Joplin Charter Review Commission Public Hearing - October 22, 2025
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Joplin Charter Review Commission Public Hearing - October 22, 2025
The Charter Review Commission met on October 22, 2025, to conduct public hearings on five proposed charter amendments. The meeting included testimony from citizens and representatives regarding potential changes to council pay, petition signature requirements, emergency ordinance terminology, public works director qualifications, and publication requirements. Commissioners also heard general public comments on charter governance and transparency.
Consent Calendar
- Unanimously approved minutes of the October 8, 2025 meeting after incorporating a suggested change.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Question 1 (Council pay): No public comment.
- Question 2 (Nominating petition signatures): No public comment.
- Question 3 (Emergency to expedited ordinance): No public comment initially; later during public comment, Mary Press expressed opposition to renaming, arguing it does not address the underlying abuse of emergency ordinances. Doris Carlin suggested retaining both terms with distinct definitions.
- Question 4 (Public works director PE requirement):
- Kurt Higgins and Clayton Christie, representing the Missouri Society of Professional Engineers (MSPE), testified in opposition to removing the requirement. They cited public safety, ethical accountability, and mentorship of junior engineers. Both have over 30 years of engineering experience in Joplin. They noted that obtaining a Missouri license by reciprocity is straightforward.
- Frank Thompson, a Joplin resident, opposed removal, stating it would lead to unqualified appointments, increased outsourcing, and wasted tax dollars.
- Question 5 (Publication requirements): Frank Thompson strongly opposed removal, stating it would strip away transparency and was the most concerning proposal.
- General public comment:
- Tom Robertson urged the commission to include any additional charter concerns in its report to council, citing the value of members' experience.
- Richard Thurman questioned whether the commission receives rationale for proposed amendments and asked for more engagement with council.
- Mary Press criticized the city's continued use of emergency ordinances despite an audit highlighting abuse, noting 31 such ordinances since the audit.
- Frank Thompson delivered a broader critique, alleging that the proposed changes serve council convenience rather than public interest, and called for elected mayor and independent audit. He disagreed with commissioner Stanley's characterization of corruption, stating the audit's facts imply it.
Discussion Items
- Commissioners discussed the scope of their charge. Mr. Stanley noted the value of bringing supplementary thoughts to council, though the current scope is limited to the five questions.
- Commissioner Glaze clarified that the publication requirements are in four charter sections (12.11, 14.15, 4.22, 4.23).
- The commission discussed the rationale behind renaming emergency ordinances; staff clarified that some council members believed "expedited" was more appropriate for non-emergency appropriations.
Key Outcomes
- No votes were taken on the proposed amendments; the public hearing was closed after receiving testimony.
- The commission decided to adjourn to a working session to review responses from city staff and prepare for future deliberation.
- The next meeting is scheduled for November 12, 2025.
Meeting Transcript
Good evening, everybody. My name's Chuck Brown. I'm chairman of the Charter Review Commission. Like to call this meeting to order. Madam Clerk, would you call the roll? Chuck Brown. Here. Melody Colbert King. Present. Morris Glaze. Here. Rob O'Brien. Here. Dan Pecarrick. Here. Diane Reed Adams. Present. Mike Seibert. Present. Ryan Stanley. Present. Phil Stinnett. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Minutes of the October 8th, 2025 meeting have been distributed. And I think Mr. Pakerick had a suggestion for change, which were which was incorporated within the minutes as distributed. So the chair will entertain a motion to uh approve the minutes of the October 2025 meeting. I would so there's a motion. Second. Motion and second to approve the minutes of the October 8, 2025 meeting. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Madam Clerk, would you read the uh public hearing procedures? It is requested that persons wishing to testify before the charter review commission follow these rules, approach the podium and state your name clearly for the record. Please give your testimony as briefly and completely as possible. By the rules of the Charter Review Commission, you have five minutes within which to give your testimony. Please follow the clock on the dais in front of you. You must complete your testimony within the five-minute time limit. The City of Joplin through this introduction and exception to evidence to 2012 comprehensive plan, the zoning code of the city of Joplin, the subdivision regulations of the city of Joplin, the telecommunications ordinance and the stormwater management regulations of the city of Joplin B and appendices 29A, 29B, 29D, 29E, and 29 after the Joplin Municipal Code. Report of the planning and zoning commission recommendations of the city staff, another written documentation presented as that information applies to each public hearing. Thank you for your consideration and understanding. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Um so folks, we'll kind of go through our charge one item at a time. And uh what we'll do is have the clerk read the the charge and then open it, open the uh field up or the floor for for uh testimony, madam clerk? Should the charter be amended to change the rate of pay of the council from five dollars per meeting to an increased amount? Very well. This public hearing is open.
openpublica.com