Members of the Amarillo City Council and the charter review committee discussed four proposed city charter amendments at Tuesday’s special meeting in downtown Amarillo.
Of the four charter amendments, the one that received the most discussion was Proposition C, which would increase the number of councilmembers to six, not counting the mayor, with three council seats requiring residents to live in the district they serve in. With this proposition, those residency-required seats would still be elected by a citywide vote.
Mayor Cole Stanley, who has favored some version of a mix of geographic districts and citywide districts in past comments, spoke out about the measures all being placed on the same proposition. He stated that he felt they should not be tied together under the same amendment, since this could leave voters conflicted about combining the stipulation with expanding the council.
“I think if you put in a residency like that in with the other prop, I think that you can tie those two together, and you potentially could miss out on getting that better representation by adding those two positions, just because it’s going to be hard to message what a residency requirement is,” he said. “How it’s going to function, and then the cons of it, because it mirrors and looks like a single-member district, which it’s not. So, what you saw council attempting to do would be to separate that out, as it’s a standalone item.”
Stanley stressed that he sees the benefits of having some seats tied to a specific area of the city, but he does not favor single-member districts, and he does not see this amendment as an establishment of such.
“But in gaining better representation for our citizens, you can see the benefits of this side of town doesn't have a representative; it doesn't really see its voice being heard on the council,” he said. “If you were to do something like that at the strict voice of the vote, meaning they were able to vote on that by itself, then I think council is fine moving forward. Let us not tie that residency requirement to those additional two seats. You have heard it said it could be a lightning rod.”
Councilmember Tom Scherlen expressed a great amount of concern that a great majority of the city’s representation comes from one part of the city.
“One part of Amarillo has been really represented while we are missing representation for, as we said in the meeting, about 110,000 people that we are trying to include," he said. "These will be three separate districts that will have requirements of residency, so at this point in time, I am going to have to visit with my citizens to see what they think.”
Scherlen said that many citizens want single-member districts, some want a hybrid model like they are suggesting, and some want seven at-large positions. He stressed that this measure being discussed is more of a hybrid model and does not add single-member districts.
Freda Powell, former councilmember and chairperson of the charter committee who is one the few recently elected officials to be elected to office from north Amarillo, gave her thoughts on the proposed charter amendment, which would establish geographic requirements for three council positions.
“This will be about what the citizens of Amarillo want; it's important that all voices are heard throughout every area of our community," she said. “We have areas of north and northeast, south and southeast and a few other areas that are underserved and disadvantaged. So, if we can have representation on the council where citizens feel like they are being actually heard throughout every area of Amarillo and the citizens' voices are going to make a difference, I believe that is important.”
Powell said it's important for voters to educate themselves on what the charter amendment measures do when they are placed on the ballot.
“I want people to know that there is an opportunity for other areas of the city to have a voice and to be heard,” she said. "Hopefully, they will participate more in the process and come to the polls and vote, because what we hear all the time, my vote or voice is not going to matter, but it does. Sometimes people need to see people who look like them representing them."
Councilmembers show support for amendments on election recall, length and limit of terms served
Proposition A, which would change the number of signatures needed to recall an elected city official from 30% of the registered voters to 30% of those who voted in the previous election, seemed to get universal support from councilmembers. The amendment would give citizens 60 days to reach the signature threshold once the recall is petitioned for.
When asked if he felt this charter amendment went from one extreme to another, Stanley expressed support for the measure, which he felt had guardrails that would not result in serial recalls to weaponize the system.
“But I think it went from almost impossible to actually recall a candidate to it’s still difficult getting those signatures together, proving all those up, and being able to recall that candidate would take quite a bit of effort,” Stanley said. “And you have to do it in 60 days. You really do want the ability to recall a candidate if they are doing harm to your city, and you would only see something like that happen if truly they were that negative.”
Another idea that Stanley supports is the charter amendment that raises the council terms to four years instead of the current two-year term, with the caveat that it should be changed to have the mayor's position stay at two years due to the influence wielded by the position. He also favors implementing two four-year terms for each council member if the voters approve the terms of serving in office.
“If you go to four years, it's nice to have a term limit because they are lengthier terms,” he said. “I think you have a lot of comfort in town with the current system of two years that if you are not doing your job, we are going to get you out. We are going to extend that to four, so it is part of that balancing mechanism.”
Stanley says under the new system, voters would still have the ability to turn over the majority of the board in any regular election with the mayor staying for a two-year term. He feels that it balances the playing field between council members and the mayor, whom he feels has the most impact and influence as it stands now.
Scherlen seemed to favor the idea of term limits as well.
"The term limits are to recommend that you can run two consecutive terms, which give you eight years,” he said. “That was put in there, so you just don’t have the same guy running over and over and over again.”
One of the key points with the term limit charter amendment recommended by the charter committee was to ensure that the council members have staggered elections, so that the whole council does not completely turn over in one election. The committee and many council members expressed concern about a brand-new group of council members with no experience serving, leaving a leadership void and having a great learning curve for all members to be as effective as possible.
“When you’re coming in as a brand-new council member or even a mayor, you have two years before the next election cycle comes up,” Powell said. “So, what you are doing is you’re trying to learn your job, you’re trying to serve, and then you are trying to prepare to run for reelection again, which is a lot.”
More discussion, citizen feedback needed before council makes decisions on amendment proposals
The council decided not to make any decisions on the charter amendments. Further discussions will be held among Baker Tilly, their consulting firm and members of council to refine the proposed changes to the city charter to be voted on.
“For me and probably every other councilmember, we have a lot of homework to do to get out and visit with our citizens,” Scherlen said. “I want as much feedback on these propositions as possible. We are changing a charter started in 1913 and the last big amendment made in 1955. It will be very important that when we go out into the public, they understand the actual reasons why we are doing what we are doing.”
Scherlen emphasized that the council needs to make sure that potential voters need to understand the how come, what for, and answer all the questions about why an amendment is being proposed.
Powell, who has worked on charter amendments before, also weighed in on the proposed amendments to the charter, agreeing that changes needed to be made to the process to give citizens more voice in holding their elected officials accountable. She felt that her prior work on the council's previous charter amendment proposals helped her better understand the process.
“We want to reassure the citizens that we are trying to hold myself or other council members accountable to make sure we are doing our job, because we work for the citizens of Amarillo, and they are the ones that decide what they want to see for our city,” she said. “I was incredibly grateful to be able to do this, because it is not about my voice or personal opinion. It's about what the committee wants as a whole and trying to make sure that we are listening to our citizens and what they want for the city of Amarillo.”
The charter committee also recommended that the city’s governance and ends policy be clarified to establish a charter through a citizens' committee.
Over the next few weeks, the council will be discussing among themselves and their consulting firm the charter amendment wording and will finalize what will be voted on in the November elections. These revisions are expected in the next few weeks, and the city has until Aug. 19 to call for a charter election in November. No further charter amendments can be put on the ballot for two years if any charter amendment passes. If none of the amendments pass, then more proposals could be put up for vote in the next election.
According to Baker Tilly, the recommended maximum number of amendments that can effectively be proposed at any given election in their research is four, so the charter amendments were restricted to just four measures.
A closer look at the proposed Amarillo City Charter amendments
The full language of each of the four proposed charter amendments being considered and revised are as follows:
Proposition A
To Amend Article II, Section 24 of the Amarillo City Charter to change recall provisions to reduce the number of signatures required to qualify the recall of a City official for the ballot from 30% of registered voters with 1/5 certifying that the voted for the official in the last election to 30% of the number of votes cast in the last election at which the official(s) were elected and increase the time limit to submit recall petitions to the City Secretary from 30-days to 60-days.
Proposition B
To Amend Article V, Sections 2, 3, and 5 of the Amarillo City Charter to change the terms of the Mayor and Councilmembers from two-years term to staggered four-years terms; to revise the process to fill any vacancies in accordance with state law; and to establish term limits such that no person shall serve more than two consecutive full terms as a member of the City Council; and allowing a person to again serve as member of the City Council after two years have elapsed since the end of their last term of office.
Proposition C
To Amend Article V, Sections 1, 4, and 5 of the Amarillo City Charter to increase the size of the City Council to include the Mayor and six Councilmembers with all members being elected by citywide majority vote; establish changes to the qualifications of the Mayor and Councilmembers such that the Mayor and three Councilmembers shall be elected on an at-large basis and that three Councilmembers shall be elected subject to residency in one of three geographic places (areas) as established by Ordinance; and that an election shall be held for the Mayor and all six Councilmember Places in May 2025 with the terms established by ordinance.
Proposition D
To Amend Article V, Section 21 of the Amarillo City Charter to require the City Manager to consult with the City Council prior to an employment offer being made to an unclassified employee in an executive position such as assistant or deputy city manager or head of any department.
Most Popular
Comments / 0