After about four months of meetings, the Jefferson City Charter Review Advisory Committee submitted the last of its proposed charter amendments Tuesday night.
It is now up to the Jefferson City Council to decide whether to place those amendments on an upcoming election ballot.
Committee chair George Hartsfield said he is curious to see which proposed changes the City Council will send to voters for consideration.
"I wouldn't be naive enough to think they're all going to sail through as written," he said. "I think some will go through as written but some may not go through, some that would be revised, so there's a whole other process again."
While the committee finalized most of its recommendations in late June, it requested a 60-day extension to review the Parks Commission city charter section, which the City Council granted in mid-July. The committee finalized changes to that section Tuesday after more than a month of debate.
The proposed charter language would allow the Parks and Recreation Commission to "administer all money appropriated from the park fund by the City Council." This park fund would go only toward public parks, recreation and forestry purposes, and the fund would be "kept separate and apart from other moneys of the City," the city charter recommendation states.
For more than a month, the city's legal department, City Charter Review Advisory Committee, Parks and Recreation Commission and the commission's legal counsel debated the Parks Commission's control of the park fund.
The council heard several bills Monday regarding the first round of proposed changes to the charter, which drew some concerns from council members. In particular, four council members expressed opposition to a proposed change that would make the city prosecutor position an appointed office instead of an elected one.
The proposed change suggests a selection committee - two members appointed by the Cole County Bar Association and one appointed by the mayor - nominate someone as city prosecutor. That nomination would go to the City Council for approval.
If approved, he or she would serve a four-year term until a successor is appointed. Currently, the city prosecutor serves a two-year term.
Some council members said they feel selecting a city prosecutor should remain with the voters. They also worried about City Council influence.
The committee also added suggested language that would give the City Council the power to remove the city prosecutor from office for just cause. The council would need a two-thirds vote to remove the city prosecutor.
Other bills discussed Monday include term limit changes, better defining conflict of interest and minor changes.
If the council approves the proposed changes by Aug. 28, they may appear on the Nov. 6 ballot. If this deadline is not met, the proposed changes may appear on the April ballot.
The City Charter Review Advisory Committee will be terminated once the City Council takes action on the proposed changes.