City wants feedback on proposed changes to charter
A Richmond commission has scheduled a forum for Sept. 1 to get feedback on suggested changes to the city charter.
The Richmond City Charter Review Commission will hold the meeting from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. in the City Council's chamber at City Hall, 900 E. Broad St.
A final report is to be released to City Council in October so that proposed charter changes can be presented to the General Assembly for approval early next year.
The council tapped the commission last year in hopes of avoiding clashes over power like those between the council and then-Mayor L. Douglas Wilder.
The commission's preliminary recommendations call for:
- giving council the authority to appoint its legislative staff, which would be separate from the administrative staff that reports to the mayor-appointed chief administrative officer;
- giving the mayor the authority to appoint the city attorney and city auditor subject to the approval of the majority of the council;
- requiring the mayor to submit a chief administrative officer for appointment within 180 days of a vacancy and require council to approve or reject the nominee within 30 days; and
- giving the mayor the authority to veto any ordinance, including ones relating to the sale and lease of land and buildings, subject to council's override. -- Will Jones
Reader Reactions
Giving the mayor authority to appoint and dismiss the city attorney and city auditor is a profoundly poor idea—unless you’re interested in lapdogs serving in these positions or the return of undetected financial waste and unaccountability to the taxpayers.
Mr. Dalal’s and Mr. Sales’ abilities to speak the unfettered truth and provide crucial checks to the practices of the former administration (or future ones which behave that way)will be irrevocably hindered! Anyone who has been reading their opinions and reports for the past 3 years and paying attention to the former administration’s strident public reactions and fiscally irresponsible behavior can readily believe that there is absolutely no “upside” to this proposition!
You just can’t be an objective, impartial watchdog looking after the interests of the taxpayer if you are being fed by your new master—the mayor. How ridiculous is that?
Are there members on the Charter that are either so obtuse or conniving, or are we supposed to be so stupid to surrender the only checks that have proven to be effective? Do we really want higher taxes to pay for the continuing problems that are disclosed?
We want lean, efficient government that follows City Charter law, and, judging by what we read, that hasn’t happened yet! That is what we demand, but how will we know what is really going on if our watchdogs are muzzled?
Do we want some ill-advised mucky-muck to turn off the light that shines on these revelations and leave us ignorant and uninformed—again?
Is somebody intentionally trying to rig the system of checks and balances to promote abuse of the public largesse? Will we see the return of people to City Hall who deliberately spin the facts, withhold the truth, and spend our money frivously?
If we allow the mayor’s office to control the city auditor and city attorney, we’ll set the stage for a resurgence of these problems ! We want public servants who are accountable and forthright, and we need checks and balances to ensure that this happens!
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement