PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Testimony by Ben Weinberg, Director of Public Policy at Citizens Union
0:30:34
·
3 min
Ben Weinberg, representing Citizens Union, provided testimony on Introduction 1088, which proposes to create a new Charter Revision Commission. He expressed support for the bill's intent to establish strong standards for the charter revision process but suggested several improvements.
- Criticized the composition of the proposed commission, recommending a more balanced distribution of appointments
- Urged for a minimum timeframe of at least 6 months for the commission's work to be explicitly stated in the bill
- Suggested additional transparency measures, including clarifying reportable lobbying activities and ensuring timely publication of commission documents
Ben Weinberg
0:30:34
Okay.
0:30:34
Thank you, Susan.
0:30:36
Hard to follow the previous testimony.
0:30:38
So I will do my best.
0:30:40
Good afternoon, council members.
0:30:42
My name is Ben Weinberg.
0:30:43
I'm the director of public policy for Citizens Union.
0:30:46
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to comment on this bill today.
0:30:51
We we've just completed Charter Vision Commission process, which we, at Citizens Union, believed, was flawed, and we have criticized that process again, again, again, again, the Commission's Genesys, their capacity, time frame, public input, We've always said that comprehensive reviews of the charter should be done absent of a political agenda through an independent commission that has a time and resources to conduct that important and thoughtful task.
0:31:16
So we applaud the the speaker, and we thank her for committing to reestablish these strong standards for the charter revision process.
0:31:25
We are particularly supportive of the provisions and intro 1098 that address these principles, including the ones that require the commission to conduct an extensive outreach campaign to clarify that it would review the entire charter ban, the employment of registered lobbyists, define the commission as an agency for foil purposes, and also requires it maintains a website with agendas, transcripts, and webcasts.
0:31:49
However, we do believe that bill can be improved in the following ways first on the proposed composition of the commission.
0:31:56
So the bill is it currently is would provide the speaker with the majority of appointments 9 out of 17 and would set the same number as a quorum.
0:32:05
Now given the politicized charter revision process that we just saw and the damage we believe it has done to the public trust in our city's constitution, we don't believe the next commission should be perceived as a counsel controlled commission, which is subject to any political fights between the two branches.
0:32:21
So we we urged the council to follow the approach.
0:32:24
It was taken by the 2018 law 18 law.
0:32:26
Sorry.
0:32:26
That was the basis for this bill, which more evenly distributed appointments across city government.
0:32:32
That was was 15 members, 4 speaker, 4 mayor, one for every other official and a quorum of over half.
0:32:39
The chair there was joined was jointly appointed by the speaker and the mayor.
0:32:43
And as a preferred alternative, the bill should establish either a higher quorum or said there's some super majority voting requirement.
0:32:51
Now the point is, again, given the what we saw this year to encourage agreement from members of appointed officials and restore trust.
0:32:59
Just two quick other comments.
0:33:00
The timeline, we were encouraged and thankful for the speaker.
0:33:03
For her announcement that this future commission would have between 8 20 months to work.
0:33:08
We just note that the bill has written does not require that time frame.
0:33:11
So theoretically, commissioners can be appointed and then decide they file questions with the city clerk way before that time before the legal deadline.
0:33:18
We support state legislation that would establish at least 6 months for charter revision commission.
0:33:23
We thank the speaker and the chair and other members who stood with us this week in support of that bill.
0:33:27
So we we asked that requirement to be in the in this bill as well, a minimum time frame of at least 6 months.
0:33:35
Lastly, we suggest 2 small additions related to transparency.
0:33:38
I'll just finish.
0:33:39
One is to clarify that the lobbying activity involving the commission is is reportable.
0:33:45
The other one is to clarify that the commission should maintain timely publications of minutes resolutions, and the testimony it receives on top of the other stuff that are in the bilic agendas, transcripts, and webcasts.
0:33:56
Thank you very much, and I'm happy to answer any questions.
