citymeetings.nyc

Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.

PUBLIC TESTIMONY

Timeline and public engagement process for the commission

0:24:38

·

105 sec

Professor Lane discusses the appropriate timeline for a charter revision commission's work and emphasizes the crucial role of public engagement in the process. He provides insights based on his experience with the 1989 commission.

Lane suggests that 8 months is a good starting point for the commission's work, but notes that more time might be needed
He stresses the importance of holding numerous public meetings and hearings throughout the process
Lane believes the commission should be subject to the State Freedom of Information Act, which he found beneficial in his own work
He highlights how public involvement in every meeting helped maintain transparency and discouraged 'crazy' ideas that might have been proposed in private

Professor Eric Lane

0:24:38

8 months is a good time.

0:24:39

Maybe they need longer.

0:24:41

Actually, the commission is by law allowed to decide when it wants to put something on the ballot.

0:24:48

I think you have to have numerous public meetings and public hearings.

0:24:52

I don't I do believe that you are sub that the commission is subject to the State Freedom Information Act.

0:24:59

I had questioned that in my own work and I I I I ended up deciding that they were, and it would work to our benefit.

0:25:09

It worked to our benefit.

0:25:10

I think to have the public involved in every meeting we did.

0:25:14

It it it disallowed people from seeing crazy things that they might ever wanted to say in private, they wouldn't say in public.

0:25:22

So I think you've built all of the ingredients for a potentially very good permission as long as you sort of make sure they are pointing independent people and to get some decent good staff and some independence of that staff or loyalty to that staff to the commission, not to the elected officials.

0:25:43

So I think that would be a very good start.

0:25:46

Where I thought so this is the last part of what I'm gonna say.

0:25:49

Where I thought it would when I when we did this chart of the places that I thought we would really be examining quickly thereafter, which I I have been wrong about because you haven't.

0:26:00

But I always thought so the power of the board of excuse me.

0:26:06

The power of the barrel presidents there was a lot of you in cry that we had taken their too much of their power away and that they would be meaningless.

0:26:18

I never thought that was true, but I always thought that would be something that would be later examined.

← Previous Chapter

Staffing and budgeting considerations for an effective commission

Next Chapter →

Potential areas for future charter revision examination