2006-12-07-Mins-Charter (2)MEETING
OF THE CHARTER STUDY COMMITTEE, CITY OF PARIS
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER
107 E. KAUFMAN STREET
PARIS, TEXAS
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2006
4:00 0'CLOCK P.M.
1. The Charter Study Committee meeting was called to order by City Manager, Tony
Williams, at 4:00 o'clock p.m.
The following members were present:
Marva Joe
Charles Waldrum
David Nabors
Charles Richards
Ozie Battle
Louise Hagood
Philip Cecil
David Hamilton
The following members were absent:
Bill Payne
Robert High
David House
Bobby Walters (alternate)
Also, present were Tony Williams, City Manager; Janice Ellis, City Clerk; and Monte
Akers, legal advisor.
2. Approval of minutes.
Subject to correcting the adjournment time to reflect 5:42 p.m., David Nabors made
a motion to approve the minutes. Motion carried, 8 ayes - 0 nays.
3. Discussion of possible ballot groupings.
Monte Akers referred the Committee to his memo of November 29, 2006, and
reviewed four different scenarios. Mr. Akers stated he conferred with four other attorneys,
as to whether or not corrections could be made with one single proposition, such as the
correction of misspelled word and grammatical errors. All four attorneys believed these
type of cleanup items could be addressed in one single proposition.
With regard to other non-substantive, cleanup issues, such as elimination of
obsolete provisions, all four attorneys expressed one proposition would be legal. However,
Charter Study Committee
December 7, 2006
Page 2
they expressed concern that the voters might be confused by the proposition or be
suspicious that such provisions were really obsolete.
All four attorneys believed it would be legal to place a single proposition on the ballot
with regard to common topic subjects. Mr. Akers gave the example of "Shall the Charter
be amended to clarify that election of council members shall be by plurality vote, so that
the candidate receiving the most votes is elected, by replacing the word majority with
plurality?"
Each of the attorneys were uncomfortable with regard to common subjects being
placed on the ballot under one proposition, such as"Shall the Charter be amended to
eliminate all sections that are in conflict with state law?"
Charles Waldrum stated he thought they were taking the wrong approach and that
they should address all of the issues. He further stated that they needed to let the people
know how badly the Charter needed to be updated. Marva Joe, Charles Richards, and
David Hamilton agreed with Charles Waldrum. David Hamilton said it was their job to be
straightforward. Chairperson Philip Cecil asked for a motion to place all of the issues on
the ballot, if that was the consensus of the Committee.
A Motion that the Committee make all necessary corrections as deemed workable
to City Charterwas made by Charles Waldrum and seconded by Charles Richards. Motion
carried, 8 ayes - 0 nays.
4. Discussion of and possible action on amendments to the City Charter.
Charles Waldrum said they may need to look at other amendments in addition to
the issues outlined in the Charter Amendment Issues. Chairperson Philip Cecil suggested
that be done after reviewing the issues at hand. The Committee began working through
the Charter Amendment Issues as outlined below:
(6) Sections 16 (Number, selection, term) and 97 (Election of councilmen by
majority). Charles Richards suggested changing the way candidates are elected, in that
a candidate should receive more than 50%. Charles Waldrum stated that as it stands now,
if you have six or seven candidates you could end up with a candidate that the majority
does not want. Ozie Battle agreed.
A Motion to retain Section 16 as is and to change Section 97 to reflect majority was
made by David Nabors and seconded by David Hamilton. Motion carried 8, ayes - 0 nays.
(7) Section 16 (Number, selection, term). The Committee decided that if a council
member is appointed to fill an unexpired term, that the council member is eligible to serve
Charter Study Committee
December 7, 2006
Page 3
two consecutive two year terms. Monte Akers pointed out that the Charter did not state the
term of office to be two years and that needed to be added.
(8) Section 17 (Qualifications). Chairperson Philip Cecil inquired of the members if
anyone thought twenty-one was too strict. Marva Joe said at eighteen you could go to war
and vote. Louise Hagood preferred twenty-one. Chairperson Philip Cecil asked those in
favor of keeping twenty-one to raise their hands. David Nabors and Louise Hagood raised
their hands. The other six committee members were in favor of age eighteen.
All Committee Members were in favor of keeping the requirement of residing in the
district for twelves months as a qualification of running for council.
With regard to a candidate being in arrears in the payment of taxes, Monte advised
the Committee this qualification needed to be amended. He stated that due to a federal
lawsuit, the City could have some legal problems with this being a qualification.
Charles Waldrum suggested that the qualification dealing with convictions be
reworded to define conviction. David Hamilton agreed. Chairperson Philip Cecil asked Mr.
Waldrum and Mr. Hamilton to get together and bring something back to the next meeting
regarding this subject.
Subject to an issue being brought back regarding convictions, the Committee
approved the changes to Section 17 as set out above.
(11) Section 23 (Council not to interfere in appointments or removals). Chairperson
Philip Cecil said they needed to address the consequences for violation of this section.
Monte Akers suggested they add a sentence stating that multiple and willful violations shall
be grounds for removal from office, after an investigation by the Council and a public
hearing. The Committee was in agreement.
(12) Section 29 (Induction into office; meetings). Philip Cecil stated the open
meetings had been a controversial topic, because the Charter does not follow state law.
A Motion to allow City Council to follow the Open Meetings Act governed by State Law was
made by David Hamilton and seconded by Louise Hagood. Motion carried, 8 ayes - 0
nays.
(16) Section 60 (Emergency appropriations). Monte Akers informed the Committee
that having the one-hundred resident qualified voter stipulation added an additional hurdle
in response to amend the budget. It becomes extremely important during homeland
security issues. A Motion to remove the one-hundred resident qualified voter stipulation
was made by David Nabors and seconded by David Hamilton. Motion carried, 8 ayes - 0
nays.
Charter Study Committee
December 7, 2006
Page 4
The Committee will next meet Thursday, December 14, 2006, at 4:00 p.m. They
will begin with Section 111 of the City Charter (#30). Monte Akers informed the Committee
that he would draft each of the amendment changes into propositions for review by the
Committee.
5. Adjournment.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
HILIP CECIL, CHAIRPERSON