Thoughts on Changes to City Charter

Recently, some of you have reached out to me concerning my thoughts regarding a potential change to the City Charter of Marco Island that is being proposed regarding the terminology describing the positions held by both the chairman and vice-chairman of the council. There will be two sets of amendments to the Charter if approved - I am speaking to only one of those proposed changes in this column.

Those changes first came about due to a discussion which was led by former Chairman Erik Brechnitz in 2023. His plan, which had been bantered about for a while, could have resulted in a mayor being elected by the voters. The mayor would have a four-year term, and the other six councilors would be elected using a potential district format utilizing the newly adjusted polling districts. Two councilors would be elected per district.

It would have been my hope that this potential amendment might have gone to a citizen's committee to address that change and take testimony regarding whether this might be worthy of placement on the ballot. At the same time, any other procedural items could be discussed and determined. The committee’s recommendations would go back before council to have the verbiage voted upon by the citizens as part of a referendum question on the ballot.

Unfortunately, that idea was shelved by council, with only Brechnitz and Folley in favor. It made more sense to me than the questions that have arisen due to the recent process which saw one councilor drawing up a change that will essentially keep everything status-quo with the exception of the titles. Hence, we will play musical chairs each year with the gavel holder as we do now.

I preferred the Brechnitz idea, especially if you were looking to add some clout to an individual. In my opinion, a person who holds that title should be elected by the citizens as a whole, and the four-year term provides a sense of continuity and stability. It also provides citizens with an elected official whom they feel sits in a seat which has their interest in mind, no matter whether they live in a condo on the beach, a home adjacent to Mackle Park, or any residential area. It also provides business owners with an individual whom they can vent to on occasion and bring up issues they have.

I also liked the approach of electing councilors via districts. This accomplishes two areas of concern that I have always had. You eliminate the “bullet voting” that sometimes goes on when certain special interests look to control the outcome of an election by only having their candidate benefit. We should be looking at all candidates and voting not by slates and instead vetting all based upon their ideas and the history of service to our community.

The mechanics of the district concept is already established by voting precincts. Those precincts are already based upon population numbers. They are equally distributed and no one area receives a lopsided number of voters. This also eliminates a particular faction of voters holding sway over another.

These are all issues that should have been discussed when a Citizen’s Charter Review Committee was established. Our Charter for the city is as important as the Constitution of the United States. It is a living and breathing document and deserves important review from time to time. Not on a whim, but by serious men and women who make their recommendations to council who then put it to a vote by the citizens for their final approval to determine if changes are to be approved.

This idea that we leave it to an individual to bring an item such as this forward without careful study and review would not meet muster in any deliberative body I have been involved in. The proposed changes to the titles are tantamount to passing around party hats once a year with no real substance to the change. 

I think it may be time for some changes, but let those changes receive proper vetting before we move forward. The proposal that will go before the voters this year may get a thumbs up, and if it does, so be it. However, should it fail, let this be a learning tool and not disregard the potential merits of making a change that encompasses more substance and forethought than has been proposed.

Men and women do not receive the respect of their peers by the titles they wear on a shirt or sports coat alone but by their accomplishments amongst their peers. Alone, titles have little or nothing to do with a person’s accomplishments or what they bring to the table, but if used properly, they have the potential to do great things for their constituents.