Unfinished Work on City Charter

Letter to the Editor — City Charter

We served as two members of this year’s Charter Review Commission and want to offer the citizens of Newport a look into our thought process regarding the recommendation for revisions submitted to the City Council. We speak now as individuals.

At our first meeting on December 28, 2021, the mayor supported having the commission “think outside the box” when it came to term limits, removal of ward council seats, and mayoral selection. Seven members, chosen from the community, took our mission seriously and developed a working style based on respectful listening and a thoughtful exploration of all the issues presented.

We wanted to ensure that the city’s charter reflects diversity, inclusion, and equity, offering fair representation to Newport citizens.

The recommendations are designed to ensure greater transparency between the council and our citizens, and to encourage citizens’ participation in our city government. The recommendations seek to make the charter more accessible and comprehensible, with the hope of bridging the perceived gap in communication that our citizens currently feel with city government. The goal is to allow the voices of the people to be heard.

A workshop was conducted on July 26, 2022. We believe it fell short, since after 2 ½ hours only two of the charter’s 10 chapters had been discussed. Council felt the need to rush public comment. The recommendations required robust discussion which would have been better served with multiple workshops.

Not 24 hours after the workshop was conducted, the charter was on the council’s July 27 docket for a vote.

The city solicitor recommended that 13 of the 17 recommendations be considered for a vote, with the rationale that voters would be overwhelmed at the polls. Among the items rejected were the recommendations to elect all councilors on an at-large basis; to set councilor term limits; to have voters, rather than council select the mayor; and to revise the process for filling vacancies to better reflect the will of the voters. The recommendations on at-large councilors and mayoral selection included a recommendation that these measures should be decided by Newport’s voters, giving a voice to the people, and removing any bias that the council may have on those issues.

A comment came from the dais that term limits at the city, and even the presidential level are undemocratic. However, term limits represent the epitome of democracy and encourage competitive elections. They would allow new voices to emerge, creating the type of participatory democracy that our city deserves and encourages fair representation on the council. Rejecting the recommendation for term limits and mayoral selections denies the people a voice in a democratic process.

We both appreciate that the city solicitor noted the charter would benefit from a thorough review and modernization with a consultant, with the resulting revised document being put to the voters in a special election. We agree. We would suggest reconstituting this year’s commission to work with a consultant, conduct subject-specific workshops, and report back to the council with a modernized charter that may reflect approved architecture for a successful city government.

Stephanie Smyth
Susan Taylor
Newport