYER.
MR. WARNER - I CAN MAKE A FLYER.
COUNCILOR LABARGE - WE CAN ALSO PUT IT ON OUR WEBSITE FOR
WARD 6.
DISCUSSION RE OTHER WEBSITES/PEOPLE TO CONTACT.
MR. WARNER - I RAN AFOUL OF MY UNDERSTANDING OF OPEN
MEETING LAW BY DISCUSSING THINGS IN AN EMAIL. IF I SEND A
FLYER TO BE REVIEWED, TO WHAT EXTENT IS THAT PROCEDURAL
AND TO WHAT EXTENT IS THAT EXPRESSING OPINIONS.
MR. SEEWALD - YOU CAN SEND ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ME. WE
CAN TALK ABOUT IT - TWO PEOPLE ARE NOT A QUORUM OF THIS
COMMITTEE. ONCE YOU SEND AN E-MAIL TO ALL OF US, THEN YOU
RUN AFOUL. YOU CANNOT COMMUNICATE WITH A QUORUM.
COUNCILOR ADAMS - THAT’S ON SUBSTANCE. WE CAN DISCUSS
PROCEDURAL THINGS - SCHEDULE THINGS.
MR. SEEWALD - WILL REVIEW FLYER. WILL SEND TO MARY (MIDURA)
FOR FORWARDING TO COUNCILORS, FOR POSTING ON OUR
WEBSITE.
COUNCILOR LABARGE - CHANNEL 15 - NCTV - AT NORTHAMPTON
HIGH SCHOOL
REVIEWING MEETING DATES.
MR. SEEWALD - WILL DO BEST TO KEEP FOLKS AT PUBLIC FORUM
FOCUSED ON CHARTER.
19

20. MR. WARNER - DO WE POLL THOSE ATTENDING ON ISSUES WE’VE
IDENTIFIED?
MR. SEEWALD - HAPPY TO INTRODUCE ISSUES.
MS. CURRIE - FLYER WILL BE OUT THERE WITH ISSUES ON IT. WE
WANT TO HEAR FROM THEM.
MR. WARNER - SUGGESTING PAPER BALLOT.
MR. SEEWALD - WHAT WOULD WE DO WITH THAT?
MR. WARNER - INFORM OURSELVES. ALSO IF YOU PRESENT IT AS
SEEKING OPINIONS, NOT ONLY OF THOSE SPEAKING, MAY BE WAY
TO INCREASE ATTENDANCE.
MS. CURRIE - THEY’LL SEE THE ISSUES. EITHER THEY CARE OR THEY
DON’T. SUPPOSEDLY THERE’S A HOT BED OF CONCERN OUT THERE.
DISCUSSION RE NUMBERS WHO MAY ATTEND; NUMBERS INVITED TO
LAST MONTHS MEETING.
MS. STRIEBEL - SEES LIST OF ISSUES; DOES NOT INCLUDE
STRUCTURAL EFFICACY OF EXISTING CHARTER. IS THAT
UNDERSTOOD ...
MR. SEEWALD - REVIEWED DISCUSSION ON THAT ISSUE.
5. PLANNING FOR JANUARY AND FEBRUARY MEETINGS AND
PREPARATION OF REPORT
(THIS ITEM COMBINED WITH AGENDA ITEM 3.)
6. ATTENDANCE AT NEXT MEETING
ANYONE WHO WILL NOT BE HERE ON 8TH
? COUNCILOR ADAMS MAY
HAVE AN ISSUE.
7. NEW BUSINESS
NONE
8. ADJOURN - 8:20 P.M.
20

21. MOTION - COUNCILOR ADAMS; SECONDED - COUNCILOR LABARGE.
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
21