Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 09-16-08 workshop agenda — reading text

the National Civic League ( 1969 -1985) and coordinator for both the sixth and seventh editions, also served as a senior advisor. Robert Kipp, group vice president at Hallmark Cards, Inc., and James Svara, department head of political science and public administration at North Carolina State University, were the other senior advisors, and they both made invaluable contributions throughout the revision process. Once again we had the great fortune of assembling an outstanding set of individuals to serve as committee members for this project. The other members of the 8th Edition Model City Charter Revision Committee were Eric Anderson, City Manager, City of Des Moines, Iowa; Linda Barton, City Manager, City of Livermore, California; Donald Borut ( ex officio), Executive Director, National League of Cities; Peter Buchsbaum, Greenbaum, Rowe, Smith et al., American Bar Association; John Buechner, President Emeritus, of Colorado; University Jacqueline Byers, Director of Research, National Association of Counties; Jim Dailey, Mayor, City of Little Rock, Arkansas; Mony Flores -Bauer, League of Women Voters; R. Scott Fosler, former Chair, National Civic League; George Frederickson, Professor, Department of Public Administration, University of Kansas; Christopher T. Gates, President, National Civic League; Guy Goodson, Councilperson, City of Beaumont, Texas; Charles Gossett, Director, Masters of Public Administration Program, Department of Political Science, Georgia Southern University; Neil Giuliano, Mayor, City of Tempe, Arizona; John Hall, Professor, Arizona State University; Bill Hansell, immediate past Executive Director, International City /County Management Association; James Keene, City Manager, City of Tucson, Arizona; Ron Loveridge, Mayor, City of Riverside, California; David Miller, Associate Dean, GSPIA, University of Pittsburgh; Sylvester Murray, Professor, Urban Studies, Cleveland State University; John Nalbandian, Chair, Department of Public Administration, University of Kansas; Neil Reichenberg, Executive Director, International Personnel Management Association; Dorothy Ridings ( ex officio), President and Chief Executive Officer, Council on d d 9 Foundations, and Chair, National Civic League; Tanis Salant, Director, Institute For Local Government, University of Arizona; Phil Schenck, City Manager, Town of Avon, Connecticut; David Schultz, Asst. Professor, Public Administration and Management Graduate School, Hamline University; David Sink, Professor, Department of Public Administration, University of Arkansas, Little Rock; Henry Underhill, Executive Director /General Counsel, International Municipal Lawyers Association; and John Vocino, Senior Analyst, U.S. General Accounting Office. The National Civic League also thanks the organizations that provided the financial support to undertake this work. Generous contributions from the Hallmark Corporate Foundation, the Carl and Lily Pforzheimer Foundation, the Murray and Agnes Seasongood Good Government Foundation, 8th and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation made the work of the Edition Model City Charter Revision Committee possible. Finally, I want to thank the staff of the National Civic League who worked so hard over the past two years to organize this effort and pull all the new ideas into the document you now hold in your hands. They were: Matt Krumme, Manager, Model City Charter Revision Project; Robert Loper, Research Director and Editor, National Civic Review; Camilla Modesitt, Director, New Politics Program; Derek Okubo, Director, National Headquarters; and Bill Schechter, Director, Community Services, Washington DC. Christopher T. Gates President I  Lm ALI Ail  INTRODUCTION The eighth edition of the Model City Charter strongly endorses the council -manager structure of municipal government that was first proposed in 1915 as the National Civic League' s ( then the National Municipal League' s) model form. In the years since, the Model has been refined to reflect the evolution of the council -manager plan, the most widely used governmental structure in American cities with a population over 10, 000. The fundamental principle of the model, that all powers of the city be vested in a popularly elected council that appoints a professional manager who is continuously responsible to and removable by the council, has endured ever since. A Model for the 21" Century The realization that the Model City Charter has exerted enormous influence in promoting the municipal reform agenda for more than a century made those responsible for the eighth edition acutely aware of the model' s evolution and of the obligation to make it an effective force for the future. Reforming reform is a delicate undertaking. To make revisions in the specifics of reform measures and to suggest alternatives to strongly held positions should not be viewed as rejecting the past but as building on it to meet changing circumstances with the benefit of wider experience. Institutions must be adapted to address new priorities and new concerns, and to be useful, models must assist in the process of adaptation. As the National Civic League' s Model City Charter Revision Committee undertook development of the eighth edition, participants considered the concept of a model. Back in 1944, on the occasion of the National Civic League' s 50th anniversary, Harold Dodds, then president of Princeton University and a former executive director and president of the National Municipal League, described the purpose of a model as being to set patterns clearly and specifically, delineating the best practice and the best thought on a problem, to correct existing defects, to set high standards which provide something to fight for instead of against ... the model laws brought stability, dignity and scientific fact to ` reform.' They made readily available to officials and citizens the product of the able thinkers on governmental problems. There have been two views as to how best to fulfill this purpose. One insists that a model presents the ideal structure of local government while the other sees a model as being based on a general principle of organization or process. In the latter case the model presents alternative means for achieving the basic end. The first view was an essential part of the tactics of the zealous reformers of the Progressive Era. They were promoting new approaches with limited proven records, and they advocated the adoption of the new package in its entirety to ensure that the innovative logic for government reorganization was given a chance to work. At a time when the council -manager plan was a novel form of government, this view of the Model City Charter was quite understandable. The successors to the Progressive reformers advocated what they considered to be a tried- and -true approach and felt that alternatives deviating from this ideal were invitations to dilution and distortion that could undermine the basic reform goal. With the widespread acceptance of the council -manager form of government and its use in communities of varying size and circumstance, the current situation is quite different. A more pressing need today is to consider whether and how the council -manager iii  N plan might be adapted to respond to contemporary challenges. Such response may include using alternatives that depart from the original reform formulation. 01 Beginning with the 1964 edition of the Model City Charter, a modification of the view of the earlier reformers was evident. The foreword to that edition stated: For the first time, the Model presents, in addition to the preferred provisions, alternatives on such matters as the composition and election of the council and the selection of mayor. Some advisors and consultants objected to the inclusion of legal texts which depart from the stated preferences, but the overwhelming majority agreed that it is advisable to provide guidance for adapting the council -manager plan to a variety of local circumstances without sacrificing the fundamental principle that the top professional serves at the pleasure of the governing body. The eighth edition of the Model City Charter continues to endorse the council -manager plan, but it presents alternatives for certain key provisions without indicating an absolute preference. A Model with Alternatives One of the changes made in the eighth edition is the inclusion of a preamble, which emphasizes that the charter is the constitution of the municipality adopted by its citizens. Some of the more important changes to the model provisions dealing with the council and the mayor are considered below. The Council. Out of a concern for increasing the capacity for governance, the second edition stressed the importance of a small council whose members had a perspective that was greater than that of a particular neighborhood or small section of city. At the same time, proportional representation from the city at- large, or from multi -member districts in " great" cities, was included to insure that the governing body provides " fair representation of all large minorities" and is " truly representative of all elements and groups of opinion." The option of using districts was dropped until the sixth edition, but through 1941, the Hare system of proportional representation was endorsed as the preferred way to elect the council. The current edition offers five alternatives. The importance of the at -large principle is emphasized, but the need for geographical representation or even more flexible proportional representation under certain circumstances is explained. There is strong support for the all at -large council alternative in smaller municipalities and in those cities where assuring fair representation of minority populations is not an issue. In cities where minority representation is enhanced by election from districts, consideration of the alternatives for mixed systems, with some council members elected at large and some by districts, is recommended. It is also recognized that councils elected entirely from districts frequently have been mandated by e the U.S. Justice Department or by court