AUGUSTA, Ga. – The Augusta Charter Review Committee is working through complex issues, but there’s no official deadline to complete its recommendations. However, Chair Marcie Wilhelmi expressed a desire to finish by the end of the year, so any proposed changes to the city’s charter could be put before voters in May of the following year.

“I believe a committee always has to have a goal,” Wilhelmi said. “If it’s an open-ended process, it will drag out as long as you are allowed, and so it’s a worthy goal.”

While the end-of-year target could allow for changes to be voted on in May, some committee members argue against rushing through the process. Angela Bakos, a member of the committee, voiced concerns about the complexity of the issues at hand.

“I don’t think so. I think there are too many complex issues, and we need to take our time to address them,” Bakos said. “It’s our duty to the citizens.”

Despite these concerns, other members, such as Roderick Pearson, emphasize the importance of staying focused and not dragging out the process unnecessarily.

“We need to be serious about what we are doing, stay focused. We can’t just dissect every frog that we put on the table,” Pearson stated.

To help meet the potential December deadline, a motion was introduced to change the meeting schedule from the first and third Thursday of each month to every other Thursday. This would increase the number of meetings by five, allowing the committee to progress more quickly. The motion passed by a narrow margin of seven to four.

Bakos, who voted against the change, explained her concerns. “I voted for the first and third because that’s what we all agreed on. The every other Thursday came up when we were talking about a December deadline. I’m trying to make sure we’re not trying to slip that in anyway,” Bakos said.

Wilhelmi, however, believes there’s no clear way to know how long the review will take until the committee makes more progress. “I don’t think any of us can say with any clarity how high is high and how far can we push this, and we won’t know until we try,” she said.

As the debate continues, there is a clear divide within the committee over balancing thorough review with meeting an ambitious timeline. Some members fear that rushing the process could lead to poorly considered changes, while others are eager to move forward with the work.

The committee’s next steps will depend on the pace of their discussions and whether the increased meeting frequency will help them reach a resolution by the end of the year.