Common Council WorkshopCommon Council WorkshopCommon Council Chambers

City HallCohoes, New York 12047

AGENDASeptember 8, 2020, 7:00 p.m.

WORKSHOP

Public comment

1. Discussion regarding acceptance of a grant from National Grid ’s Urban Center/Commercial District Revitalization Program for Remsen Street Phase III

2. Discussion regarding release from Declaration of Restrictive Covenants

3. Renewal of Lease Agreement with Parsons Child and Family Center, Inc. for space at the Cohoes Public Library

4. Discussion regarding the amendment of Chapter 239 of the Cohoes City Code to modify the number of waste containers to be made available to three family residential properties

5.Discussion regarding Charter Review Committee

Executive Session

9-8-20 BACKUP DOCS UPDATED.PDF

1. 7:00 P.M.

Documents:

1

REQUEST FOR AGENDA ITEM

Legislative Request / BOM Request

Legislative Request __x__ BOM Request ___ Date ____8/21/2020____________________ Department ____Planning_____________ Contact Person ___Joe Seman-Graves______________ PERPOSE FOR REQUEST: Adoption of Resolution: _x_____ Adoption of Local Law: ______ Adoption of Ordinance: ______ Budget Amendment: ______ Bond Approval: ______ Contract Authorization: ______ Other (Briefly Explain) ________________________ __________________________________________ __________________________________________ Budget Amendment (State the following) Increase Account/Line No._______________ Decrease Account /Line No.______________ Source of Funds ______________________ CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION Purchase Equipment/Supplies: ___ Lease Equipment/Supplies: ___ Professional Services: ___ Education/Training: ___ Settlement of Claim: ___ Grants: New __$100,000_______________ Renewal______________ Submission Dead Line __________

Fiscal Impact in Dollars or Percentage Federal _________ State ___________ City of Cohoes_________ National Grid __$100,000_____ All back -up material has been submitted _x___ Explanation: In 2019 the City of Cohoes applied for, and was not granted CFA funding for Remsen Street Phase III. Phase III would finish off the streetscape renovation of Remsen Street minus the portion directly fronting the fire parcels which we anticipate will be developed in concert with the fire parcels themselves. The City’s application for CFA funding was not successful due to a limited commitment of matching funds from the City. To bolster our next application, we needed to secure matching funds that would make the project competitive in our current fiscal environment. I approached National Grid regarding their Urban Center/Commercial District Revitalization program which the City has utilized in the past, specifically for Remsen Street Phase I. The program is intended to fund capital projects that will spur investment in commercial districts that have a high percentage of vacant/abandoned properties. After submitting a request to National Grid, we were informed that the City was eligible for up to $100,000 of funding for Remsen Street Phase III. The grant is reimbursement based, with funding being released upon the successful completion of the project. National Grid requires the funding to be matched 3:1 with funding from other sources. The total cost of the Remsen Street Phase III project is $400,000 (cost estimate attached), so the City will use the $100,000 from National Grid to show matching funds for our CFA application and use the CFA funding to provide the 3:1 match for the National Grid funding. Under this plan, the City will be reimbursed for Remsen Street Phase III in its entirety. As it is written, the grant is good until March 31, 2021. However, our National Grid representative, Katie Newcombe, has assured me that the City will have the ability to extend the deadline once the grant is accepted by the City. This means that we will be able to hold onto these matching funds until we receive CFA funding, which may not happen this year given the current status of NYS grants. Submitted by:_Joe Seman-Graves________ date___8/21/2020_____________

CITY OF COHOES OFFICE OF PLANNING

JOSEPH SEMAN-GRAVES PHONE: 518 233-2130 CITY PLANNER 97 Mohawk Street jseman-graves@ci.cohoes.ny.us Cohoes, NY 12047 August 21st, 2020 Honorable William T. Keeler Mayor of Cohoes 97 Mohawk Street Cohoes, N.Y. 12047 Re: Accepting a grant of $100,000 from National Grid’s Urban Center/Commercial District Revitalization Program for Remsen Street Phase III. Dear Mayor Keeler, In 2019 the City of Cohoes applied for, and was not granted CFA funding for Remsen Street Phase III. Phase III would finish off the streetscape renovation of Remsen Street minus the portion directly fronting the fire parcels which we anticipate will be developed in concert with the fire parcels themselves. The City’s application for CFA funding was not successful due to a limited commitment of matching funds from the City. To bolster our next application, we needed to secure matching funds that would make the project competitive in our current fiscal environment. I approached National Grid regarding their Urban Center/Commercial District Revitalization program which the City has utilized in the past, specifically for Remsen Street Phase I. The program is intended to fund capital projects that will spur investment in commercial districts that have a high percentage of vacant/abandoned properties. After submitting a request to National Grid, we were informed that the City was eligible for up to $100,000 of funding for Remsen Street Phase III. The grant is reimbursement based, with funding being released upon the successful completion of the project. National Grid requires the funding to be matched 3:1 with funding from other sources. The total cost of the Remsen Street Phase III project is $400,000 (cost estimate attached), so the City will use the $100,000 from National Grid to show matching funds for our CFA application and use the CFA funding to

provide the 3:1 match for the National Grid funding. Under this plan, the City will be reimbursed for Remsen Street Phase III in its entirety. As it is written, the grant is good until March 31, 2021. However, our National Grid representative, Katie Newcombe, has assured me that the City will have the ability to extend the deadline once the grant is accepted by the City. This means that we will be able to hold onto these matching funds until we receive CFA funding, which may not happen this year given the current status of NYS grants. Should you require any additional information please don’t hesitate to contact my office at your convenience Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Joseph Seman-Graves City Planner City of Cohoes

nationalgrid Arthur W. HamlinManager, Economic Development

Project #:5618

August 10, 2020

William Keeler Mayor of CohoesCity of Cohoes 97 Mohawk Street Cohoes, NY 12047

Dear William Keeler :

Congratulations! City of Cohoes 's application for a grant from National Grid's Urban Center/Commercial District RevitalizationProgram has been approved for your Remsen Street Ph III Project.

You have been awarded a grant of up to $100,000. The program also requires you to match these funds 3:1 with funding fromsources other than National Grid. As indicated in the program application, grant funding is only released to you upon thesuccessful completion of the project, as verified by National Grid.

The Economic Development Grant Programs have been extended through March 31, 2021. Under no circumstances will fundingbe released by National Grid after that date unless this agreement is extended by National Grid in writing and continuedauthorization to do so by the P.S.C.

Enclosed is a Project Funding Agreement. Please sign and return the agreement to: Lynne.Hickman@nationalgrid.com

It is important that you return the signed agreement. We will return a fully-executed agreement to you for your file.

Upon completion of your project and to request payment you will need to do the following:

Log back into your account at www.ShovelReady.com and go to the Project Completion section:

a. Fill out and upload the Certification of Project Completion Form and the Payment Requisition; and

b. Upload all paid invoices and a brief final report describing what was done to achieve the goals outlined in your application.

We will be contacting you to insure compliance with the program, which may include one or more site visits. If you have questionsor need more information regarding your grant, please contact Katie Newcombe at (518) 433-3522.

Also, please contact me prior to issuing any press release or arranging for a news conference concerning this grant.

Again, congratulations on behalf of all of us at National Grid. We look forward to working with you.

Sincerely,

Arthur W. Hamlin Manager, Economic Development

xc: L. PoltynskiKatie Newcombe

300 Erie Boulevard West, Syracuse, NY 13202-4250 www.nationalgrid.com

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

PRIVATE CUSTOMER AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION

d/b/a NATIONAL GRID

AND

CITY OF COHOES 97 Mohawk Street

Cohoes, NY 12047

Application Number: 5618

300 Erie Boulevard West

Syracuse, New York 13202

Economic Development Program

Private Agreement

8/10/2020

#5618

1

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

PRIVATE CUSTOMER/DEVELOPER AGREEMENT

1. DEFINITIONS.

"Agreement" means this document and the Approved Online Application.

“Award Letter” means the letter that informs the Grantee that they have received approval of an

Economic Development grant and the amount of that grant.

"Customer" means the retail customer of Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, d/b/a National

Grid, ("Company") receiving Project funding under this Agreement.

“Project” means the activity described in the Approved Application.

"Program" means the subject Company Economic Development Program that is providing

funding for the Project.

"Company" means Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, d/b/a National Grid, or its successor or

assign, the entity funding the Services under this Agreement.

2. SCHEDULE. The Customer shall complete its Project by the dates set forth in the Approved

Application, unless the Project is delayed by occurrences beyond the reasonable control of the

Customer. Under no circumstances will funding be released by Niagara Mohawk Power

Corporation, d/b/a National Grid, without continued authorization to do so by the New York State

Public Service Commission.

3. FUNDING. The Project may be funded, in whole or in part, by the Company. The Customer

shall be responsible for all sums necessary to complete the Project not provided Company. Any

funding provided by the Company shall be used by the Customer solely for the uses approved in

this Agreement. The Company reserves the right to withhold funding if there are unauthorized

changes to the Project or if the requirements of the Program or this Agreement are not met. The

Company also has the right to withhold or terminate funding if Customer is in arrears on their

current account. Under no circumstances will funding be released by Niagara Mohawk Power

Corporation, d/b/a National Grid, without continued authorization to do so by the New York State

Public Service Commission.

4. PAYMENT. The Customer will advise the Company of its completion of the Project. The

Company reserves the right to conduct a site visit, inspect the work, determine its completion, and

verify its compliance with Program requirements. If Company confirms that the Project has been

completed and is in compliance with Program requirements, the parties will execute a Certificate

of Project Completion and the Customer will submit a Payment Requisition form. The Company

will remit a check to the Customer in the amount of the Program grant stipulated in the Award

Letter.

Economic Development Program

Private Agreement

8/10/2020

#5618

2

• Under certain conditions Customers in the following programs may be eligible for Progress

Payments: Strategic Economic Development, Industrial Building Redevelopment, Capital

Investment Incentive, Brownfield Redevelopment, 25 Cycle Investment Incentive, Energy

Efficiency in Empire Zones and Dairy Industry Productivity. The Customer must request a

Progress Payment in writing on their letterhead prior to submittal of the attached Certificate of

Progress Payment. Included in the request must be justification for the Progress Payment, all

invoices and evidence that corresponding matching funds have been expended. Progress

Payment requests are subject to approval by the Vice President Economic Development and

the Sr. Vice President Business Services & Economic Development.

5. CUSTOMER REQUIREMENTS.

• The Customer agrees to conduct the Project in accordance with the Approved Application and

Program requirements. If the Customer fails to do so, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation,

d/b/a National Grid, may require Customer to return all funding received.

• The Customer will cooperate fully with the Company, and provide full information regarding

its business and costs to the extent necessary to enable the Company to evaluate the Project or

determine whether Program funds should be remitted to the Customer. This cooperation shall

include the Customer's designation of a representative with whom the Company can interact

on all matters related to this Agreement and whose decisions are binding on the Customer. If

Customer provides false, inaccurate, misleading or otherwise deceptive information, Niagara

Mohawk Power Corporation, d/b/a National Grid may require Customer to return all funding

received.

• The Customer will be required to complete a survey upon receipt of funding. Regulatory

requirements prohibit the Company from continuing to fund recipients who fail to fulfill

reporting requirements.

• The Customer agrees to give credit to the Company on any collateral materials produced as a

result of funding received through the Program.

6. CHANGES. The Customer may request changes or amendments to the Agreement. Any such

changes must be in a writing signed by the Customer and the Company.

7. LIMITATION OF COMPANY LIABILITY. COMPANY MAKES NO WARRANTY

WHATSOEVER, WHETHER STATUTORY, WRITTEN, ORAL, OR IMPLIED

(INCLUDING WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR USE FOR

A PARTICULAR PURPOSE) WITH RESPECT TO THE PROJECT OR WITH

RESPECT TO ANY ECONOMIC BENEFITS, ENERGY SAVINGS, OR IMPROVED

ENERGY QUALITY RESULTING FROM USE OF PROGRAM FUNDS. While the

Program is intended to provide benefits to recipients, the Customer understands and agrees that

the Company is not liable for any losses resulting from the Customer's participation in the

Program or from the Program's failure to result in benefits to the Customer. To the fullest extent

allowed by law, the Company is exempt from any and all liability to the Customer for any

damage, injuries, or losses of any nature, whether direct or indirect, special, consequential,

incidental or otherwise, including, but not limited to, those arising out of, resulting from, or

related to this Agreement and/or any Company actions pursuant or related to this Agreement or to

Economic Development Program

Private Agreement

8/10/2020

#5618

3

the Program. The Customer releases Company, its directors, officers, employees, agents,

successors and assigns, from any and all liabilities to the Customer.

8. TERMINATION. Any party to this Agreement may terminate this Agreement for convenience upon

thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. The Company may terminate the Agreement at any

time for any nonconformance with a material term of this Agreement. Niagara Mohawk Power

Corporation, d/b/a National Grid may terminate the Agreement at any time for legislative, court or

regulatory changes effecting its rates, tariffs or Economic Development Programs. In the event of any

termination, no amount shall be paid or payable by the Company for the Customer's termination costs,

including, but not limited to, costs associated with the transfer or termination of personnel or other

contracts.

9. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBCONTRACTING. The Customer shall neither assign this Agreement,

nor subcontract any portion of the work, nor assign any moneys payable under this Agreement,

without first obtaining the written consent of the Company. The Company may reject any assignee,

delegatee or other transferee, or any subcontractor, within its absolute discretion, that it considers

unable or unsuitable to perform activities under this Agreement. Any Company-authorized

assignment or subcontracting of this Agreement shall not relieve the Customer of the responsibility

for full compliance with the requirements of this Agreement. In the event the Company authorizes

assignment or subcontracting of this Agreement, or any portion of the work, the Company makes no

warranty, guarantee or representation, whether express or implied, with regard to any materials or

workmanship provided by any contractor or the reasonableness of the prices charged by them. The

Customer understands and agrees that such contractor is solely responsible for the work. The

Company assumes no liability or responsibility for any damages or claims resulting from the

Customer's selection of any contractor. The requirements of this Agreement shall be included in any

subcontracts placed by the Customer.

10. THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARY. The parties have no intent, and do not create, any third-party

rights or interest in this Agreement or in the Project.

11. NOTICES. Each party shall designate the name and address of that party's representative. Any legal

or contractual notices required to be sent to either party shall be deemed duly sent when mailed to the

intended party's designated representative by means of certified or registered mail, return receipt

requested.

12. WAIVER. No term of this Agreement may be waived except in a writing signed by the parties.

13. LAWS. This Agreement shall be interpreted and enforced according to the laws of the State of New

York, exclusive of those laws determined by application of New York’s choice of law principles. All

parties hereby consent to personal jurisdiction and venue in the courts in the State of New York.

14. SEVERABILITY. To the extent that any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be invalid,

illegal or unenforceable, it shall be severed from this Agreement without affecting the validity,

legality or enforceability of the remaining provisions of the Agreement.

15. INTEGRATION AND MERGER. The parties agree that there are no understandings, agreements,

or representations, expressed or implied, other than those expressed herein. This Agreement

Economic Development Program

Private Agreement

8/10/2020

#5618

4

supersedes and merges all prior discussions and understandings, and constitutes the entire agreement

between the parties.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto agree to the terms and conditions of this

Agreement, and agree to be bound by the same, and represent that their signatories have complete

authority to sign and accept this Agreement.

CITY OF COHOES Project #5618

By: __________________________________________________

Title: _________________________________________________

Date: _________________________________________________

NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION, d/b/a NATIONAL GRID

By: __________________________________________________ Arthur W. Hamlin

Title: Manager, Economic Development

Date: ________________________________________________

Remsen Street Phase III Preliminary Opinion of Probable CostCity of Cohoes

Description Quanity Unit Unit/Labor Cost Total Cost Notes

Site Preparation

Maintenance and Protection of Traffic 1 LS $5,500.00 $5,500 Curb Removal 650 LF $6.00 $3,900 Sawcut Pavement 650 LF $2.50 $1,625 Full Depth Asphalt Removal at Curb 1,050 SF $4.00 $4,200 Mill Asphalt Pavement - 1.5" Depth 18,000 SF $1.50 $27,000 Paver Removal, Stacking, and Delivery 5,450 SF $2.00 $10,900 Concrete Sidewalk & Collar Removals 1,500 SF $4.50 $6,750 Additional Removal Allowance 1 LS $2,500.00 $2,500

$62,000

Concrete Sidewalks - 4" Concrete, 8" Subbase 5,000 SF $8.50 $42,500 Curbing - 6" Granite 650 LF $65.00 $42,250 Curbing at Planters - 6" Granite 150 LF $65.00 $9,750 Reinstall Salvaged Pavers on New Sand Bed 1,550 SF $12.50 $19,375 Includes polymeric sand & sealer

ADA Drop Curb Ramp 4 EA $1,200.00 $4,800 Includes detectable warning strip

Asphalt Pavement - Full Depth Replacement at Curb 1,050 SF $8.00 $8,400 Includes subbase

Asphalt Pavement - 1.5" Top Course, Milled Area 18,000 SF $1.50 $27,000 Decorative Crosswalks - Stamped/Colored Asphalt 1,200 SF $16.00 $19,200 Preformed thermoplastic

Decorative Crosswalks - Raised White Striping 300 LF $12.00 $3,600 Street Trees and Porous Rubber Surfacing 15 EA $1,250.00 $18,750 Includes root barriers

Street Trees and Metal Tree Grate 2 EA $1,750.00 $3,500 Includes root barriers

Site Furnishings - Benches 2 EA $1,600.00 $3,200 Site Furnishings - Refuse/Recycling 2 EA $1,400.00 $2,800 Site Furnishings - Bike Racks 4 EA $1,500.00 $6,000 Roadway Signage & Snowplow Markers 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000 Includes decorative street signs

Striping - Parking Spaces & "No Parking" Borders (4" white epoxy) 230 LF $9.00 $2,070 Striping - No Parking Diagonals (8" white epoxy) 40 LF $12.00 $480 Striping - Road Center Lines (4" yellow epoxy) 950 LF $9.00 $8,550 Striping - Shared Lane Symbol (white epoxy) 6 EA $90.00 $540 Striping - Stop Bars (18" white epoxy) 4 EA $75.00 $300 Striping - Handicap Symbol (blue epoxy) 1 EA $250.00 $250 Striping - Handicap Diagonals (8" blue epoxy) 30 LF $12.00 $360 Striping - Handicap Border/Striping (4" blue epoxy) 20 LF $9.00 $180

$229,000

Manhole / Catch Basin Resetting 12 EA $300.00 $3,600 Reset Existing Valves (Gas) 6 EA $250.00 $1,500 Water valves by City DPW

Light Poles Base Adjustments 1 LS $2,500.00 $2,500 Light Pole Relocation 1 EA $5,000.00 $5,000 Stormwater Management Allowance 1 LS $3,500.00 $3,500 Bioretention/Underdrains

Additional Utility Allowance 1 LS $6,500.00 $6,500 Electrical charing station, etc.

$23,000

Construction Item Subtotal $314,000$20,000

Design Contingency (10%) $30,000

Construction Subtotal $364,000Professional Fees

Survey CompletedDesign/Engineering $22,000

Bidding and Negotiations $4,000Construction Administration $10,000

Professional Fee Subtotal $36,000

Construction Total $400,000

Note: This Opinion of Probable Cost is intended to be used for order of magnitude pricing for budget purposes. Estimate is based on approximate dimensions as gathered from preliminary survey and site vists.

Utilities Subtotal

General Conditions (6%)

The Chazen Companies | June, 2020

Utilities

Site Improvements

Site Preparation Subtotal

Site Improvements Subtotal

2

RELEASE FROM DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS

THIS RELEASE FROM DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS AND

TERMINATION OF RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES OF EASEMENT is made this

______ day of __________, 2020 by the CITY OF COHOES, successor-in-interest to

the Cohoes Urban Renewal Agency, a public benefit corporation, duly created and

organized pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 322 the laws of

the State of New York 1968, having its office at City Hall, 97 Mohawk Street, Cohoes,

New York 12047,

Grantor,

And

TYREA HOLDINGS, LLC, a New York limited liability company with an address at

381 Columbia Street, Cohoes, New York 12047,

Grantee,

That the Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar and other

good and valuable consideration, to it in hand paid by the Grantee, receipt whereof is

hereby acknowledged, has released to the Grantee all of the Grantor’s right, title, interest

and claim of demand with regard to the Covenants and Restrictions indexed in Book

2170 page 824; Rights and privileges over easement as set forth in Book 2170 page 824;

and a reservation of right to terminate easement as set forth in Book 2170 page 824 which

the Grantor may have in the land lying and being in Albany County, New York, and more

particularly described in Schedule "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof.

RELEASE FROM DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS IS BEING

RECORDED TO HEREBY RELEASE, TERMINATE, REMISE AND RELINQUISH,

UNCONDITIONALLY AND FOREVER, EACH AND EVERY COVENANT AND

RESTICTION, ALL RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES OVER THE EASMENT

PREVIOUSLY IMPOSED UPON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SCHEDULE "A"

PURSUANT TO THAT CERTAIN DEED RECORDED IN THE ALBANY COUNTY

CLERK’S OFFICE In Liber 2170 Page 824 on June 19, 1979 OF THE PUBLIC

RECORDS OF ALBANY COUNTY, NEW YORK.

[SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE]

CITY OF COHOES

____________________________

William Keeler

Mayor

STATE OF NEW YORK :

COUNTY OF ALBANY : ss.:

On the ______ day of _____________, 2020, before the undersigned, personally

appeared William Keeler, Mayor, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis

of satisfactory evidence to be the individual whose name is subscribed to the within

instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her capacity, and that

by her signature on the instrument, the individual, or the person on behalf of which the

individual acted, executed the instrument.

____________________________________Notary Public, State of New York

SCHEDULE A

Description of the Property

3

4

§ 239-12 Duty to provide sufficient containers. [Amended 6-22-2004 by Ord. No. 4-2004]

A.

It shall be the duty of every person, firm, partnership or corporation owning, or

having the management or control of, any residential property to provide

sufficient City-issued waste containers, to a maximum of two ninety-five-gallon

containers, to hold all accumulations of garbage, trash, waste, offal, ashes and

any other offensive waste substances ordinarily accumulated on the premises.

B.

Notwithstanding any other provision in this article to the contrary, a property

owner of a residential structure housing three or four dwelling units may notify

the Commissioner of Public Works of his or her choice to substitute up to three

thirty-five-gallon containers for a residential structure housing three dwelling

units, or up to four thirty-five-gallon containers for a residential structure housing

four dwelling units, for the otherwise maximum of two ninety-five-gallon

containers. If this option is exercised, the first thirty-five-gallon container would

be issued at no charge, and the additional two or three thirty-five-gallon

containers could be purchased for an amount to be approved by the Board of

Managers. Notwithstanding any other provision of this article to the contrary, all

three or four of said thirty-five-gallon containers would he authorized to be put

out for collection from each residential property exercising this option.

5

§ C13-3Charter review. This Charter may be amended in the manner provided by the Municipal Home

Rule Law. This Charter shall be reviewed at least once every 10 years following

the effective date and revised as deemed necessary pursuant to the Municipal

Home Rule Law.

§ C13-4Charter revision. The charter may be revised or amended at any time in the manner provided by

statute.

Revising City Charters

In New York State JAMES A. COON LOCAL GOVERNMENT TECHNICAL SERIES

A Division of the New York Department of State

Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor Rossana Rosado, Secretary of State

Publication Date: June 1998 Reprint Date: 2015

NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE99 WASHINGTON AVE

ALBANY, NEW YORK 12231-0001http://www.dos.ny.gov

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Historical Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

City Charters: The Constitutional and Statutory Base. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Restrictions on the Content of City Charters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Public Hearings and Referenda. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Approaches to Charter Revision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Revision by Charter Commission. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Charter Revision by initiative and Referendum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Charter Revision and Direct Legislative Action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

The Charter Commission: Organizing for Work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

The Charter Commission at Work: The Charter Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Work Plan for a Charter Commission. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

The Charter Commission and Public Education. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

The Major Issues for Charter Commission Decisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Determining the Form of City Government. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Issues of Structure and Powers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Structure and Powers of City Government. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Issues That May - or May Not - Be Especially Troublesome. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Appendix.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Areas to be Covered in Department Head Interviews. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

 

1

INTRODUCTION

What is a city charter? It is the basic document thatdefines the organization, powers, functions andessential procedures of the city government. It iscomparable to the State Constitution and to theConstitution of the United States. The charter is,therefore, the most important single law of any city.1

Why should cities undertake charter revision? There are several reasons, generally stemmingfrom the fact that a charter affects everything thecity government does. It provides the basis formost municipal regulatory functions and for thedelivery of municipal services.

An obsolete charter can be responsible for manymunicipal problems. If it contains provisionswhich are unworkable under current conditions,municipal officials may have to make a difficultchoice between being responsible for inferiorservice delivery or inviting legal challenge fordeliberate, albeit well-meaning, deviation fromthe law. Until such provisions are eliminated, themost competent officials will be unable to carryout their responsibilities both efficiently andlegally.

Even though a charter may not be so obsolete asto present dilemmas of conscience, revision maywell lay the basis for improved governmentaloperations. A good charter should provide a cleardistribution of the powers of city government andclear descriptions of the duties and powers ofmunicipal officials.

A common failing of many city charters whichwere written prior to the early 1960s is that theyoften covered every detail of city operations,perhaps in an attempt to ensure certain home rulepowers. The length and detail of those olderdocuments tend to discourage citizen interest andunderstanding. Now that home rule is moresecurely established, charters can be (and often

are) used to delineate basic powers and structurewhile leaving the details of operation to becovered in an administrative code. It is essentialfor effective citizen participation that the generalpublic be able to understand the basic documentof their municipal government.

Many existing charters have been weakened andcomplicated by frequent piecemeal revisionsover many years. They may needcomprehensive review to determine the extentof revision required and to ensure internalconsistency.

Charter revision can result in improved citygovernment organization and operations. Reconsideration of governmental structure canresult in elimination of costly unproductivepositions. Clear delineation of lines ofresponsibility and authority facilitates the workof municipal officials, legislative as well asexecutive.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The first State Constitution, adopted in 1777,recognized the colonial charters of two cities,New York and Albany. The Constitution furtherprovided that the legislature should “arrange forthe organization of cities and incorporatedvillages and to limit their power of taxation,assessment, borrowing and involvement indebt.” Thus, a special legislative act wasrequired to establish each new city and to amenda city charter. However, as the home rule powerof cities in New York expanded, cities won theright to amend their charters by local law.

By 1834, seven new cities had been charteredalong the State’s principal trading route, theHudson-Mohawk arterial between New YorkCity and Buffalo. These new cities wereBrooklyn, Buffalo, Hudson, Rochester,Schenectady, Troy and Utica. Thirty-two more

2

cities were created between 1834 and 1899 asthousands of immigrants were drawn to the Stateto work in the multiplying and expandingindustrial and commercial enterprises. The mostrecently chartered city in New York is Rye, whichcame into being in 1942, bringing the number tothe present total of 62.

In the absence of a general law providing for theincorporation of cities, city government in NewYork differs substantially from city to city,although the basic purposes and functions of citiesare similar.

Since each city has been separately chartered bythe legislature, there is no general constitutional orstatutory standard of population or geographicalarea. As a consequence, the populations of thecities (other than New York City with its morethan 7 million people) range from 2,864 (Sherrill)to approximately 328,100 (Buffalo). Land areasrange from 0.9 square miles (Mechanicville) to 72square miles (Rome) with 303.7 square miles inNew York City.

There is no concept of progression in size amonglocal governments from village to city. Forty-nineof the State’s 62 cities had 1990 populationssmaller than that of the largest village, and 182 ofthe State’s 556 villages had more residents thanthe smallest city.

The struggle for increased home rule powers forcities in New York State has been long and hard. It was not until the late 1800s that the Legislaturebegan applying statutes to cities generally ratherthan passing specific laws on individual localmatters. Municipal home rule was a major issueat the Constitutional Convention of 1894, and as aresult of its recommendations, cities were dividedinto three classes by population to enable theLegislature to pass general laws that wouldaddress the problems of cities of various sizes.

Finally, in 1924, a Home Rule Amendment to theConstitution, followed by the enactment of theCity Home Rule Law, granted powers to cities to

choose their own form of government and toamend their charters by local law withoutspecial action by the Legislature. Theprovisions of the City Home Rule Law wereincorporated without substantial changes intothe present Municipal Home Rule Law when itwas enacted in 1963.

CITY CHARTERS: THECONSTITUTIONAL AND

STATUTORY BASE

The nature and scope of subject matter whichmay be included in a city charter or charteramendment is that which the cities mayaccomplish by local law. The grant of local law2

powers to cities is derived from the New YorkState Constitution, Article IX, as implementedby, and spelled out in, the Municipal Home RuleLaw. Under this basic grant of local law power,cities may:

1. Adopt or amend local laws in relation to their“property, affairs or government” that are notinconsistent with the provisions of theConstitution or with any general law; and

2. Adopt or amend local laws not inconsistentwith the Constitution or any general lawrelating to several specifically enumeratedsubjects, whether or not these subjects relateto the “property, affairs or government” ofcities.

The term “property, affairs or government,” asused in section 10 of the Municipal Home RuleLaw, constitutes a broad grant of local lawpower to cities to manage their governmentalaffairs and operations and to discharge theirresponsibilities to satisfy local needs as thoseneeds are perceived in the cities themselves.

Specifically enumerated areas in which a citymay adopt local laws include:

3

P the powers, qualifications, number, mode ofselection, removal, terms of office,compensation and hours of work of its officersand employees;

P the creation and discontinuance of governmentdepartments;

P the protection of its environment;

P the health, safety and welfare of persons andproperty within its boundaries;

P the licensing of businesses and occupations;

P the levy, collection and administration of localtaxes and assessments;

P acquisition and management of real andpersonal property;

P authorization of benefit assessments for localimprovements; and

P the membership and composition of itslegislative body.3

In some instances, a city’s scope of authority toadopt and amend its charter may be broader thanthe city’s local law power. The provisions of anyexisting charter, or general or special state lawpreviously enacted conferring a right, power orauthority or imposing a duty or obligation on acity may be continued in a new city charter oramendment of an existing charter. If, therefore,4

the State legislature has delegated a specificpower to a city, even though the city in the firstinstance had no authority by local law to assumefor itself such power, the power may be continuedin a new charter or amendment of an existingcharter.

Restrictions on the Contentof City Charters

The power of cities to enact local laws is subject

to several limitations which likewise limit theirauthority to adopt and amend their charters.

First, the constitutional grant of authority tocities for the adoption of local laws itselfcontains certain restrictions. A local law cannotbe inconsistent with a general state law or theNew York State Constitution. A general law isa law enacted by the State Legislature which interms and effect applies alike to all cities.5

Second, the State Legislature in enacting theMunicipal Home Rule Law (section 11),specifically restricted the adoption of local lawswith respect to several particular subject areas.For example, a local law may not supersede astate statute if the local law removes arestriction relating to the issuance of bonds orother evidences of indebtedness; affects themaintenance, support or administration of theeducational system or a teachers’ pension orretirement system; or applies to or affects thecourts.

Third, the scope of local law authority isrestricted with respect to subjects which thecourts have determined to be areas of stateconcern. A matter of state concern is a subject6

area which the courts have decided affects theresidents of the entire state rather than only the“property, affairs or government” of a particularlocality. The courts have determined that suchareas include taxation, transportation andhighways, parks, incurring of indebtedness,water supply, education, social services, health,banking, rapid transit, civil service, housing andmunicipal boundaries. Generally speaking, acity may not adopt a local law relating to amatter of state concern unless such enactment isauthorized specifically by the Municipal HomeRule Law, section 10(1)(ii) or unless the StateLegislature has specifically granted such powerto the city.

Finally, local laws may not be enacted withrespect to subjects for which state law clearlyindicates a state purpose to preempt or

4

completely occupy a particular field. Preemption7

occurs when state regulation in a particular area isso comprehensive as to indicate an intention toexclude local legislation.

Public Hearings and Referenda

When city charter revision is to be accomplishedthrough the adoption of a local law by a legislativebody, a statutory public hearing is required, as isthe case prior to enactment of any local law.8

In the case of charter revision submitted by acommission or voter initiative, a public hearing isnot mandatory, but highly desirable.

The Municipal Home Rule Law section on charterrevision by commission does specify that a chartercommission is responsible for publicizing theprovisions of the proposed charter oramendments.

A local law, enacted by a city council, establishinga new charter for a city, is subject to mandatoryreferendum. Amendments to existing charters by9

local law may be subject to referendum, eithermandatory or on petition, if they meet specificcriteria enumerated in sections 23 and 24 of theMunicipal Home Rule Law. A new charter orcharter amendment proposed by elector initiativepursuant to Municipal Home Rule Law, section 37must be submitted to the city’s voters forapproval, as is the case when proposed by a citycharter commission.10

APPROACHES TO CHARTERREVISION

The Municipal Home Rule Law provides threeways to revise a city charter: by chartercommission, by initiative and referendum or bydirect legislative action.

Revision by Charter Commission

A charter commission may be established byany of three procedures set forth in section 36 ofthe Municipal Home Rule Law.

The city’s legislative body may establish acharter commission by local law, or it maysubmit to the city voters the question (also in theform of a proposed local law, to take effect uponvoter approval) of whether or not there shall bea charter commission. In both instances, thelocal law enacted by the council may eitherindicate the number of members of thecommission or provide a method fordetermining the number. Whether the membersshall be elected or appointed must also bespecified. The local law also must prescribe themanner of appointment or election ofcommission members.

The mayor of a city may create a chartercommission by appointing no less than nine normore than 15 residents of the city to serve asmembers. The commission is established uponthe filing with the city clerk of the mayor’scertificate of appointment, which also will namethe chairman, vice chairman and secretary.

The establishment of a commission by voterinitiative requires signatures equal to 15 percentof the votes cast within the city for Governor atthe last gubernatorial election — or 45,000,whichever is less. If the petition is found tomeet all the requirements of law, the legislativebody is required to submit to a referendum thelocal law as proposed. The local law mustprescribe the composition and structure of thecharter commission and provide a method forappointment or election of its members. It mayalso include the names of specific persons toserve on the commission.

After a charter commission has been createdpursuant to section 36, it is charged withresponsibility for reviewing the entire charter

5

and preparing a draft of a proposed new or revisedcharter. The new charter or amendments are to becompleted and filed with the city clerk in time forsubmission to the voters at the next general or aspecial election. The proposed charter oramendments may be submitted in a singleproposal or may be presented in parts withalternative provisions among which the votersmay choose.

Charter Revision by Initiativeand Referendum

A city charter may be amended under section 37of the Municipal Home Rule Law. Under thismethod, if a number of city voters equal to at least10 percent of the votes cast for Governor in thelast gubernatorial election — or 30,000,whichever is less — sign a petition for submissionto the voters of a proposed local law providing fora new charter or charter amendments, theinitiative process is under way. The petition andproposed charter changes are filed with the cityclerk, who is required to determine the legalsufficiency of the petition, subject to judicialreview. Whether or not the clerk determines thatthe petition is legally sufficient, he is required tosubmit the proposal to the city legislative body.

If the proposed changes to the charter are not of akind which require a mandatory referendum, thelegislative body may, if it wishes, adopt theproposed local law itself. If the proposed changesrequire a referendum, the legislative body maysubmit the proposal to the voters at the nextgeneral election.

If, however, the legislative body fails to adopt thepetition without change within two monthsfollowing its filing and such petition meets all therequirements of law, a number of voters who didnot sign the original petition equal to five percentof the votes cast for Governor at the lastgubernatorial election — or 15,000, whichever isless — may file an additional petition with the cityclerk requiring the submission of the proposed

local law at the next general election for voterapproval.

If this additional petition is found to beadequate, the clerk is required to present thematter to the election officials for referendumwithout further action on the part of thelegislative body.

If the proposed local law amending or revisingthe charter receives the majority of the votescast in the referendum, it is adopted, and thenew charter or charter changes will be in effectas provided in the proposal.

Charter Revision and Direct Legislative Action

A third method of revising a city charter is bydirect action of the legislative body under itslocal law power as provided in section 10 of theMunicipal Home Rule Law. Although thisoption is infrequently used, it is possible for acity council, for example, to proceed directly torevise the city charter in this manner rather thanby creating an independent charter commission. In this case, the city council, in effect,constitutes itself as a charter commission andproceeds, usually through its own committees,to accomplish the amendment of revision of thecharter. Whatever changes are agreed upon arethen enacted by local law subject to mandatoryreferendum or referendum on petition if sorequired by the Municipal Home Rule Law,sections 23 and 24.

THE CHARTER COMMISSION:ORGANIZING FOR WORK

Establishment of a charter commission andinitiation of its work involves the considerationof many preliminary details, such ascomposition, staffing, financing, organizationand general procedures.

6

Only in the case of a mayor-appointedcommission are there legal provisions regulatingthe size of a charter commission: no less than ninenor more than 15 members. There is no hard andfast rule specifying the most desirable size of acommission. A major consideration indetermining composition, however, which mayinfluence the size, is the type of representationdesired. Representation in turn depends to a greatextent on the degree of social and economichomogeneity of the community. For example, insome cities where council members are elected bywards, each council member and the mayorappoint one person to the charter commission,thereby transferring to the charter commissionmuch the same refection of community interestsas are found in the council.

The question often arises as to whether theappointees should be elected officials or laycitizens. There is no hard and fast rule whichapplies in all cases. Experience has shown,however, that elected officials and other keyopinion leaders in the community havedisproportionate influence upon the outcome of acharter revision effort. No matter how good apublic opinion program (discussed later in thismanual) is, opinions expressed publicly, pro orcon, by well-known individuals are likely to havea significant impact on voters. It is, therefore,usually advisable that elected municipal officialsplay a meaningful role in the charter revisioneffort from the outset, to gain the benefit of boththeir experience and their sense of what will beacceptable to the public.

The most important consideration in thecomposition of a charter commission is that itinclude representation adequate to give a voice tothe diverse viewpoints in the city, includingpolitical interests and ethnic communities, whichare likely to have a stake in the substance of thecharter. The formula for providing suchrepresentation must be devised with specificcommunity characteristics in mind, since successin one city is no guarantee of success in the next.

The basic organization of a charter commissiondepends in part on how it came into being. Ifthe commission was established by the mayor,the chairperson, vice chairperson and secretarywill have been named by the mayor. In the caseof a charter commission created either by thelegislative body or by initiative, the choosing ofthese officers will be the first order of thecommission, unless the legislation creating thecommission also specifies its membership andorganization. If no chairperson has been named,the mayor or a member of the legislative bodycan convene the first session of the commission.

Once the basic organization is established, thecommission may wish to name a treasurer andparliamentarian and to set up a committeestructure. It is usually desirable, however, todevise a work plan before the committeestructure is determined.

Other issues that may be considered at the firstmeeting are:

P how often the commission will meet;

P whether it will establish its own set of rulesor operate under general parliamentary rules(particular attention should be given todefining a quorum);

P how decisions will be made (by simple orextraordinary majority vote or by consensus);

P what are the commission’s financial needs;and

P what type of expert assistance should besought.

Provision should be made to supply eachmember of the commission with a copy of thecurrent city charter before their deliberationsstart. At the same time, members shouldbecome familiar with the legal andconstitutional provisions that affect the work ofa charter commission and those relating to city

7

charters in general. Basically, this means learningabout what the Municipal Home Rule Law sayson the subject. One way of accomplishing thisobjective is to invite a speaker to attend acommission meeting.

Charter commissions may need two kinds of staffassistance: for gathering data and administrativeanalysis; and legal expertise of the preparation ofa draft charter. It is also assumed that thecommission and its staff will have, or have readyaccess to, adequate clerical and stenographicassistance.

The staffing of a charter commission can beprovided in a variety of ways: managementconsultants and/or attorneys may be retained; full-time or part-time clerical and professional staffmay be employed; or a combination of thesearrangements may be suitable. Locating expertsin charter work, however, is not an easy task,since several kinds of competence are desirable.

The members of charter commissions usually lookfirst to the legal profession to find expert help, andlegal expertise is essential to good charter work. An attorney who has experience in public affairsand/or the field of municipal law is well qualifiedto provide assistance.

Persons with special competence in municipalgovernment organization, administrativeoperations and public administration can be foundin universities, governmental research institutionsand consultant firms. In some communities, aformer public official with long experience inlocal government may be available to assist thecharter commission.

Overall, municipal government generalists,working with legal counsel, can provide thecompetence needed for charter drafting andrevision. The flexibility in staffing a chartercommission, of course, will be determined largelyby the financial resources available.

Realistically, a charter commission will need

some money to conduct its work. Even ifconsultant expenses are not to be incurred, thecommission will need secretarial services,supplies, postage, printing and, perhaps, a smalltravel budget and funds for disseminatinginformation to the public.

Potential sources of money to cover chartercommission expenses include grants frompublic or private sources and in-kind servicesfrom city agencies, a local governmentalresearch bureau or other private sources. Recognizing the diminishing fiscal resources ofcities, it is nevertheless the city’s responsibilityto make some financial commitment to a charterrevision effort which is designed to keep thecity’s fundamental law up to date. In any event,a charter commission without funds may finditself severely handicapped and a potentiallysuccessful product jeopardized.

THE CHARTER COMMISSION ATWORK: THE CHARTER PROCESS

Before a city charter can be drafted or revised, asubstantial amount of preliminary work isnecessary to ensure a good quality product. Theentire process should be carried out inaccordance with a plan. The question of how toensure, to the greatest extent possible, theadoption of the proposed revised charter shouldreceive careful consideration. Moreover, manyspecific issues must be explored, understood,discussed and resolved before actual charterwriting is undertaken.

Work Plan for a Charter Commission

The preparation of a work plan and a timetableis recommended as the first step in the revisionof a charter. An orderly method of proceeding

8

will facilitate the work of the commission, willenable the members to understand the relationshipof their separate tasks to the overall project andwill help to assure completion of the work withintime constraints imposed by state law. While thework of the commission and its schedule willdepend in part on whether or not it retains aconsultant, the work plan will include commonelements.

The timetable developed by the chartercommission should set specific times forbeginning and completing each of the elements. Itwill be apparent that it is possible to carry outmore than one element at a time. In any event, theschedule will have to stay within time limitsimposed by law and by a decision as to when theproposed revised charter is going to be submittedto the voters. A charter commission which setsout to accomplish a complete charter revision orthe drafting of a wholly new charter is welladvised to schedule its work over at least a fullyear.

A work plan normally begins with one or moreorientation and education sessions for chartercommission members. Normally included in thiselement is a general briefing on the functions of acity charter, some background information onprinciples of governmental organization andadministration and examination of samplecharters.

Research and analysis of the existing municipalgovernment is necessary to permit commissionmembers to identify areas of municipalorganization and operations which can beimproved by charter changes. Some chartercommissions find that the city government is insome respects operating outside the charter, if notin violation of it. An important consideration,therefore, is to determine the extent to which thegovernment is currently operating according toprovisions of the charter. This step can beaccomplished by a combination of twotechniques:

P First, a review of operating budgets,departmental annual reports and otherdocuments can reveal patterns of citygovernment organization and operations.

P Second, a survey of the department heads andpossibly other employees by questionnaire orinterviews, or both, conducted by consultantstaff and/or charter commission members canprovide valuable insights to supplementtestimony given by department heads atmeetings of the charter commission. Asample outline of questions for such a surveyis provided in the Appendix.

The charter commission might simultaneouslyundertake a general review and analysis of theexisting charter because this work and thegovernmental survey are closely interrelated. Several questions to be answered during thispreliminary phase are whether the charter isoutdated, whether it is too detailed, whether it isambiguous concerning the powers and duties ofvarious city officials and operating units, andwhether it is internally consistent. It would alsobe useful at this time to review the principalfeatures of past charter revisionrecommendations and to determine, if possible,why they succeeded or failed to gain voterapproval.

At this stage, the commission needs to considerkey issues and have alternatives outlined for italong with a review of pros and cons for eachoption. It is at this stage, in the identificationand description of key issues and alternativecourses of action, that a consultant can providevaluable service. Lacking a consultant, thecharter commission may want to seek outtemporary assistance to guide it through thecrucial stage of identifying and consideringmajor issues and making decisions essential forcharter drafting. It is essential, also, to follow asystematic format for orderly presentation anddiscussion of topics.

It is often desirable, during the deliberation

9

phase of charter revision, to provide opportunitiesfor citizens and groups to express opinions on themain charter issues at public meetings set asidefor this purpose. The information gained can beextremely helpful to commission members inassessing the public’s receptivity to possiblemajor changes, such as abolishing or adding anelective office. Several meetings of the chartercommission can be set aside to receive publicviews on specific issues under consideration.

If possible, the commission should reachdecisions on all major issues before charterdrafting is started. If all major questions havebeen resolved, the commission will be able todevote full attention to questions on how thedecisions can best be implemented. The charterdrafter can then be given the necessaryinformation and guidelines to prepare a first draftof a revised charter. An undisputed point is thatthe charter commission as a body cannot write acharter. If no consultant is available for the task,the commission members should be organizedinto small committees to handle the drafting ofspecific sections, with one person responsible forassembling the separate drafts into an internallycoherent charter.

If the revised charter is a short document, it maybe feasible for the commission to review the entiredraft as a unit. Usually, however, it is preferableto present the draft one section at a time as it iscompleted. This procedure will divide theworkload more evenly over time and avoidswamping the commission at the end with alengthy document to be reviewed under deadlinepressures. As discussion proceeds on these draftproposals, it is, of course, possible for thecommission to reverse its judgments in light offurther reflection, additional information orinsurmountable difficulties in developingimplementing language.

The only legal obligation to be met by the chartercommission at this stage in the charter revisionprocess is the responsibility for publicizing theprovisions of the proposed charter or

amendments. Some cities provide for moreextensive public review of the proposeddocument by printing and distributing copies inaddition to holding full-scale public hearings.

As a result of the final public hearing, thecommission may make further revisions in theproposed charter. When the document is at lastin final form, it must be filed with the city clerkwithin the statutory deadline imposed on thecommission’s work for submission to the votersin accordance with the Municipal Home RuleLaw.

The Charter Commissionand Public Education

An effective public education programconstitutes one of the most important aspects ofa charter revision effort. From its first meetingto its last, a charter commission should considerits relationship to the public whose ultimatejudgment of the commission’s work will beexpressed in the form of referendum votes. It isdifficult, at times, to keep a new charter frombecoming a political — even a party — issue. Opponents might adopt a critical stance withrespect to a commission’s efforts to educate thepublic about the revised charter, andparticularly, with any effort it might make toadvocate passage of the proposal.

Regardless of how it conceives its role, it isessential that the charter commission conduct apublic education program. The earlier it isstarted, the greater the chances for generatingand sustaining widespread interest in thecommunity. Another benefit is to permit thecharter commission to test public reaction tovarious viewpoints and proposals underconsideration. In addition, it may be valuable interms of developing public support foralternatives to the status quo to be proposed bythe charter commission. Finally, thecommission will want to prepare the voters tovote intelligently.

10

A variety of techniques can be used to conductsuccessful public education programs. During theinitial phases of the charter commission’s work, amember or subcommittee should takeresponsibility for issuing accurate and completepress releases following each meeting. Designated members, or in some cases, allmembers, can make themselves available forinterviews and public appearances to explain thefunctions of the charter commission and create apositive image from the outset. Mediarepresentatives should be invited to attend allcommission sessions.

Another successful method used in some cities isa series of public hearings. As was pointed outearlier, public hearings throughout the charterrevision effort, though not required, can be aneffective way of both increasing citizen awarenessand measuring public opinion — a two-wayprocess. The public hearing is also a vehicle forconsulting various groups and organizationsconcerning their views and ideas on the city’sgovernment and charter revision. Among themost important groups in the community thatshould be consulted are city officials andemployees. The public hearing can serve as ameans for soliciting their ideas and opinions. It isessential to get their input in terms of informationand advice on operations of the city and thepossible effect of various charter proposals onmunicipal operations. By turning to theseofficials, and carefully considering their views, thecommission may gain the support of thisinfluential group.

The schools should not be overlooked as amedium for the conduct of a public educationprogram. The preparation of a new city charterprovides important and interesting subject matterfor citizenship and public affairs education in theschools. This will educate future voters and willalso inform older family members when studentscome home and discuss “what they did in schooltoday.”

The most active phase of public information

begins after the proposed charter revision hasbeen drafted. The traditional public informationtechniques such as brochures with briefquestions and answers, open letters withendorsements published in newspapers,interviews on news programs, and public serviceannouncements on the media are equallyapplicable to charter revision efforts. Oneapproach thought to be particularly beneficial isfor charter commission members to explain thenew charter in speaking engagementsthroughout the community.

Public opinion polls on specific issues may beof some value, although they should be usedwith caution, even when conducted by areputable consultant, since it is often difficult toapply reliable techniques in relatively smallareas. A further consideration is thatprofessional polling is often excessively costlyin relation to the value of the results.

Yet another option to be considered inimplementing the public education program ispublishing in a pamphlet either the draftproposed charter or a narrative final report offindings, or both. Many charter commissionshave found that the narrative is most effective. It is a statement to the voters in languageunderstandable by lay citizens. It can spell outthe main features and merits of the new charterand explain why each provision was proposed. It can help to ensure that the impressions andinterpretations made, especially by the press, arecorrect and as favorable as possible.

In addition to its concerns with keeping thepublic informed, the charter commission willwant to keep in mind that yet another dimensionof its purpose is to gain approval of its charter. Regardless of the thoroughness of the publiceducation program, it will not be possible toreach and inform every voter who can beexpected to vote in the referendum. As notedearlier, many votes are certain to be determinedon the basis of comments expressed andpositions taken by opinion leaders in the

11

community. It is therefore advisable to take threemore steps: to seek help and support frominfluential citizen groups, to solicit editorialsupport of the local newspapers, and to obtain theendorsement of municipal officials and, ifpossible, political party leaders. Experience hasindicated that any one or all of these may beespecially significant in influencing the outcomeat the polls.

THE MAJOR ISSUES FOR CHARTERCOMMISSION DECISIONS

A commission undertaking a review and revisionof a city charter will find it necessary to makesome early basic decisions which will have muchto do with the remainder of its work. Some ofthese will relate to the commission’s objectivesand its conception of its function. Others willrelate to the determination of what kind of citygovernment the commission wishes to proposeand will result in part from the way thecommission sees its purposes and in part fromconsideration of certain fundamental alternatives.

With exceptions for special local situations, thebasic issues which call for decisions by a chartercommission are much the same for all cities. Twoissues related to the form of a city charter requiredecisions before the commission can proceedeffectively with its work. The first of these iswhether to revise the charter by amending specificprovisions while leaving others relatively intact,or to draft a wholly new charter. The second,relevant primarily to wholly new charter drafting,is whether to propose a “long-form” or a “short-form” charter.

In deciding whether or not to propose piecemealamendments to the existing charter or to propose awholly new charter, the charter commission willweigh a number of basic considerations. The firstof these is the mandate to the charter commission,which may or may not indicate clearly whether the

commission is to proceed with drafting a newcharter or with amending the old.

A second consideration is the judgment of thecommission members as to the reasons why thecharter commission was created. To make thisdetermination, the commission will want toanalyze carefully the nature of specificobjections to the existing charter. If the charteris merely old, contains archaic provisions andinappropriate or ambiguous language, or if someof its provisions have been made inoperative bystate legislative or judicial action, it is possiblethat a piecemeal amending process mayaccomplish the desired purposes. If, however,in addition to all of these conditions, thedeficiencies relate to important structural oroperational arrangements in the citygovernment, or if there is a desire to make basicchanges in form and organization of thatgovernment, a wholly new charter is clearlyindicated.

A third consideration will be the commission’sjudgment of how best to make the proposedchanges intelligible to the voters of the city. Presentation of a number of separate proposalsfor change has the advantage of keepingcontroversial proposals from impairing thechances of less controversial amendments in areferendum. On the other hand, a host ofseemingly unrelated proposals may confuse andbewilder the voters. It is difficult to produce aconsistent, coherent result with a piecemealapproach to charter revision.

Lastly, the charter revision effort may be madean ongoing activity over a period of severalyears, if that seems desirable. Individualsubjects or sections of the charter can be takenup and a limited number of revisions presentedto the voters each year. This approach maywork particularly well in areas such as financialprocedures, which can be addressedindependently. It should be noted, however, thatthe charter commission would have to berenewed after every election at which

12

propositions are presented.

In many cities, the number of controversial issueslikely to cause a complete charter revisionproposal to be defeated may in fact be quitelimited. In such a case, New York law permits acompromise between presenting a singlecompletely revised charter document and a seriesof separate amendments. What can be and hasbeen done effectively is to submit to the voters acomplete charter but with alternative provisionsfor those sections where lack of such a choicemight generate sufficient negative votes to defeatthe whole charter.

Whatever may be its final choice as to method ofsubmission, a charter commission will want tomake an early decision as to whether its objectiveis to produce a completely new charter or topropose a limited number of amendments. Thecommission’s work plan and time schedule willdepend largely on this decision.

How does a charter commission determinewhether it will keep or produce a long-form orshort-form charter? Most city charters are long,involved documents containing large bodies ofdetail relating to the organization and operation ofthe city government. The terms “short-form” and“long-form” relate to the amount of detailincluded in the charter document.

A short-form charter provides only for thestructure and powers of the city government,establishes the basic offices and sets forth generaloperating arrangements. The details oforganization and operations, and for implementingthe powers and carrying out the functions of thecity government, are left to an administrative codeenacted by the legislative body as a local law. Asa general rule, the charter is subject to voterapproval but an administrative code is not, since itassigns no powers but only specifies how powersare to be exercised and how duties are to becarried out. A sometimes quoted rule of thumb isthat a charter says “what can be done and providesthe machinery for doing it, while an

administrative code spells out how it is to bedone.” While this statement is no doubtoversimplified, it suggests the basic distinction.

In recent years, the weight of opinion hasfavored the short-form charter andadministrative code. For example, in theenumeration of powers of the city council, it isalways safer to make a general grant of power,which is legal in New York State, than to try tolist every power the council may need andthereby to run the risk of unintentionallylimiting home rule. It is felt that the chartershould serve as a framework within which thecity government can solve problems as theyarise, rather than as a well of solutions to everyimaginable municipal problem. Thomas Reed, awell-known municipal consultant, some yearsago advised, “The main purpose of a charter...isto empower, not to restrain. If that is kept inmind, your charter will not repeat the long-winded folly of some of its predecessors.”

Determining the Form of City Government

A city charter commission faces a number ofbasic questions relating to the kind of citygovernment it wants to propose. The bulk of thecommission’s work will be devoted to obtainingthe necessary information to resolve these issuesand to evaluating alternatives. In deciding theissues of charter content the charter commissionwill be making decisions that will largely shapethe city government and thereby influence thefuture of the community.

In making a complete review of the citygovernment, a city charter commission mustdecide whether to change the form of the citygovernment. The following paragraphs outlinethe standard forms of city government in theUnited States and review some considerationsinvolved in choosing among them. Citygovernment forms fall generally into four broadcategories.

13

In a council-manager form, an appointed,professional manager is the administrative head ofthe city; the council is the policy-making body andthe mayor, who may be elected by the voters or bythe council from among its own members, ismainly a ceremonial figure. The manager usuallyserves at the pleasure of the council, has thepower to appoint and remove department heads,recommends legislation, directs and supervisesday-to-day municipal operations and prepares thebudget. The manager does not have a veto powerover council actions.

In a strong mayor-council form, the popularlyelected mayor is the administrative and executivehead of the city government and the council is thepolicy-making body. The mayor usually hasextensive power to appoint and remove agencyheads from office, to supervise and directmunicipal operations and to prepare the budget. The mayor ordinarily has broad veto powers overcouncil actions as well. This form sometimes alsoprovides for a professional administratorappointed by the mayor and is then called themayor-administrator plan.

In a weak mayor-council form of government, themayor, even though popularly elected, is mainly aceremonial figure. The council is not only thepolicy-making body, but also provides acommittee form of administrative leadership andexercises the powers of appointment and removalof agency heads and budget preparation. There isgenerally no mayoral veto power, and committeechairmen tend to wield extensive powers.

The fourth category of city government is thecommission form. Commissioners, elected tohead and administer the individual departments ofthe city government together form a council that isthe policy-making and law-making body. In somecases, one of the commissioners may bedesignated to perform the ceremonial duties of themayor.

In recent decades, most cities selecting a newgovernment have chosen either the council-

manager or strong mayor-council form. Thecommission and weak mayor-council plans findlittle favor as ways of dealing withcontemporary municipal problems.

The commission form has had no new adoptionsfor many years in New York State or in the restof the country, so far as can readily bedetermined; nor has the weak mayor-councilform been chosen with any frequency. Moreover, unsatisfactory performance of theweak mayor-council plan in many cities is thestimulus for many charter revision movementstoday.

As between the strong mayor-council andcouncil-manager plans, a charter commissionwill find many advantages in both. There is noquestion, however, about the trend toward thesetwo plans, the basic characteristic of which isthat they provide a more centralizedadministrative direction of city activities. Thecouncil-manager form nationally is found mostfrequently in younger cities of relativelyhomogeneous composition, with populations inthe middle range (25,000 - 50,000). Very largeand very small cities are more likely to use themayor-council form, as are older cities withmore heterogeneous populations made up of avariety of ethnic or economic population groups.

It is interesting to compare New York with allcities in the United States as regards the use ofthe major forms of government.

Forty-one of New York’s 62 cities, or 66%,operate under the mayor-council system. Eighteen, or 29%, use a council-managersystem, while only three or 4.8% employ acommission system. Nationwide, thepercentages are — roughly — 54% mayor-council, 37% council-manager, 3% commission,and 7% “town meeting” (a system not in use inNew York).

SOURCE: New York Local GovernmentHandbook (4th Ed.); ICMA Municipal Year

14

Book (1990).

Obviously, the mayor-council form has greaterrelative popularity in New York than in the UnitedStates at large. This difference can probably beattributed to the diverse socioeconomiccharacteristics, as well as the age, of many NewYork cities. The commission form, oncepromoted as a tool of municipal reform, has lostmuch of its popularity over the years.

Issues of Structure and Powers

Most city governments have basically similarfunctions, duties and responsibilities. A basicsimilarity, therefore, exists among city charterswith respect to the structures they provide and theways in which powers and responsibilities areallocated. Within these basic likenesses, however,there are significant diversities of detail. Thesedifferences result not only from choices as to theform of city government, but also from differinglocal preferences, pressures and circumstances.

Among these differences, the most substantial arein the powers and functions of the executive andin the relationships the charter sets up between theexecutive and the legislative elements of the citygovernment. There are also differences in theorganization and structure of the administrativesector.

All such differences reflect options a chartercommission faces, its choice depending in eachcase on its judgment of local needs andpreferences. It is not possible in a manual of thissize and purpose to array and discuss all suchalternatives. It is useful, however, to identify themajor areas concerning structure and powers withwhich a charter commission must deal, and to listcomponent areas of decision within each majorconcern. This is the purpose of the followingoutline.

STRUCTURE AND POWERS OFCITY GOVERNMENT

I. The Legislative BodyA. Is the council to have the broadest

possible scope of powers consistent withNew York State law and the philosophyof municipal government? If not, whatpowers are to be exercised elsewhere?

B. Council qualifications and compensation1. Member qualifications2. Prohibitions3. Vacancy and forfeiture of office4. Council to be the judge of the

qualifications of its members5. Council compensation: to be set in

charter or to be set by council in budget

C. Council representation and composition1. Number of members2. Terms of office: number of years;

staggered or concurrent3. Nomination method4. Election method: wards, at large,

combination (if wards, method ofdistricting and apportionment)

D. Council organization and procedures1. The presiding officer: election by

voters at large or chosen by council,duties (voting power)

2. The council’s secretary, selection andduties

3. Time and place of regular meetings4. Method of calling special meetings5. Meeting procedures

a. Public meetingsb. Council to establish rules of

procedurec. Voting, quorum, binding action

requirements

II. The Executive FunctionA. Strong mayor-council form

1. Mayor’s qualifications and

15

compensation: set in charter or bycouncil in budget

2. Method of electing mayor: by voters orcouncil

3. Mayor’s term of office: number of yearsand how related to terms of councilmembers

4. Vacancy and forfeiture of office5. Full-time or part-time6. Enumeration of mayor’s authority and

responsibilitya. Presiding officer of councilb. Law enforcementc. Messages to councild. Veto authority, council overridee. Item veto authority, council overridef. Administrative supervisiong. Appointing authority: department

heads, boards and commissions, withor without consent of council

h. Preparing and submitting proposedbudget

i. Other responsibilities

B. Council-manager form1. Manager’s qualifications2. Method of appointing manager3. Council to fix manager’s compensation4. Components of a removal procedure5. Provision for acting manager6. Specific authority and responsibility of

the managera. Supervisory authorityb. Appointing authorityc. Budget preparationd. Attend council meetingse. Advise councilf. Other responsibilities

C. Mayor-council-administrator: same as II-Aabove with the following added:1. Method of appointment and

qualifications of administrator2. Administrator’s relationship to the mayor

defined3. The authority and responsibility of the

administrator

4. Administrator’s authority,responsibility and compensation: to bespecified in the charter or inadministrative code

III. Administrative organization: how muchdetail will be spelled out in charter? Howmuch will be left for an administrativecode?

A. Departments: there must beadministrative departments in every citygovernment. May want to provide forkey ones such as finance, law, publicsafety and public works. Less detailgives council flexibility to adaptorganization to meet changingrequirements. Generally preferable toprovide for plans and proposals tooriginate with manager or mayordepending on form of government.

B. Boards, commissions and quasi-independent agencies: should they beretained? Which ones? To do what?

C. Administrative authority: are alladministrative units to be integrated underauthority of a chief administrator? If not,which ones are to be insulated fromcentral control?

D. Appointive or elective: Thomas Reedsays to elect an administrator “as nearlynever as is politically practicable.” Heprefers appointment by andresponsibility to the chief administrator,i.e., mayor or city manager.

IV: Financial procedures: how much of thedetail of financial procedures can bedeferred to an administrative code?

A. Municipal fiscal year

B. The office responsible for preparation ofthe budget and capital program

C. Components of the budget and the capital

16

program

D. Budget and long-range program adoptionprocedures

E. Procedures for amendment of the budget

F. Appropriation lapse

G. Provisions for budget implementation andadministration

H. Real property tax administration

I. Nonproperty taxes

V. Other ProvisionsA. Conflict of interest for municipal officers

and employees

B. Activities expressly prohibited for officersand employees1. Discrimination based on race, sex, age,

political or religious affiliation2. Falsification of records, documents, tests3. Bribery4. Holding office in a political party5. Solicitation of political contributions

C. Separability of the charter provisions

D. Transitional provisions: are they toprovide for:

1. First election2. First council (initial staggering of terms)3. Mayor4. Continuance of officers, employees5. Initial salaries of officers6. Transition in departmental affairs,

contracts7. Laws repealed or inconsistent8. Fiscal year

Issues That May — or May Not —Be Especially Troublesome

Charter commission members should be awareof some possible troublesome issues thatfrequently arise in city charter revision.

Among these issues, the distribution of authoritybetween the mayor and the legislative body withrespect to the exercise of the appointing powerand the legislative role in budget developmentcan be especially difficult in cities where anattempt is being made to move away from theweak mayor-council toward the strong mayor-council form of government. The power ofappointment can rest with the mayor alone orwith the mayor subject to approval by thecommon council. This authority may be parallelor be different for department heads and boardsand commissions.

With respect to the legislative role, the questionthat arises most often is whether the mayorshould have veto power over the council’sactions and, if so, what majority must thecouncil have to override the veto. In the contextof the budgetary process, the key issues are: whoprepares the budget, and whether the mayor canveto individual items in the proposed budgetand, if so, should the item veto be limited toincreases.

Another frequently raised issue is whether toretain independent or quasi-independentadvisory boards and commissions. From apolitical point of view it is often advisable not totamper with these bodies, if to do so may riskdefeat of an entire charter revision. From anadministrative point of view, however, they maytend to impede the ability of the chiefadministrative officer to manage effectively theaffairs of the city, particularly if their membersare elected and operate from an independentpower base.

How long should terms of office be? This issue

17

must always be faced but may be especiallytroublesome in connection with the office of themayor, as it relates to the terms of councilmembers. It is said that the people have morecontrol over government if officers are elected,say, every two years. On the other hand, theargument in favor of a longer term is that a newlyelected official takes a year to learn about thegovernment and his official role, but spends closeto a year campaigning for reelection. This issuetakes on added significance in the case of a mayorwho is to be a strong chief executive.

A fourth issue that may cause heated discussion isthe question of election or appointment ofdepartment heads. As in the case of boards andcommissions, the administrative point of viewfavors appointed department heads. In fact, it ismore essential for a chief administrator to havesome control over appointment of departmentheads than over boards and commissions. Moreover, in many cases there is no justificationfor retaining elected department heads unless theyare to exercise policy decision-making authority.

Election of the governing body can be yet anotherthorny issue charter commissions may face. Thequestion is whether to elect council members bydistricts, or at-large, or by some combination. If acombination, how many should be elected at-largeis the question. The greater the homogeneity in acity the more likely it will find at-large electionsatisfactory, whereas election by districts is morecommon in heterogeneous communities with avariety of ethnic groups and divergent interestsidentified with definable geographical areas.

CONCLUSION

A city charter is not a panacea for all localgovernment problems, but it is an important toolfor making better government possible. Thegoals of charter revision are in fact the same asthose of better city government: better municipalservice delivery and more efficient use offinancial and human resources in carrying outthe functions of government.

For these reasons, those who undertake torevise city charters will want to have as theirobjective the presentation of the best charterpossible. This objective can be accomplished byfollowing the advice in this manual: devise awork plan and timetable, engage in carefuldecision-making, and make public educationand citizen involvement a top priority.

18

ENDNOTES

National Municipal League “A Guide for Charter Commissions,” New York, 1972.1

Municipal Home Rule Law, section 36(5); 37; 10(c)(1).2

Municipal Home Rule Law, section 10(1)(ii).3

Municipal Home Rule Law, section 10(4)(c) and 36(5).4

Municipal Home Rule Law, section 2(3).5

Adler v. Deegan, 251 N.Y. 467, 167 N.E. 705 (1929).6

Wholesale Laundry Board of Trade v. City of New York, 17 App. Div. 2d7

327, 234 N.Y.S. 2d 862 (1962) aff’d 12 N.Y. 2d 998 (1963).

Municipal Home Rule Law, section 20(5).8

Municipal Home Rule Law, section 23(2-a).9

Municipal Home Rule Law, section 36(5-b).10

19

APPENDIX

Areas to be Covered inDepartment Head Interviews

1. Duties and responsibility of the department and its

subunits.

2. Laws (local, state, federal): governing/affecting work

of department; where legal authority comes from;

mandates/controls by other units of government.

3. Organization and staffing: table of organization,

number of employees, method of appointment of

department heads. (Obtain copy of schedule of

positions and salaries and an organization chart.)

4. Lines of authority/internal relationships: who reports

to whom, supervisory responsibility; where to get help

on money problems, policy direction, personnel,

administrative matters, conflict resolution.

5. External relationships: with mayor, city manager,

other departments of the city, the common council,

committees of the common council, advisory boards

and commissions, other governments; nature, purpose

and frequency of relationships.

6. Budget: fiscal year, current budget figures, how needs

are determined, who prepares

request; revenues such as dues, fees, state or federal

grants; performance budgeting or other formats:

capital budgeting. (Obtain copy of current operating

budget.)

7. Administrative procedures: written manual; reports to

whom, how often, what kind; record keeping;

formalized deadlines; purchasing, what items are

needed.

8. Day-to-day operations: main services, program

activities; how assignments are made to department

heads and to staff; how things run on a day-to-day

basis. (Obtain copy of annual report.)

9. Evaluation of operations: obtain frank estimates of

strong and weak points including service delivery,

financial, staff and external relationship

considerations; barriers to needed improvements.

10. Changes: 5-10 year projection for

increase/decrease in operations, services delivered

by one agency or department which could better be

delivered by another; general changes

recommended.

11. Charter revision: specific suggestions or

recommendations regarding charter revision.