The document discusses issues with the current charter review committee process, including a lack of benchmarking best practices, inadequate citizen outreach, and influence from special interests. It identifies primary causes as elections being at-large rather than by district, concerns over "service fees," and the mayor interfering with the city manager role. The solution proposed is to base the process on best practices from similar cities, conduct outreach to gather citizen and stakeholder feedback, and ask hard questions to enable effective change. A decision analysis process is recommended to determine objectives and priorities for charter reform recommendations.

1. Separating the Mess
Problem Solving
Charter Review Committee
2011

2. Problem Statement
 Current Charter Review Committee Process is
inadequate and will not lead to effective Charter
Reform.
2 11/15/2011

3. Separating the Mess
Cause or Perception No Benchmarking of Best
that Charter Practices
Effect? is
unimportant!
Special No Citizen
Interests Feedback
Override Inadequate CRC Prior to
Citizen Process for Final
Interests achieving Report
Charter Reform
Poor Direction
from City
No Outreach to Council on
Citizens or Concerns and
Stakeholders Inability to Issues
adapt and
change
3 11/15/2011

4. Primary Causes of Charter Review
Mess? Elections at Large
Failure to
maintain “control
 Cause Communicate
by special
Use of the Need for
interest” over
“Service Elected City
citizen
Fees” as Auditor
engagement
Hidden
concern
Tax Issue
Council
Mayor’s interference with Poor Proceedings
City Manager’s Role by Direction and
Chairing Monthly from City Deliberations
Department Meetings Council on in Public Issue
Interacting with and Concerns
Influencing Operations and Issues Desire to
Outside of Charter Desire to maintain
Powers and Authority Maintain status quo so
Issue Weak that direct
Mayor accountability
Structure remains weak
4 11/15/2011

5. Solution
 Base on Best Practices of other cities of similar
size and demographics utilize an outreach
approach to citizen, stakeholders and elected
officials for feedback and innovative ideas.
 Hard questions needs to be asked if effective
change is to be realized.
 Will this CRC have the courage to act?
 Will the current agenda prevail and our citizens
be let down again?
5 11/15/2011

6. Decision Analysis
 Determine “Objectives” for decision (s) for Charter
Reform after community input and through
review.
 Determine “Musts” (non-negotiable changes)
 Determine “Wants” (important but negotiable) and
set weights for each want to help with decision
process for recommendation to City Council for
citizen approval.
 Effective citizen input and feedback will signal
what items on the ballot will fly.
6 11/15/2011