For a few days last week I had the opportunity to attend city manager camp (actually called the Michigan Local Government Manager’s Association Winter Institute). This is where 225 top municipal managers gather to keep the saw sharpened (for those Steven Covey fans). As an ICMA Credentialed City Manager I am required to attend at least 40 hours of training per year.
This was a very good institute where a lot of ideas were exchanged. It is also a great place to see what others are doing and measure what we are doing versus other communities. Rest assured we are doing a lot of things right, but we can always improve. Finding what other managers are doing well helps us not reinvent the wheel.
One session was on what is coming up on the radar screen for Election Day. Every 16 years the question of a Constitution Convention (Con Con) is placed on the ballot. Electors will get to decide whether we have a Con Con, then we would have to elect delegates to deliberate and come up with a modified constitution or an entirely new one. There is no funding for this process and I don’t think there is any time frame for the process. Then, the final document would be placed on a ballot to see if we the people want to keep the current constitution or move to the “new” one.
Wow, that is big. What would you want in a Michigan constitution? Or would you prefer to leave it like it is.
I attempted to look at the making of legislation and what would be good legislation where I found “Signed by President Lincoln in 1862, the Homestead Act is short and beautiful –two qualities good legislation should have, and two qualities in which legislation today is utterly lacking.” Larry P. Arnn.
Ok, 1862 for good legislation, what about making a good constitution? I went further back and read “I draw my idea of the form of government from a principle in nature, which no art can overturn, that the more simple anything is the less liable it is to be disordered, and the easier repaired when disordered; and with this maxim in view, I offer a few remarks on the so boasted constitution of England.” Thomas Paine, 1776
Good old Tommy P. then goes on to explain the complexity of the English Constitution and how complicated and convoluted the set of governing laws are. The beauty of the two above authors (some 234 years apart) is that simplicity reigns supreme, when written and if it ever needs to be changed. We may error in trying to cover every circumstance that arises, and then we will need more complex laws to correct the correction, and so on. This does seem to make common sense. Hey, maybe that’s why Mr. Payne used the title for his pamphlets on explaining why a simple representative republic was the best form of governance to live with “Common Sense”.
Very interesting stuff.




