Members of the City of Norman Business and Community Affairs Committee on Oct. 2 discussed calendar options for placing charter amendments, the city’s recurring street‑maintenance bond and other potential ballot measures on upcoming municipal election dates.

The committee reviewed the practical and legal constraints for scheduling. A staff member said a citywide measure such as the street‑maintenance bond must be on a general municipal election; that makes February or April the only feasible spring options because special elections are not normally permissible for some charter or citywide contests. The staff discussion noted that if no charter questions are placed on the February or April ballots, there is an argument a judicial challenge could arise; absent that, November 2026 remains an available citywide option.

Council members listed which charter items they were most likely to pursue. Several speakers said they favor separating previously bundled charter questions so voters can consider them individually. The swearing‑in timing for newly elected council members drew repeated attention; one council member noted a preferred revision would allow swearing in “within 30 days of certification of the election board,” decoupling the date from a fixed calendar day. Other charter topics mentioned included council pay, term length (which failed when previously bundled) and whether to amend charter language regarding utility rate authority and a public utilities authority or trustees.

Several speakers described the perceived tradeoffs of ballot timing. A staff member highlighted “ballot fatigue,” noting turnout and vote totals dropped across nine questions in a prior charter election — the first question received over 1,000 more total votes than the ninth question. Committee members discussed using February, April and November strategically (for example, placing the street maintenance bond — a citywide measure that has been reapproved repeatedly — on a ballot where it can benefit from broader turnout). One member observed that pairing the street bond with council races could provide turnout and campaign support.

The committee also discussed the possibility of creating a trusteeship or authority to review utility rates and offer recommendations. Speakers agreed that such trustees would likely make recommendations to council rather than unilaterally set rates; there was also historical context referenced: a past practice of using utility funds for unrelated expenses prompted more restrictive charter language in earlier decades.

No formal motions or ordinance changes were made. Staff said they can be ready for either a February or April ballot but prefer April to allow more time for public outreach, marketing and voter education. Committee members directed staff to continue planning with an emphasis on balancing ballot content, public outreach and legal timing; staff will return with recommendations and draft ballot language as needed.