DETROIT CHARTER REVISION COMMISSION CANDIDATES 

 

On this year's primary ballot, Detroiters voted yes to revise Detroit's City Charter. In November, a 9-member Charter Revision Commission will be elected to oversee a three-year revision process. The City Charter establishes the legal framework for the city, laying out the government structure, mandating departments and their roles, and defining the powers of elected officials. The Detroit City Charter was last revised and adopted in 2012. Please take the time to get to know the candidates running for the Detroit Charter Revision Commission in the fall.

These videos are not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE August 7th 2018 in the Primary election and November 6, 2018 in the General Election.

This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE Tuesday, November 6, 2018 in the General Election. #Vote #Detroit #2018Elections

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

ANSWER: Contradictions in the Charter are real and need to be analyzed. The current Charter was in response to a particular set of circumstances in a pre-bankrupt Detroit. There needs to be a spelling out of the scope and scale of issues to be dealt with, whether that relates to grounds for judicial proceedings, ethics, lobbying, etc.

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

ANSWER: The structure of the Charter should be designed in a way where Departments and Officials are able to communicate to one another in the most practical way possible that does not reflect, necessarily, the current conditions of an Administration--but looks to what the future may hold for the City. There ought to be basic parameters around roles and responsibilities. I don't believe in prohibitions in communications between and among Departments and Officials but a structure that reflects the best way to optimize core City services.


This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE August 7th 2018, in the Primary election and November 6, 2018 in the General Election.

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

NO ANSWER

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

NO ANSWER


This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE Tuesday, November 6, 2018 in the General Election. #Vote #Detroit #2018Elections

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

NO ANSWER

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

NO ANSWER


This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE August 7th 2018, in the Primary election and November 6, 2018 in the General Election.

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

NO ANSWER

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

NO ANSWER


This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE Tuesday, November 6, 2018 in the General Election. #Vote #Detroit #2018Elections

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

NO ANSWER

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

NO ANSWER


This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE Tuesday, November 6, 2018 in the General Election. #Vote #Detroit #2018Elections

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

NO ANSWER

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

NO ANSWER

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

ANSWER: First I would work to achieve consensus among my fellow commissioners that everyone understood the conflicting provisions. Next, I would pose my own questions to the scenario which would include but not be limited to, "how have similar conflicts concerning new provisions and existing expressed peoples' will pursuant to the charter been reconciled in the past?;" "what have courts held in cases where corporation counsels have sought to sue their employer?;" and "do any provisions of the consent agreement foreclose suit by the corporation counsel?" In other words, I would examine all relevant precedent on the issue and then follow a process similar to determining legislative intent whereby I would encourage the charter commission staff to examine past charter revision hearing records to determine the peoples' intent behind the conflicting provisions in an effort to determine whether it was the peoples' expressed will to create such a conflict.

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

ANSWER: First, I would make the changes brought forth to me through commission revision sessions by the citizens of Detroit. Within the purview of my role to reflect the peoples' will I would make every effort during the revision process to keep my fellow commissioners aware of causes and effects to the existing charter as we add or subtract language. Some questions I might use in this process might be just what you've quoted from the Citizens' Research Council above about balancing a charter's flexibility with the structure required to set the course for government and also querying the group as to operational consequences among charter sections of any proposed revisions we may make via some sort of cross-reference table.


This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE Tuesday, November 6, 2018 in the General Election. #Vote #Detroit #2018Elections

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

ANSWER: I would need to research the law on this inconsistency to recommend a resolution to the people

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

ANSWER: To be clear, I would recommend to the people, I do not see my duty, I'd elextwd, to tell the people how their Charter should read. I would recommend that language be as clear as possible for each fundamental role and office listed in the Charter.

This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE November 6, 2018 in the General Election.

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

NO ANSWER

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

NO ANSWER

This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE August 7th 2018, in the Primary election and November 6, 2018 in the General Election.

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

ANSWER: The last Charter Revision Commission took on a gargantuan task in drafting the 2012 Charter. We have an opportunity today to improve upon their work and fix any unworkable provisions. Identifying inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the current charter – with extensive input from citizens across Detroit – should be one of the first tasks of our Charter Revision Commission.

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

ANSWER: I believe that the Charter needs to be a concise framework for effective Detroit city government operations. It should be clear and workable. The Charter should not hamstring the city's elected officials from being responsive to Detroiters' needs, or changing technology and circumstances.

Here's an example: the current 2012 Charter broadly states that Detroiters have a right to reliable, convenient and comfortable transportation through a Transportation Department operated by the city's executive branch. It does not - and should not - get into specifics about which buses should operate where and other details that should be left to elected officials.

I use transportation as an example here given the innovation we've seen in urban transportation since the 2012 Charter was written (from Lyft and Uber to bike sharing and electric scooters). A charter without flexibility wouldn't be able to address changing technologies and innovations like we've seen in the transportation space.

This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE August 7th 2018, in the Primary election and November 6, 2018 in the General Election.

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

NO ANSWER

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

NO ANSWER


This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE August 7th 2018, in the Primary election and November 6, 2018 in the General Election.

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

NO ANSWER

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

NO ANSWER


Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

NO ANSWER

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

NO ANSWER

This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE August 7th 2018, in the Primary election and November 6, 2018 in the General Election.

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

NO ANSWER

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

NO ANSWER


This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE August 7th 2018, in the Primary election and November 6, 2018 in the General Election.

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

NO ANSWER

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

NO ANSWER


This video is not an endorsement of any candidate. VOTE August 7th 2018, in the Primary election and November 6, 2018 in the General Election.

Q1. Inconsistencies in the Charter

QUESTION: “The charter should be written with clarity and precision. Nothing is more frustrating than to find, several years after a charter has been adopted, that it contains inconsistent provisions, unworkable procedures, or fuzzy language. The city charter, adopted by the people themselves, constitutes the fundamental law for the city until amended or replaced.” (Nature and Purpose of a Home Rule City Charter, Citizens Research Council) For example, in 2012, then Corporation Counsel Krystal Crittendon sued the City for entering into a consent agreement with the State of Michigan, invoking a new power granted by the 2012 Charter revision to enforce the City Charter by taking “all reasonable actions to secure compliance, including but not limited to judicial action.” However, another section requires Corporation Counsel to “defend all actions and proceedings against the City.” As charter revision commissioner, how would you rectify inconsistencies and unworkable procedures in the City Charter, including the contradictions such as the example above?

NO ANSWER

Q2. Changes to the Charter

QUESTION: The structural rigidity and uneven specificity of the charter has operational consequences. “A good charter provides elected officials with enough direction to set the course for government, but enough latitude to manage operations efficiently and effectively and to respond to changing conditions.” As charter revision commissioner, what changes would you make to ensure the charter is clear in defining the roles and powers of fundamental roles in the city’s government structure, but allows enough flexibility for government innovation as conditions call for?

NO ANSWER