CHARTER CHANGES

There will be 10 proposed changes in Cape Girardeau's city charter when voters go to the polls next April 2. Nine of the changes were recommended by a review committee whose work was completed several months ago. In the meantime, two of the committee's suggested changes have been removed from consideration, and another was added by the city council.

Overall, the changes proposed by the review committee add up to additions to the charter rather than changes or refinements. One proposal that is a revision is the one offered by the council. This change deals with notification requirements for lawsuits brought against the city. This technical change, which should be approved by voters, would bring the charter into line with the narrow notification requirements of state statutes.

The two proposals that were dropped by the council this week dealt with the granting of cable-television franchises and the regulation and licensing of trades. In both cases the council took the right action by removing them from the ballot. In the case of the cable-TV franchise, the proposal was at odds with federal law. The other would have eliminated the regulation of any trade by the city.

Of the remaining nine proposals, most either duplicate existing practice or, in some cases, existing ordinances. In nearly every case, adding these recommendations to the charter doesn't seem to serve any practical purpose. In fact, many of the proposals are aimed at problems whose roots date back to previous councils and previous officeholders. While similar problems could arise in the future, there are ample ordinances and state laws to deal with them. Moreover, voters pretty much took care of those problems at the ballot box. That is always the prerogative of voters and is the best way to deal with these situations.

Here are the proposals:

-- Create a city ethics commission. There already are regulations in place regarding the ethics of public officials. Unethical or dishonest officeholders also must face the test of voters at each election. This is as it should be.

-- Prohibit the city from raising any fee or tax above 5 percent in a fiscal year. The city council already operates under an ordinance that requires the same thing. The council reversed itself earlier this year on some fees that were increased above the limit. Instead of a charter amendment to require the same thing, the council would do better to look at the limiting ordinance that is already in place. Certain voluntary user fees perhaps shouldn't be capped at 5 percent increases, particularly when increases over 5 percent would still be rather small in dollars and cents.

-- Limit council members and the mayor to two consecutive terms. While the Southeast Missourians has long supported term limits for federal officeholders, they aren't needed for council members. This is a situation where voters know the officials involved, work with them, see them at church and have them as neighbors. The best limit on the terms of council members should be the quality of service they provide, and local voters know when changes are needed.

-- Lower the residency requirement for council members. This change warrants approval by the voters, even though most council candidates will find that knowing the voters and winning their confidence in an election sometimes takes a while. But if a newcomer can get the backing of voters, he or she deserves to be elected.

-- Require a detailed accounting of enterprise funds. This information already is public record and available for inspection. A charter amendment wouldn't be an improvement.

-- Establish an emergency reserve fund. The city already does this now by council resolution. If such a charter amendment passed, the city would be required to budget surpluses each year in order to maintain the hefty reserve the proposal seeks. It is better to let the council decide each year what needs to be set aside in reserves.

-- Require the city to disclose its debt. It already does. A charter amendment won't help.

-- Establish a charter preamble that calls for honest government. Surely everyone is for honest government, whether or not it is in the charter.

Of course, voters will have the final say on all of these proposals. Each proposal will be voted on separately, and it only takes a simple majority to approve a change. Voters who are unclear about these changes should take time to visit with city officials before voting. The Southeast Missourian also will have more information about the proposals closer to election day.