The Charter Commission has had several public hearings thus far, but with a disappointingly low turnout. For the most part, it seems like the same few folks.
On Monday, Nov. 30, the Commission is holding a public hearing on Articles V and VI; Article V is about the City Manager, and Article VI covers the public schools. I know that most people can find more interesting things to do on a Monday night (like go to bed early), but it's really important that the Charter Commission hear from a broader cross-section of our community than they have thus far.
Even if your only input is, "don't change anything," that may just be the message they need to hear.
That is exactly the message they need to hear. After all that was the message by which 5 out of 7 of them were elected.
Not much of a crowd here for the meeting... two representatives of the League of Women Voters, two of the CDAR folks, one reporter, and me. Three Commissioners absent (Abbatiello, Fain, and McCoy).
(11-13-2009 02:42 PM)Netmom Wrote: [ -> ]Not much of a crowd here for the meeting... two representatives of the League of Women Voters, two of the CDAR folks, one reporter, and me. Three Commissioners absent (Abbatiello, Fain, and McCoy).
I'm sorry to say, but I forgot about the meeting.
Very low turnout at tonight's Charter Commission public hearing, and they're pretty much the same folks who've showed up for every meeting. I know that those of us who voted for the majority did so to oppose any major changes to the Charter. But still... if no one shows up to SAY so, then those wanting to re-write everything will be the only ones heard.
Tonight's topics are the City Manager and the School System. In the amphitheater at the high school. C'mon down.
Thanks for the reminder, NM. I'd intended on going and it had completely slipped my mind until I read your notice.
BTW, Chuck Agle referenced a visual presentation either just before or just after Abbatiello's proposal. It did not occur, at least not before I left. Do you know what it was about?
He first said he was going to put Abbatiello's handout on the screen, then handed out a limited number of paper copies instead. I did get one though (as did most of the School Board), so I've attached my scanned copy.
I was very glad to see 80% of the Board show up, because at previous public hearings, there hasn't been much participation from Council or City administration. That's unfortunate, because they're the ones who could help answer some questions or at least discuss the merits or pitfalls of various proposals. The Charter Commissioners have said at previous meetings that they very much want input from the folks affected.
And, thank you for showing up and participating, Trina. It was cold, wet, and a work/school night, but it's one of those things that can go badly awry if citizens don't contribute to the discussion.
Based on Jim O'Conner's observation about how dysfunctional the Oak Ridge municipal system is, rather than modifying the city charter, maybe we should scrap the entire thing and adopt Farragut's charter. Why do we keep trying to re-invent the wheel when there are functional examples all around us?
I can see the points of envy: they have no property tax (other than Knox County's), as their sales tax revenues are bountiful. If we had Farragut's sales tax revenue, all this discussion would probably be moot.
But to adopt their charter would be to consolidate our schools with the County school system, rely on the Sheriff's Department for law enforcement, and give up having our own (very capable) fire department in favor of a paid subscription service like Rural Metro. I don't know about you, but I've talked to people who moved here from Farragut, who will plainly state that the fees for Rural Metro, subscription-based garbage collection, higher homeowners insurance rates, and all that other stuff we take for granted adds up to more than the Oak Ridge property taxes on a comparable home.
And that doesn't count the private school tuition that many families pay as well.
(01-09-2010 11:29 AM)Eric Wilson Wrote: [ -> ]...rather than modifying the city charter, maybe we should scrap the entire thing and adopt Farragut's charter. Why do we keep trying to re-invent the wheel when there are functional examples all around us?
There are some who argue that there is no need to change the charter for the simple fact that it has served us for over 50 years. Then there are some who would argue that there is always room for improvement.
Regardless of either belief, the charter is undergoing revision. Given that we all seem to agree that our city's future is on shaky ground and that our charter serves as our foundation, one would think more folks would want to “shore it up” by participating in the revision process. From what I've seen at the handful of meetings I've attended, that does not appear to be the case.