Tonight's City Commission Meeting. The Charter and Who Decides. Agenda Item #6 .

For Tonight's 7:30 pm Meeting  Agenda Packet Click Here


Agenda Item #6

First it should be noted that the City's Charter, in the State of Michigan belongs to the People and can only be changed by the people. The topic first came up at the February 14th City Commission. The minutes of that meeting reported that...

When City commission was asked in February to "consider a possible Charter Commission to update the various sections of the Charter that are outdated a nuclear solution was suggested.. That is because a Charter Commission is employed  only when when a very major or perhaps total  Charter overall is deemed necessary. Then the existing government, all elected officials, all appointed officials, and the city employees are removed from the process. The Citizens on their own elect a charter commission from  their own. No active Government officials elected, appointed or employed may participate. The process of arriving at a significantly new or revised charter is arduous, fraught, and may require a period of time as long as eighteen months. Then it must be approved by the Governor and Attorney General of the State.

Is this what City Commission is requesting ? Mayor Zambricki  per the above minutes requested a an  "inventory of of sections of the City Charter that are obsolete. That inventory which consists of a page and a half of items appears in tonight's agenda package and is reproduced below.

To submit a page and a half of unclear items that often reference other documents that are not available to the reader is insulting to the reader. To use such  as  a focal point of  discussion  on topics that effect the rights of  the people is an indication that the Commission does not understand the importance of the Charter or the rights of it's citizens.

While the commission may discuss what ever it chooses it  can not change the charter without the approval of the people.

To "update " various sections that are considered "outdated" , the people of the City   must approve or disapprove  amendments suggested by the commission.  The approval process requires every amendment suggested be listed and voted on  Usually there is a 60 day time limit to put on the  ballot "suggestions" that come from a legislative body.

One might  argue that these points are so insignificant that  as" a convenience to residents and to reduce costs " the commission just go ahead and on it's own change the charter. Why make a fuss over something so minor ?  That is just it. They are minor. In regards to Charters the State of Michigan is quite specific  about who has the power to do what. It says the people not the City Commission  make all decisions major or minor regarding the Charter.
An ambitious City Commission could conceivably use  points so minor that no "reasonable " person  could "possibly "object to test the knowledge and will of the people.

Power in Government is a continually shifting thing. The point of a Charter or a Constitution is to balance that power. Our charter gives the resident only two powers. The right vote and the right to approve charter changes.  Allowing City Commission to change the charter no matter how minor would forfeit half the rights the people now enjoy. 

Consider the plight of Congress which according to the the Constitution has the right to to declare war.

 The last American President to ask Congress for a Declaration of War was Franklin Roosevelt in 1941. Since then vague terms like a Police Action in Korea,  or ad hoc resolutions like the Gulf of Tonkin  Resolution in Vietnam have allowed the President to act as he saw fit. The Congress did attempt to
re-establish some control with The War Powers Act. Wikipedia  tell us .....

The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war. The resolution was passed by two-thirds of Congress, overriding a presidential veto.
The War Powers Resolution was disregarded by President Clinton in 1999, during the bombing campaign in Kosovo, and again by President Obama in 2011, when he did not seek congressional approval enforce to a U.N. no-fly zone over Libya. He argued that the Resolution did not apply to that action.^[2] All presidents since 1973 have declared their belief that the act is unconstitutional. ^[3][4]

Incidentally matters concerning the legality of an act per the Constitution are determined by the The U.S. Supreme Court not the President. Thus the concept of an  Imperial Presidency

In the State of Michigan Charter changes regardless of how small or seeming insignificant  must be presented as Charter amendments must  voted on by the people. The first step would be to replace the short hand below with clear language.