MADISON, Wis. — When Madison residents get their ballot they'll see four referendum questions about the structure of the city's common council.

They come from the Task Force on Government Structure which was formed in 2017. 

What You Need To Know

  • Madison residents will vote on advisory referendum about Common Council structure

  • Questions get at alder terms, district, and full time status

  • Task Force on Government Structure curated the questions

  • Referendum is advisory, there is not set timeline for Common Council changes

“It really had been since the 80s that the city had taken a close look at its structure,” said John Strange, a Madison assistant city attorney who has worked with the Task Force over the last several years. “Including mayor's office, council, boards, commissions and committees to really look at what structure would best represent all of Madison's residents.”

The first question asks if the common council should move from part time to full time and give the position a raise to 50 to 80 percent of Dane County's medium income for a single parent family of two.

“Some of the pros and cons on this first question that the task force identified is that going to a full time council could ensure that all residents have full-time representation,” Strange said.

Cons the task force considered would be professionalizing the role and taking it from a public service role to a big money politics one.

The second question gets at the size of the common council and if it should increase or decrease member or keep it at the current number of 20.

One pro the task force sees is if the council transitions to full time it may be logistically easier to go to a smaller higher paying body.

“They also thought that larger districts could change level of influence a small group of residents might have on a particular alder,” Strange said.

Cons, Strange said, were still professionalizing the position too much and the risk that as alders represent more people individuals have less say.

The third question asks if alder positions should increase from two year terms to four.

A pro the Task Force sees is reducing the number of elections and the cost associated with that as well as allowing residents to get more familiar with those alders and give the alders more time to work before turning to a campaign. Strange said the Task Force considered cons too.

“They cited the possibility that it may create a possibility where if someone does resign during their four year term, especially towards the beginning of that term, that a political appointee would serve out the remainder of that term,” Strange said.

The fourth question asks if alders should have a term limit of 12 years — they currently have no term limits.

“Some of the pros that they cited was that it could ensure a cycle of candidates with new ideas, kind of getting more people through with new ideas,” Strange said.

The Task Force also sees term limit as a way to keep the position from being too professionalized. However, there are cons too.

“It could deprive the council of experienced leaders,” Strange said.

Ultimately there is no set timeline for changes to the common council, but the city plans on taking the results from the advisory referendum and using it to guide how the body will look.