There are three different ways to make changes to the Dartmouth Town Charter.
1-The Town Meeting can petition for an Act of the General Court to change the charter.
2-A 2/3 vote of Town Meeting can put a change on the ballot for decision by the voters (this has some limitations, can’t change form of government or change some offices) The voters then vote on the proposed changes. Our town charter currently calls for an appointed charter commission that makes recommendations for changes to the Town Meeting every 10 years.
3-get 15% of voters to petition for a charter commission, get approval for commission from voters and elect a charter commission (at the same election when the charter commission is approved). The charter commission can make changes and go to voters with an amended or new charter. (No restrictions on what they do, change form or do whatever)
Here is how I arrived at that ...
Our Town Charter says this (MS Word Doc) about charter commissions SECTION 6-7: PERIODIC REVIEW, CHARTER AND BY-LAWS
(a) Charter Review - At least once in every ten years, beginning in 2010, and thereafter in each year ending in a zero, a special committee to consist of nine members shall be established for the purpose of reviewing this charter and to make a report, with recommendations, to the town meeting concerning any proposed amendments which said committee may determine to be necessary or desirable. The committee shall consist of nine members who shall be chosen as follows: the select board, the finance committee and the school committee shall each designate two persons, the planning board shall designate one person, and two persons shall be appointed by the town moderator. Persons appointed by the said agencies may, but need not, be members of the agency by which they are designated. The committee shall meet to organize forthwith following the final adjournment of the annual town meeting.
Massachusetts General Law (MGL) section 43B contains the procedures for charter revision and says this about Town Meeting recommending charter changesCh 43B section 10 Amendments to a city or town charter previously adopted or revised under this chapter may be proposed by the city council of a city or the town meeting of a town by a two thirds vote in the manner provided by this section; provided, that amendments of a city charter may be proposed only with the concurrence of the mayor in every city that has a mayor, and that only a charter commission elected under this chapter may propose any change in a charter relating in any way to the composition, mode of election or appointment, or terms of office of the legislative body, the mayor or city manager, or the board of selectmen or town manager. The section continues with more, read it at the link above. Actually you need to read sections 1 through 12 of Chapter 43B to get the full picture
The state constitution Article LXXXIX says thisSection 3. Procedure for Adoption or Revision of a Charter by a City or Town. - Every city and town shall have the power to adopt or revise a charter in the following manner: A petition for the adoption or revision of a charter shall be signed by at least fifteen per cent of the number of legal voters residing in such city or town at the preceding state election. Whenever such a petition is filed with the board of registrars of voters of any city or town, the board shall within ten days of its receipt determine the sufficiency and validity of the signatures and certify the results to the city council of the city or board of selectmen of the town, as the case may be. As used in this section, the phrase "board of registrars of voters" shall include any local authority of different designation which performs the duties of such registrars, and the phrase "city council of the city or board of selectmen of the town" shall include local authorities of different designation performing the duties of such council or board. Objections to the sufficiency and validity of the signatures on any such petition as certified by the board of registrars of voters shall be made in the same manner as provided by law for objections to nominations for city or town offices, as the case may be.
Within thirty days of receipt of certification of the board of registrars of voters that a petition contains sufficient valid signatures, the city council of the city or board of selectmen of the town shall by order provide for submitting to the voters of the city or town the question of adopting or revising a charter, and for the nomination and election of a charter commission.
If the city or town has not previously adopted a charter pursuant to this section, the question submitted to the voters shall be: "Shall a commission be elected to frame a charter for (name of city or town)?" If the city or town has previously adopted a charter pursuant to this section, the question submitted to the voters shall be: "Shall a commission be elected to revise the charter of (name of city or town)?"
The charter commission shall consist of nine voters of the city or town, who shall be elected at large without party or political designation at the city or town election next held at least sixty days after the order of the city council of the city or board of selectmen of the town. The names of candidates for such commission shall be listed alphabetically on the ballot used at such election. Each voter may vote for nine candidates.
The vote on the question submitted and the election of the charter commission shall take place at the same time. If the vote on the question submitted is in the affirmative, the nine candidates receiving the highest number of votes shall be declared elected.
Within [ten months] after the election of the members of the charter commission, said commission shall submit the charter or revised charter to the city council of the city or the board of selectmen of the town, and such council or board shall provide for publication of the charter and for its submission to the voters of the city or town at the next city or town election held at least two months after such submission by the charter commission. If the charter or revised charter is approved by a majority of the voters of the city or town voting thereon, it shall become effective upon the date fixed in the charter.
Section 4. Procedure for Amendment of a Charter by a City or Town. - Every city and town shall have the power to amend its charter in the following manner: The legislative body of a city or town may, by a two-thirds vote, propose amendments to the charter of the city or town; provided, that [1] amendments of a city charter may be proposed only with the concurrence of the mayor in every city that has a mayor, and [2] any change in a charter relating in any way to the composition, mode of election or appointment, or terms of office of the legislative body, the mayor or city manager or the board of selectmen or town manager shall be made only by the procedure of charter revision set forth in section three.
All proposed charter amendments shall be published and submitted for approval in the same manner as provided for adoption or revision of a charter.
There you have it my explanation and some or all of the links to check it for yourselves. Do you think we should from a charter commission? If so, an appointed or elected one? Remember the appointed one is restricted on what it can propose as amendments (e.g. cannot change in a charter relating in any way to the composition, mode of election or appointment, or terms of office of the legislative body, the mayor or city manager or the board of selectmen or town manager)
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Methods of amending the Town Charter
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
I think that if we are going to do it we should establish the commission without limiting its power to look at everything. One of the main discussion topics over the last few years is our form of government itself. I would recommend the members be elected, which would also let the residents be more involved in the process from the get-go.
I think it should be an elected one. The voters can decide who they want, and the majority wins. That way, most people (aside from some SB members and their followers, maybe) can't scream and holler if they don't like the choice.
If you don't like who's running, put up your own choice(s) or run yourself for the commission. We can campaign for our choices, and may the best man/woman win.
Of course, we DO run the risk of some such foolishness or other from those not happy with the outcome. When will some people learn to stop acting like two-year-olds when they don't like the outcome or decision of something, and accept it gracefully and with the dignity of an adult?
An election. That way no one can say it wasn't a fair determination, or whatever else they wish to spout off about. Let me rephrase that, they SHOULDN'T say it wasn't fair, but of course, they probably will.
Go, Barry!
And thank you, Joe, for your sleuthing, and Diane for your questions, and Bill for providing us all with information and sticking up for the ordinary guy.
Yes, thank you so much. I don't know how I would get out of bed in the morning if it weren't for you folks.
Enough!
I agree that we should have an elected commission. The people will get to vote on it after changes are made. I guess it's too late to vote on a commission in April. So, it would be a special election. We should start now if that is the direction people want to go. I would like to look at getting rid of town meeting. Dartmouth has outgrown that form of govt.
A charter commsion can only be enacted upon by an affirmative vote of the public. It comes in 2 parts - to enact the commsion, yea or nay; and who acts as a commsion member.
From the post, " a special committee to consist of nine members shall be established for the purpose of reviewing this charter and to make a report, with recommendations, to the town meeting " and "the select board, the finance committee and the school committee shall each designate two persons, the planning board shall designate one person, and two persons shall be appointed by the town moderator ". Appointed, see?
The concept of making it an elected position is put forth to push the recall idea off indefinately. If its an appointed commission in the CHarter let's start appointing and get things moving.
The difference between the elected commission and the appointed one is that the elected commission can change everything about the charter including the form of government. I am sure that many people would like to weigh in on that subject so why not do it right. Of course those who want change to go backward would never approve.
Post a Comment