After several months of sometimes heated discussions and negotiations, the Slidell Charter Review Committee in its final meeting Wednesday has decided on 11 proposed changes to the city charter that it will present to the City Council for its approval, before it can be put on the March 27 ballot for voters.

The final list presented to the committee Wednesday had 17 proposals, but committee members decided to combine five into one proposal, hoping it would make it simpler for the voter, and shorten the final ballot. They also decided to drop one proposal making 12 proposed changes to be submitted to the council.

The committee is made up of Council members Ray Canada, Lionel Hicks, Joe Fraught, Bill Borchert and Kim Harbison. The review of the charter started out as housecleaning, where the council wanted to get rid of parts of the charter that were obsolete and no longer needed. However, the process ended up doing more than housecleaning. By their last meeting, the committee was submitting proposals to the council that would affect appropriations, the salaries of elected officials, and how to save money for capital projects.

The six “housecleaning” changes were all put into one proposal. According to city attorney Tim Matheson, these sections were relevant when the first government under the charter was instituted and no longer needed. For instance one section picked for deletion from the charter deals with how to re-draw district lines for the first elected council when an annexed parcel of land is added to the city between the time the charter is first adopted and the election of the first city council.

The proposal that was will not be passed on to the council deals with what happens to an elected official if they are found guilty of malfeasance in office. The charter said the official would forfeit their position. Since the city is now under the state Code of Ethics, the committee at first wanted to strike the charter section. However, Matheson said that the city’s Code of Ethics was stricter than the state’s, because the state does not have the power to make an elected official forfeit their job and only imposes fines. The committee decided they wanted the stricter punishment and decided against the change.

Three of the changes that will be submitted to the full council deal with the salaries of the mayor, police chief and council members. The proposals would establish the salaries of each elected office by ordinance during the annual budget process. None of the salaries could be increased more than the average raise for city employees. The council could not vote to increase the salary of the current council members, but could vote for a raise for the new council that would come in after an election.

The committee also proposed to change the old title of clerk of court to council administrator.

Two proposals that have that are vehemently opposed by Mayor Ben Morris have to do with appropriations and putting aside money. One change would prohibit the mayor from transferring money from one department to the other.

He could still move money around within one department, but if he wanted to move funds from one department to another, he would have to get the council’s approval by ordinance. Morris said that this ties the hands of the mayor in doing city business.

“It’s micro-management,” Morris said.

Another proposal would put aside 4 percent of the city’s operational revenue to help pay for capital projects. Morris said that it was not wise to put a definite amount into the city charter, because in case of an emergency, or loss of revenue, the city may not be able to put aside the 4 percent. He is not against saving money, just in putting aside a defined amount.

Morris also had qualms about another proposed change that would force the mayor to make up the yearly budget with the stipulation that wages and benefits could not exceed 54 percent of the operating revenues, except in the years of a declared emergency. Fraught told the mayor that this would help keep costs down in case of an economic down turn. Fraught said this would help the city keep costs down, and would prevent cuts in city jobs in case there was a decrease in operating revenue.

The other proposed changes:

• Would let the council hire its own attorney that is independent of the city attorney.

• Would allow an emergency ordinance passed by the council during an emergency to become law if the mayor did not either sign or veto the legislation within 12 hours.

• Would let elected officials take office on July 1 following an election instead of the current law that says elected officials take office on the first Monday in July.

• Would allow an elected official, who resigns an elected office to take a city job immediately instead of waiting one year.

Canada reminded the committee that these are suggestions, and the full council must still approve them. The committee has to submit the proposals by Dec. 8, so the council can either approve or deny the changes.

They must do this by Jan. 12, so that the ballot can be sent to the Secretary of State by Jan. 15. If the Secretary of State approves of the ballot, then the votes will have their say in the March 27 election.