Montrose council divided on forming citizens charter commission; vote slated for July agenda

City Attorney Mr. Bowsy briefed the Montrose City Council at its June 15 work session on options for forming a citizens charter commission, describing two primary approaches under Colorado law: a statutory model that proposes a ballot question for voters and elects commission members, or a council-appointed model created by resolution.

"Please know that a charter commission is advisory in nature and would have no actual authority to present any charter questions to the voters," Mr. Bowsy told the council while outlining the legal history. He noted the charter was originally drafted by a convention in 1913–14 and has been amended only a few times since.

Councilmembers split on whether to form a commission and on the timetable. Several councilmembers said a commission would increase public participation and provide focused review of substantive changes — including whether the police chief or city clerk should report to council or the city manager and whether municipal elections should move from April to November. One council member argued the commission is unnecessary because council and existing citizen-initiative procedures can present amendments to voters.

"I do support the commission," one council member said, urging citizen participation in charter review and noting past examples from other municipalities. Other members warned that a commission could be time-consuming, potentially biased depending on appointment method, and may miss November-ballot deadlines if formed by the statutory route.

Members discussed logistics including commission size (statute allows 9–21 members), appointment methods (public application and council appointment or direct election under statute), and ballot deadlines (staff noted county notification timing that makes a statutory November placement tight unless deadlines are met). Council consensus at the work session was to place a formal "form a charter commission" item on the July 7 regular meeting agenda; if council approves the formation, details of makeup and a subsequent work session would follow.

Public speakers both praised and opposed a commission. Kevin Williams, a longtime resident, said a citizens commission would strengthen direct democracy and public accountability; other speakers cautioned it could add delay and cost and urged council to use its elected mandate for noncontroversial housekeeping amendments.

Staff said they would prepare the agenda language for the July 7 meeting and, if the council votes to form a commission, will return with a recommended process and timeline for appointments or an election model.