Hudson Renewed – Citizen’s Initiative for Charter Change
While I am open to charter reform for Hudson, I do not agree with the approach to the ideation process or to the content of the proposed citizen’s initiative.
New York State Law sets forth three paths to Charter Reform
Quotes are from Revising City Charters in New York State by James A.Coon
- Charter Revision and Direct Legislative Action – via common council “Whatever changes are agreed upon are then enacted by law subject to mandatory referendum on petition if so required by the Municipal Home Rule Law, sections 23 and 24.” This option is infrequently used.
- Charter Revision by Initiative and Referendum – In this case approximately 300 Hudson voters sign a petition, the proposed changes are filed with the city clerk who will determine legal sufficiency, the clerk then submits it to the legislative body (in this case the common council), “If the legislative body fails to adopt the petition without change within 2 months following its filing” additional petition signers will be required and it could become a referendum to be voted on in the next general election. This was the chosen path of the group currently proposing charter reform here in Hudson with no meaningful public input.
- Revision by Charter Commission – This approach is inclusive. It would educate the public on the current charter, city government structure, and would involve the public in decisions concerning the form the government should take. It would outline specifically the new structure and powers of city government and it’s officials and employees. “The most important consideration in the composition of a charter commission is that it include representation adequate to give a voice to the diverse viewpoints in the city, including political interests and ethnic communities, which are likely to have a stake in the substance of the charter”. Personally I find the quoted language problematic but it embodies the spirit of inclusiveness. This is the slower more thoughtful approach that I would like to see enacted.
Problems I see with the Proposed Charter Reform
- Cost
Currently
-8 Council Members $45,098
-1Council Majority and 1Council Minority Leader $11,765
-Common Council President – $12,875
-Mayor – $79,182
-Mayor’s office staff – $73,442 (recommended ‘25)
Total – $222,362
Proposed Reform
-5 Council Members $28,000 (approximate)
-Common Council President (to be elected by and from within the council) – an additional $1000
-Mayor – to be elected in a general election – $5000
-City Manager (with a masters degree and 4 to 6 years experience)
I found salary ranges between $212,273 (Newburgh) and $160,000 (Ithaca)
Median of the above = $186,136.50
-Assistant City Manager (referred to multiple times in the proposed reform)
I found a range from $82,946-$100,604 (Batavia)
$80,993-$107,800 (salary.com)
Median of the above = $93,085.75
- Office Staff – Let’s say the City Manager and Assistant City Manager share an assistant/secretary – $73,442
Total – $386,664.25 –This assumes that the City Manager will not require a larger staff and/or outside contractors. If additional staff and/or outside contractors are hired city government salary costs will be exorbitant. We will all be paying for this and we need to get it right.
- Reducing the Number of Council Members to 5 – The hiring of a City Manager will not reduce the workload of the Common Council. Currently there are 16 boards and committees. Because of space restrictions some of these boards/committees meet during working hours. Most of Council Members participate on one or more of these. Asking 5 council members to do the work of 10 members (or doubling the amount of work) will limit the numbers of working class people who can be a productive part of our local government. This also gives the 5 a tremendous amount of power. If the group of citizens who brought this reform proposal believes that half of the common council is ineffective they need make it known what each of the council members is actually doing (or not doing) and encourage positive community engagement.
- Voting with only 5 Council Members – Because the council meets twice monthly (informally to receive reports and discuss resolutions and formally to vote, to pay bills, accept donations, and pass legislation, etc) progress is made slowly. Under the proposed reform the council would need to have a super majority (4 members) in order to vote. If any two members are sick, have a family emergency, or get stuck at work there can be no vote. This will waste time.
- Government Structure? – The chart provided on the group’s Hudson charter change website and in the binders given to all the council members (except me) is a complete oversimplification of city government structure. It does not include the myriad city departments their commissioners, department heads, and staff. It also does not include the numerous boards and committees which help in decision making.
- Transition from Current System to City Manager System – There is nothing mentioned in terms of how the transition will be made from one system to another.
General thoughts about the only public gathering around the proposed initiative at the Hudson Public Library on Jan. 22nd 2024.
I am open to Charter Reform and creative thinking around it.
If this was to be a conversation starter then there needed to be a conversation and it should have started before the drafting of this charter reform document. Unfortunately, there was no real conversation at this gathering either. Anyone voicing a different opinion or asking a question not in line with this group’s thinking was dismissed.
Peter Spear had a smart suggestion, a Citizens Assembly, which could be used as part of a Charter Commission. He was rebuffed. If we are going to reform our local government, the governed – ALL OF US, need to be represented and our ideas heard. This should be an inclusive and thoughtful process. This group spent three years behind closed doors changing the word mayor to the words city manager and reducing the number of Common Council Members from 11 to 5. There were no broader structural changes suggested in this reform.
I will be voting no on this particular charter reform when it comes to the council and again if it goes to referendum.