Aggie Stackhaus thanked everyone for coming to participate and also talked about the work for far of the Commission. She said that the commission is pursuing a streamlined, constitutional charter. She also said she heard the city Manager speak and he said something very enlightening. He had said that it was hard to recruit people to come to Kansas City if we don’t believe in ourselves. Aggie Stackhaus then went on to say that the commission’s goal is to produce a more streamlined document that creates greater operational flexibility.

Henry Lyons recounted that he was part of the group, with Charles Wheeler, Art Asel, John Dillingham, James B. Nutter, and Skip Sleyster which in 1991 led an initiative process to pass the two consecutive term limit. Keep it the same. The evidence has favored term limits. There is no concrete evidence that the two term limit has been bad for Kansas City . If you are good, you will get elected. Also do not change initiative. Jack Holland asked if any of the suburban Kansas City cities had term limits and aren’t we in competition with them. Henry Lyons responded that other big cities such as New York , Dallas , and San Antonio had enacted term limits, but the suburbs hadn’t because no council members in the suburbs were going to jail.

Terrence Nash believes that the Parks Department should be organized like the other departments under the City Manager. You could still have a Parks Board, but it would report to the City Manager. Nash also believes that the Police Department should come back to the City from the state and the City Manager would be responsible to lead the Police Chief. He thinks the budget year should be moved, his preference was July 1 to June 30 th, but he thought the City Manager could decide. He urged that the budget should not be passed until the comprehensive financial report of the city was published and available to everyone. He stressed no change in term limits or initiative, recall and referendum.

Mark Esping said we voted on charter changes three times since 1999. He asked if no bid on bond issuances was being considered. He asked why we were even looking at a change in initiative. We should not change it. We don’t need new rules. We must allow involvement of citizens and initiatives are our way to participate. He does not like the idea of stating a reason for a recall effort. Citizens are just asking for the opportunity to vote. We shouldn’t have to give a reason for a recall effort. He would have a problem if you changed the recall provision. Esping said a geographic proportional initiative would create a system that could not be handled easily because you would need nine separate petitions and would discourage average citizens. Only organized groups would be able to use initiative. Don’t discourage participation.

Calvin Williford asked if voluntary (on the petitioner’s part) Law Dept review would be acceptable. Esping said if it would speed up the process, then yes. Jack Holland asked about geographic proportionality which Esping answered earlier, but expanded to say it puts people in 3 rd and 5 th at a disadvantage because those districts have small turnouts and also talked about his reason he had just said. Henry Lyons said no geographic proportionality and he is leery of Law Dept. review. Terrence Nash said no geographic proportionality and he might understand the Law Dept review but put a 10-day time limit on that review.

Stan Glazer said he was there to observe and listen. He agrees with Henry Lyons on eight years is enough. More than eight years is a dictatorship. Glazer thinks election should move to later in Spring or even Summer.

Louie Wright testified that he thought the commission and City Manager should talk to the people who do the work. He described his background as a lifelong resident, 30-year employee and president of IAFF Local 42. He suggested not changing the initiative and referendum. Elections generally work. Current process is good. He said he could live with geographic proportionality. It is the petitioner’s responsibility for who they get to sign their petitions. Wright said he had found it was a better process to go door to door. Wright said the old adage if it ain’t broke don’t fix it reminded him that sometimes if we haven’t used it, it might be broke and he thinks the recent recall vote showed it is broken. An elected official could get 50% less one vote and lose their seat to someone who got 10% of the vote in a crowded 2 nd question of who would replace should 50% plus one vote for the recall. That is nutty and undemocratic. Wright said on term limits he said the evidence is they have not delivered what they promised. Term limits are also undemocratic. The City Council deals with hundreds of laws and issues and term limits have brought the power to the bureaucracy. It takes the better part of four years to get your footing and then the next four years looking for the next political position. We don’t have term limits for surgeons, plumbers and others…as a matter of fact for those professions we value experience. Also second term re-elections are usually unopposed because a challenger simply waits four years for an open seat. Wright went on to say that there is a greater incidence of corruption since term limits than before them in Kansas City . Council members since term limits have gone to jail based on their council work where council members before term limits were in trouble for tax returns and things outside of City Hall. The first four years you rely on the bureaucracy to give you information and then the last four years that bureaucracy begins to wait you out. You also are looking for the next political job and it becomes a conflict or corruption invitation. The second term also breaks down Council decorum as the Council members looking to be Mayor will try to upstage their colleagues.

Wright then talked about the charter’s restriction on political activity for city employees. In 1995 the City Manager issued a directive that limited employees from wearing stickers, making contributions and attending political events. The federal courts said that directive was unconstitutional. Those provisions must be changed. Don’t disenfranchise city employees simply because they work for the City. They can’t run for school board, or State Representative or committee person without quitting their job. That is not right. As the court case said “no right is more precious than having a vote in elections for the people who make the laws.” Other employers have greater insight. Jackson County allows employees to run for office. In Iowa there are firefighters in the House and one in the Senate and they represent their cities well in both of their jobs. Independence ’s restrictions have been stricken. Liberty , Missouri is more restrictive than Kansas City . The policies in the metro are all over the map. The merit system would continue to rule. You would not be able to be fired for your political opinion. Wright elaborated that he is for total elimination of term limits. It is a contradiction that you trust the people with initiative petitions, but you don’t trust them in candidate elections. Candidates are eliminated from appearing on the ballot simply because they have won two straight elections for the same office. When asked about a three term limit, Wright said it would be a modest improvement, but the bureaucracy waits out the elected officials. Calvin Williford raised the scenario of could we trust a firefighter in the State Senate. Wright said that Senator would be foolish to go against his constituents and against his home city. Wright said that official would be a tremendous advocate for the city. Wright said in the current system council people were consultants who did not have to disclose who they work for and there are inherent conflicts.

John Sharp, former city councilman, said we should not change initiative and referendum even though one person has overused the process. He also said the last attempt at charter change was defeated mainly because no one could tell from the ballot language what it did. Concentrate on the few things that need to be changed and do it. We passed the health levy because we had good ballot language and we passed a Hickman Mills School levy because we explained exactly what it would pay for on the ballot. As much as we can do it, please spell out the changes. Keep it simple, but make it specific.

Aggie Stackhaus said she was cognizant of his simplicity message. John Sharp did not want to comment on the hot button issues. He thought the only things that would pass were those with general consensus. Leave the divisive things alone.

Henry Lyons said that the only people not for term limits are politicians, lobbyists and powerful business interests. No politician running for their second term has said, “Elect me because I now finally have the hang of it after learning for the first four years.”

Councilman Eddy thanked the commission and agreed that the charter is antiquated and that the ballot question must be simple. He agrees to keep the housekeeping new charter as question one and then the hot buttons separate or at a later election.

Opal Kane said she favored the current two term limit.