By Thomas Warren III, Editor-in-Chief

It is my sincere opinion that of all possible amendments to the Amarillo City Charter which have been discussed in recent years, the proposal the Amarillo City Council will vote to place on the ballot next week is among the most arrogant and self-serving ever suggested.

On Tuesday, the Amarillo City Council will vote on ordering an election to amend the Amarillo City Charter in two ways. First, the Council will consider an item to add two years to each term of the members of the City Council, staggering future elections. Second, the Council will consider a proposal to cut their number of meetings by half.

Now, I know the meeting calendar cut has been discussed before openly. I have always thought reducing the number of meetings did not make much sense, because if you are willing to place your name on the ballot, you should be willing to work full-time for your constituents. I think people can debate that idea even though I do not believe there to be much merit to that point-of-view. My biggest issue with these proposed elections is the item to extend the lengths of the City Council’s terms.

The proposal, as it will appear on the ballot, is troubling in a few ways. First, I remember Mayor Ginger Nelson calling for such a change at a forum during last year’s election, then walking it back after voters expressed their anger. So, I feel there is some hypocrisy on this issue. Secondly, I never like the idea of extending an elected official’s term length. No other City Council in Amarillo’s history has ever attempted something so arrogant as to increase their term lengths. That move alone is shameful. However, my biggest worry with this proposal is that it does not expressly say whether the change will be retroactive or whether it will apply to the composition of the next Amarillo City Council. Since there is no language saying whether the item is or is not retroactive, I worry that the existing incumbents could have grounds to extend their own terms if the item passes. Personally, I think this proposal should have been expressly said, one way or the other, if it applies to the current membership of the body. Voters should not have to vote to approve an item before they find out how that said item will be used by their local government.

What the City Council is considering placing on the ballot is extremely dangerous, in my opinion. This would be a change that would only benefit the five people sitting on the dais at Amarillo City Hall and would not benefit the 200,000 citizens of Amarillo.

Overall, I think if any proposal should be placed on the ballot to amend the City Charter, it should be to move elections to November to improve voter turnout and accessibility. I also think County Commissioner Mercy Murguia and others have raised a point about discussing some form of single-member districts in the future.

Nevertheless, it looks like voters will not be getting any real positive options for changes on the ballot this November, and will instead be stuck with a proposal to simply improve the quality of life for local elected officials while giving citizens fewer chances to have their voices heard and fewer chances to vote on their city’s leadership, all the while possibly handing an extra two years to current elected officials.

This proposal is downright shameful and is not clear as to how the change would be utilized. This item never should have made it to the ballot in this shape.

If the City Council is hellbent on sending this proposal to the ballot, then voters need to send them a message on Election Day in November and reject this self-serving and arrogant attempt to change our City Charter.