These proposed changes to the City’s charter are well-intentioned. All five Commissioners have publicly urged a “Yes” vote. While they mean well, I urge my fellow Winter Park residents to vote “No” on these proposed charter amendments.

First, Winter Park’s charter mandates a Commission-appointed residential Charter Review Committee to meet every decade to review the city’s charter and recommend to the Commission any changes to the charter that is ultimately decided by the voters. I served on the most recent Charter Review Committee. We discussed and debated many topics via public workshops, with an opportunity for public comment, and ultimately recommended several changes to the city’s charter. These changes overwhelmingly passed in March 2020.

Supermajority was not discussed by our committee. Nor was a resident petition presented to the Commission asking for a supermajority. The City’s tradition of citizen input via advisory boards —Planning and Zoning, Economic Development, Parks and Recreation —were not asked to weigh in on the implications of a supermajority vote. A good process makes for good governance. During the first reading on Sept. 22, the City Commission spent roughly an hour crafting these questions, and their process did not include residential input or expert testimony about the implications of a supermajority. During the second reading on Oct. 13, these passed after a minute without any discussion.

Second, proponents of these changes have argued that a supermajority would protect Winter Park’s greenspace from development. You will not find a bigger advocate for our city’s greenspace than me. Along with hundreds of my fellow residents, we successfully advocated for the Commission to fully fund athletic fields actively used by residents and their families. I served on the Tree Preservation Board.

Winter Park has strong protections against developing parks and wetlands. Anytime the charm and character that makes Winter Park unique is threatened, the voters of this community have spoken.

Which leads to the final and most important point. The ultimate power of accountability for the decisions made by a Commission is the voter. A supermajority requirement for land-use decisions weakens our ability to hold our Commission accountable. Winter Park voters have the ability, and have frequently used it, to change the commission within a two-year cycle. A supermajority consolidates power in the City Commission and as the Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board stated, “making these rules more rigid deprives Winter Park of flexibility it might need to respond quickly to high-value proposals.”

Good governance requires flexibility and the ability to compromise. The best way to preserve and protect Winter Park is to keep a simple majority rule that has served us well. Passing these amendments sounds like it will protect Winter Park. This may be true in the short term, but in the long run, if these pass, Winter Park will stay the same. I am voting “No” on all six of these amendments and I urge my fellow residents who want Winter Park to remain a vibrant community with an effective government to do the same. Vote “No.”

Respectfully, Lawrence Lyman