There sure is a lot of chatter about charter reform in Portland. Ever since voters soundly rejected the lastest effort to ditch the commission form of running a city in 2002, some people have continued to look for ways to accomplish just that.

The commission form challenges bureaucratic norms for neatness -- and a near-religious belief in efficiency. But despite the stray threads and jagged lines of its commission form, Portland has managed to become one of America's great cities.

Unfortunately, the preoccupation with our form of government obscures the real question that the city ought to be grappling with: How should the charter embody our highest hopes and aspirations for our city?

A visit to the current charter is instructive. Fundamentally, it is impenetrable. What does it say about our city? What does it say about the relationship of the government to its citizens? What does it say about the kind of community, the kind of society we are seeking to build? Don't look in the charter for answers.

In fact, if we look at the charter as the city's constitution, what becomes evident is a critical need to clarify what the charter should say about our city and community.

So what should Portland's next great charter reform adventure address? For starters:

What does it mean to be a citizen of Portland?

What should the city government do to facilitate, encourage and empower
good citizenship?

What do we want to say about our relationship to the region, the state,
Cascadia and the globe?

How can we do a better job, through the charter, of explaining how we
value and sustain Portland as a place accessible to all?

What do we expect from our elected leaders?

More pragmatically, any future charter review commission should address
the following in its efforts:

What is the purpose of a city charter? And if it is likened to a
municipal constitution, what should a preamble say about the kind of
community we want to create and maintain?

What is essential to achieve this mission?

What purposes do all the various chapters and sections serve?

Take a look at other charters from other cities. What do they say about
those communities?

Although we suspect that municipal charters are not your usual bedside reading material, Portland can do far better in setting the tone for what a charter for a great and unique place should look like in the year 2005.

If we can answer these questions thoughtfully and comprehensively, then a charter reform effort will make some sense. Certainly they put the ultimate question of governmental structure where it ought to be: a means to well-articulated, carefully thought-out ends and not the goalm of our efforts.

-Ethan Seltzer is director of the Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning at Portland State University. Sumner Sharpe is a senior consultant with the Portland office of Parametrix, a planning and environmental consulting firm. Margaret Strachan is a former Portland city commissioner.