In a significant move towards restructuring its governance, Chicago is set to establish its first city charter, joining the ranks of other major U.S. cities that have long benefited from such frameworks.
With a history marked by mismanagement, the Windy City is recognizing the urgent need for a clear governance structure—something that has been lacking for decades.
Unlike its peers, Chicago is the only major city in the U.S. without a city charter, and this initiative aims to bring certainty and stability to its city government.
State law will dictate the process for adopting this new charter, however, the selection of individuals responsible for drafting it remains an open question.
To guide this pivotal process, Chicago may benefit from examining the experiences of other cities that have successfully adopted their inaugural charters.
Several critical aspects must be addressed when establishing a charter commission: membership composition, selection methods, the scope of authority, and the final adoption method.
The processes through which inaugural charter commissions are formed can differ significantly from those intended to revise existing charters.
This distinction is important as drafting a new charter represents a fundamentally different challenge compared to amending an established one.
Chicago’s potential inaugural charter commission can draw lessons from the founding charters of other metropolitan areas, particularly as it crafts a framework from a clean slate.
Historically, most major cities adopted their charter frameworks in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, providing over a century of governance experience.
Here’s a look at how some of the top ten cities in the U.S. established their inaugural charters:
**Commission Size**
Among the largest cities, charters were typically drafted by commissions comprising 11 to 15 members.
Jacksonville set a notable precedent with its Local Government Study Commission, which included 50 members and a 17-member executive committee.
Conversely, Dallas had its original charter drafted by the Texas state legislature.
However, most commonly, a commission size of around 15 members is noted in successful cases.
**Selection Process**
The process of forming inaugural charter commissions varies; in most cases, these commissions were elected by the public.
Some were appointed by the city council or the mayor, while others were designated by the state legislature.
Notably, New York City’s inaugural commission in 1897 was appointed directly by the governor.
**Scope of Authority**
The authority granted to these charter commissions also varies.
A slim majority had full control to draft their charters and send them directly to voters for approval, while others required legislative endorsement prior to ratification.
**Final Adoption Method**
All inaugural city charters mandated some form of ratification for the adoption of the final document.
Typically, this has involved state legislation or popular referenda, with most cities securing final approval from voters.
However, in some instances, such as New York and Dallas, charters were approved by state legislatures through the passage of relevant bills.
**Recommendations for Chicago’s Inaugural Charter Commission**
In light of these experiences from other cities, several recommendations can be made for establishing Chicago’s inaugural charter commission.
While it may initially appear advantageous for voters to directly elect the charter commission, this approach could inadvertently complicate and prolong the process.
Given Chicago’s size, a commission of 50 members—if elected by ward—would mirror Jacksonville’s substantial proportion.
Alternatively, Chicago could consider a reduced commission of around 10 members elected by district, aligning with the Chicago Public School Board map.
This would enable a more efficient process, with an additional member elected city-wide or selected among the other 10 to avoid tie votes.
Creating a different division of city commission districts for the election would also present logistical challenges.
For Chicago’s inaugural commission, the feasibility of an appointed commission appears to be the most practical option.
Looking to New York’s model where the governor appointed the inaugural commission, or Jacksonville’s state legislature-appointed body, an ideally structured commission could involve representation from multiple governance levels.
Incorporating the governor, state legislature, and city government representation would grant the commission the necessary authority to draft the charter independently, without needing to seek legislative or mayoral approvals.
According to Article VII of the Illinois Constitution, any changes in governance structure or officer selection in a home rule city must be confirmed through a public referendum.
Final approval and adoption of Chicago’s charter, therefore, must come directly from the voters, ensuring that the people have a say in shaping their governance.
As discussions surrounding Chicago’s inaugural charter evolve, the city stands at a crossroads between enduring historical challenges and the potential for progressive governance reform.
By learning from the other great cities of the nation, Chicago can establish a resilient framework that not only clarifies its government structure but also equips it to meet future challenges head-on.
image source from：illinoispolicy
