Ganim, City Council Leadership Announce Charter Revision Process

Mayor Joe Ganim and City Council leadership on Wednesday issued a joint news release calling for creation of a charter revision commission to modernize the document framing municipal rules and regulations. Unclear what will be examined beyond “needed changes to civil service, the role and makeup of city commissions, among many other issues” to update the language as this seems to be a work in progress for voters to decide during November’s presidential general election, by far the largest electorate participation.

Council leadership had proposed charter revision for the 2023 mayoral cycle but the mayor opposed it, preferring it during a presidential turnout. The last charter question appeared on the 2012 election ballot when voters defeated a call for a mayoral-appointed school board, advanced by then-Mayor Bill Finch.

City news release:

Today, City Council President Nieves, in collaboration with and strong support of Mayor Ganim and other Council members, submitted a resolution to initiate a Charter revision process here in the City of Bridgeport. After many discussions, a consensus has built around the need to modernize and update the Bridgeport City Charter, and to have a Charter Revision Commission examine complex issues regarding needed changes to civil service, the role and makeup of city commissions, among many other issues.

This resolution is expected to be referred to the Ordinance Committee for consideration at Tuesday’s full City Council meeting. Within 30 days of final passage of the Council’s initiation of the Charter revision process, the Council must adopt a resolution establishing a Charter Revision Commission of between 5 and 15 members, not more than one-third of whom may hold public office in the City, and not more than a bare majority of whom shall be members of any one political party.

Once the Commission has been formed, it is the expectation that the Commission will conduct several public hearings in order to get feedback from residents of Bridgeport on recommended changes to the Charter.

“I want to thank President Nieves and the Council members that have engaged with me on the need for Charter revision,” stated Mayor Ganim. “I believe strongly that the Commission should take its time in working through these complex Charter issues and that the Commission creates as many opportunities for public participation and input as possible. Ultimately, I am hopeful that a collaborative effort between the Administration, City Council, the public, and the Charter Revision Commission will yield a final product that Bridgeport voters will stand behind.”

“I have been and continue to be a strong advocate for Charter revision,” stated Council President Aidee Nieves. “I am grateful to the Mayor and my Council colleagues for agreeing that it is time to update and modernize our Charter here in Bridgeport. The issues that the Commission will take up will be complex and will require a significant amount of input from stakeholders. But I believe that a thorough process will result in a positive Charter change for our city.”

“As a strong supporter of Charter revision, it is my hope that this will be a deliberative, thoughtful, and community-based process,” stated Councilman Scott Burns. “There are several interesting and challenging issues for the Commission to consider. I look forward to seeing the changes that they will bring back to the Council after careful consideration and public input.”

“As someone who has been through Charter revision in the past, I want to emphasize the importance of this process and the need for the public’s input,” stated Councilman Ernest Newton. “Charter revision is a process that happens infrequently, so I encourage the Commission to be thoughtful and carefully consider all of the many Charter issues that it will be presented with as their work will impact the City for many years to come.”

0
Share

7 comments

  1. #confusion. 🙃

    John, no reason to fashion an answer from Speedy. I believe you inadvertently and eloquently answered it. When you said, “RT imported my message into this posting at a time when I had determined that I had nothing to add to the Maria saga.” Good Job, 🙂

    However, I believe there is much assumption going on. I didn’t import your message because I determined you had nothing to add to the Maria sage. On the contrary, I imported it to a new thread that had no comment to avoid it getting lost in the noise of other comments.

    However to be fair, while that thread was part of the continuance of Maria’s sage I can understand that, without an apology, answering questions can become confusing when personal assumptions and perspectives are made. Especially when you’re different and special. 🤪🤣

    https://www.youtube.com/clip/Ugkx5WyvyzgZaESfSypE4HvTb4wjAIP9EvsK

    BTW when did we get ice cream? 😂

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFpARlLDrgo

    0
  2. P.S John, it’s humbling of you to speak for most people who see my messages as merely crusty, without import and unnecessary internet references. Good Job, stay humble, my friend. 🙂

    I see you take your pie inquiry, seriously. While Cherry pie tends to have an aftertaste my most recent was cannoli cream pie and chocolate cream pies at Christmas.

    Talking about pies kinda got me craving might have to step out and pick up an Edwards chocolate creme Pie 🥧 🙃

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB3C-bIwatQ

    0
  3. So RT, you are wandering from a given target article, about the announcement of Charter Revision process to a “look back” on a past topic, and spun it for your own amusement rather than the benefit of the community at large.
    Your above THREE comments were sent in a 40 minute time period. Would you be more effective if you would provide your thrust at one time, with internet references as footnotes when necessary, and that would become the a la mode that works for you and readers? As an OIB, first class pie thrower I am more interested in what kind you hurl at others, rather than your tasteful choices for your targets. Time will tell.

    3+
  4. Nope, and Nope 🙂

    since many OIB posters fell off and were read. I Post for comment count. Was your Post/reply for amusement, conversation, or for the benefit of the community regarding the Charter Revision? 🙂

    40 minutes is a conservative number with my OCD 🙂

    You are more interested in what kind I pie I hurl, rather than the tasteful choices of my targets?

    I don’t choose my targets my targets choose/chose me. As what I hurl, whatever floats the boat. How about so 50 shades of bacon pie? 😎

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3edrF3wrF8

    JS playing, I’m a cuddler. but I do love me some cuddling pie. #big bang #your welcome ladies #good job fellas. 🤪

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=en5fW1SEqgw

    0
  5. Most important charter revision category: Administrative/Managerial Accountability — Bring back the 2-year mayoral term/ election cycle + create an Ethics Commission with real oversight authority and “teeth”…

    4+

Leave a Reply