During the City Council's August 13th, 2007 worksession, altering the city's charter was discussed in order to explicitly allow for "executive sessions." Such a change would require a charter election be held. Executive sessions -- city council meetings where city may discuss matters in private -- were halted recently when it was decided that they might conflict with the City Charter. During the ensuing discussion, Council member Dennis Stewart proposed that term limits for city council members be added to the proposed Charter election. This produced a lengthy heated discussion without significant resolution regarding the term limit issue.

At issue is the upcoming November election date. Due to state legal requirements, the City Council’s last opportunity to vote on a proposed charter change in time for the November election is August 27, 2007. This gives the City Attorney only two weeks to draft possible variations in charter and proposition language, schedule public meetings to discuss it, and get public input. By contrast, the previous Charter Commission was appointed in September of 1987 and the Commission had a year before the City Council scheduled a Charter Election. This presumably included a full set of public meetings before a commission composed of various members of the Richardson Community.

Executive Sessions were halted in June when a citizen suggested that section 3.10 of the city charter was being violated by holding Executive Sessions. It states, “All meetings of the council and all committees thereof shall be open to the public and the rules of the council shall provide that citizens of the city shall have a reasonable opportunity to be heard at any such meetings, in regard to any matter there considered.”

City Attorney Pete Smith explained that the only city he knew of that did not have executive sessions was Lancaster but he believed they were moving to change that restriction or already had changed it. Mr. Smith also hinted that an argument could be made that the city was not violating the city charter by holding executive sessions but he did not elaborate.

Discussions of changes in the charter were interrupted due to the regularly scheduled City Council meeting. After the regularly scheduled meeting the Council Members returned to their worksession wherein Council Member Dennis Stewart brought up the issue of term limits. It was at this point some contentious discussion began.

Mr. Stewart handed out a proposed change wherein 10 year term limits would begin after the May 2009 election. Bob Townsend responded that he had heard constituents discuss other things such as staggered terms and direct election of the mayor and argued that many things ought to be considered. Council member Pris Hayes suggested simply a 12 year term limit.

Council Member John Murphy said the two original proposed changes were “housekeeping” issues and said that term limits and other issues of how people were elected were more serious. They should be thought out more carefully he argued. He noted the previous Charter Commission having ample time to take public input and suggested the two executive session items be considered for a November charter election and that a Charter commission be convened for a possible Charter Election in two years. He argued this gives the public full opportunity to participate in the process rather than a reduced two weeks.

"[Term Limits] are a way for losers to get rid of individuals," noted Murphy , "It is undemocratic. It is a punative thing against individuals."

Former Mayor and Council Member Gary Slagel was skeptical of “rushing” to add election issues onto a Charter Proposal and questioned “shoving them in.”

“[Let the] Community have the debate,” Slagel stated by stating that a quick jump to such an important topic could jeopardize leadership.

Councilmember Rhea Allison was absent.

Current Mayor Mitchell was mostly silent on the issue only asking people to clarify their points. He expressed that opinion about whether or not he was for term limits was separate from an opinion about whether or not it ought to be included in an upcoming Charter Election. He skirted close to suggesting that a term limit proposing would be on the November ballot but never actually said it outright.

The discussion ended with City Attorney Pete Smith being assigned the task of presenting some proposed language changes for the two original Council Meeting Charter changes and he was tasked with presenting some variations of term limit proposals. Most Council Members seemed flustered and unhappy by the contentious discussion. It is likely there will be an update at next week’s worksession.