Review Committee Recommends 18 Amendments to Town Charter

The Charter Review Committee convened its required public forum on December 18, to receive comments and suggestions to its Preliminary Report which was released on December 7, 2025. The sparsely attended hybrid gathering began with a short presentation, describing the committee’s process as well as an overview of the contents of the Preliminary Report. The committee reviewed 18 modifications to the Charter to recommend to Town Council as well as some of the comments and concerns the committee received over the course of the past year. The 41-page Preliminary Report with Addendum is available on the committee website.

Some of the recommendations focused only on clarification of terms such as “measure” and “multiple member body”, and clearing up voting ambiguity. But others were more substantive, such as requiring at least three Councilors to vote to postpone a Town Council vote and extending the voter veto signature period from 14 to 21 days. Other recommendations urged Town Council to allow agenda-specific public comment periods as well as general comment periods at each meeting, and increased required district meetings to three per year for district councilors while requiring at-large councilors to attend at least five meetings in a two-year term. A recommendation specific to public forums would allow full public input without a rigid time limit, as is required under the present rules

Comments from attendees addressed specific Charter sections and more general concerns.     

Nina Mankin asked that the budget process allow sufficient time to review and comment on proposed budgets in order to enhance communication and coordination among the town, School Committee, and Library Trustees.

Josna Rege had several comments, among them questioning why the committee had not taken into account the many comments submitted to the League of Women Voters during its thorough review of the Charter and public survey, noting particularly the League’s strong  recommendation to add a preamble and value statement to the beginning of the Charter. She urged the committee to include in their final report, all of the individual comments that they received in the course of their review. And she took issue with the present practice of allowing the Town Manager to have final say on all town committee and board appointments.

Rani Parker pointed out that at hybrid meetings it is not possible to know how many participants are in attendance. She pointed to Southampton’s practice of requiring that anyone speaking at a meeting must be visible. She made the point that non-English speaking town residents cannot fully participate in meetings because translation is not provided. Committee Chair Julian Hynes responded that this was considered but the majority of the committee voted it down. Parker observed that it is difficult to understand the complexity of town government. Anita Sarro agreed, urging the committee to consider ways to summarize or provide plain language explanations in English and other languages. Hynes said that translated versions of the Charter are available upon request but did not specify which languages or how one would go about requesting them.

Andy Anderson, the only member of the public present in person, challenged the committee to strongly urge the town to take all available steps to advance ranked choice voting.

Darcy Dumont criticized the process of Town Manager appointments saying they lacked transparency and pointed to Northampton’s practice of making applications for town appointments a matter of public record. She also urged, in the interests of transparency and legal compliance, that the committee promptly post approved minutes.

Anita Sarro drew the committee’s attention to never-used Town Council Rule of Procedure entitled “Public Dialogue”. Unlike the restrictions of Public Comment periods at meetings or Public Forums, this rule is intended to create opportunities where Council members and residents can discuss topics in an informal setting.

Meg Kroepin complimented the committee on their work, calling it a tribute to democracy Adrienne Terrizi similarly thanked the committee for their work.

Recommendations Added After the Public Forum
In an apparent response to some of the comments received, the committee considered additional recommendations proposed by committee member Andy Churchill at its subsequent meeting on December 18. These proposals were screen-shared but had not been posted prior to the meeting. 

Reflecting Parker’s comments, section 2.6(d) would be expanded to require that the number of people present at a meeting be made known and that all participants would be given the opportunity to be visible. Anyone “zoom-bombing” or otherwise acting inappropriately would be excluded, and these requirements would be contingent on technology being available and functioning. The committee voted unanimously to include this recommendation.

Picking up on Dumont’s comment about transparency in the application process, committee member Bernie Kubiak reported that Southampton does not require public access to all applications but instead allows each applicant to opt-in by checking a box on the application indicating consent to public access. The committee will include this suggestion in its report, but only in the Addendum and not as a specific recommendation to amend section 3.3(c).

The committee voted to recommend changes to Article 5 to ensure that public is given sufficient notice and opportunity to review and have input on the budgets for the town, the School Committee and Library Trustees.

The committee also voted to recommend that the ability to hold Public Dialogues be moved from the Town Council’s Rules of Procedure and be incorporated into the Charter as a new section 8.1.

The committee also agreed to include within the addendum a statement urging the town to press forward in advocating for the adoption of ranked choice voting.

Addendum Renamed
The Preliminary Report concludes with a recitation of items that were mentioned in pubic comment but either were considered beyond the scope of the committee’s charge or did not receive majority support to include as specific recommendations The section is divided into two sections under the headings of “Structural Changes” and “Public Engagement.”

Structural changes include topics such as a preference for an elected mayor or a return to Town Meeting but are not comprehensive. For instance, the section includes the suggestion to reduce the size of Town Council. But a related document summarizing  comments by theme, notes the repeated suggestion to expand it. As Bernie Kubiak was quick to point out, the comments included in the addendum are those that the committee (or perhaps more accurately, the majority of the committee) determined in the exercise of their judgment, to be worthy of inclusion. 

The section on Public Engagement Issues is a three-page compilation of ideas on how town government can enhance transparency, responsiveness, communication, and accuracy, echoing many of the themes that were expressed at the public forum.

The committee determined that the title of “Addendum” did not accurately reflect the intent of the section and instead have renamed it “Beyond the Charter – Improving Amherst Government”

Committee members divided the responsibilities of drafting the Final Report that should be posted on the town website on or about December 23. The final meeting of the committee the final meeting of the committee will be held on December 29. The committee will present its Final Report to Town Council on January 5.