The Constitution at the Local Level: Why Communities Need New Charters

ANNA YURCHENKO, CO-FOUNDER OF WE BUILD UKRAINE

A community may have a development strategy, an approved budget, dozens of local programs, and a comprehensive recovery plan. But all of this still doesn’t answer some simple questions.

What should residents do if they want to bring a specific issue before the council? How do you initiate a public hearing? How many signatures do you need to collect? Can a single village discuss an issue that affects only it? When must local authorities respond to residents’ proposals?

Without clear answers, a community resembles a city with roads but without traffic signs. There’s traffic; everyone’s heading somewhere, but at every intersection, they have to figure out all over again who has the right of way and what rules to follow.

For a territorial community, its charter should serve as these traffic rules.

Not a formal document for the archives. Not a legal text that was voted on once and never opened again. The charter should be a clear set of rules governing interactions between residents, the local council, executive bodies, council members, and village heads.

WHY COMMUNITIES NEED TO UPDATE THEIR CHARTERS

The charter is often called the “local constitution.” The wording is grand, but for most people, it’s not very clear.

In reality, the charter should serve as a guide for day-to-day interactions within the community.

It should explain to residents how to submit a proposal and ensure it is considered. To village heads — how to represent the interests of their community. To council members — how to work with community initiatives. To executive bodies — how to conduct consultations and public hearings, rather than simply reporting that they took place.

By the end of 2026, local governments must adopt territorial community charters or bring existing documents into compliance with the new legislative requirements.

Starting January 1, 2027, having a charter will be mandatory.

The reason isn’t just the statutory deadline. In recent years, the very understanding of local democracy and resident participation has changed.

People have the right to do more than just elect local officials every few years. They can contribute to the decision-making process, submit local initiatives, participate in public hearings and consultations, establish advisory bodies, evaluate the work of local authorities, and receive information about their activities.

But having a right doesn’t necessarily mean it’s easy to exercise it.

If a person doesn’t know where to submit an initiative, what documents to include with it, or how long to wait for a response, the system doesn’t work.

If the charter provides for public hearings but does not specify who can initiate them, how residents are notified, and what happens to their proposals after discussion, participation quickly becomes a formality.

The law paves the way. But it is up to the community to establish clear signs, routes, and traffic rules.

NO TWO COMMUNITIES ARE ALIKE

In some places, people are accustomed to submitting requests through online services. In others, the community leader remains the primary point of contact. In one community, a youth council is active; in another, it’s civic organizations or self-governing bodies. Some residents use the official website daily, while others learn about council decisions from a notice posted near a store or at the community leader’s office.

All of this must be taken into account.

For example, if holding public hearings in a small village requires collecting hundreds of signatures across the entire community, that right will remain nothing more than a nice-sounding phrase in a document.

If a local initiative can only be submitted in person at the administrative center, residents of remote settlements will have to spend half a day traveling just to submit a single document.

If, following a public discussion, local authorities are not required to explain which proposals were accepted and which were rejected, people will very quickly lose sight of the point of such participation.

Therefore, the key question is not how many pages the charter will have. What matters is whether people will be able to make use of it.

WHY A SINGLE CHARTER IS NOT ENOUGH

A charter does not operate in a vacuum.

It is linked to the local council’s rules of procedure, regulations governing standing committees, village heads, public hearings, consultations, council members’ reporting, and the work of advisory bodies.

A charter can stipulate that a representative of an initiative group has the right to speak at a council meeting. But if the rules of procedure do not specify when they will be given the floor, the exercise of this right will depend on the chairperson’s discretion.

You can guarantee people the right to public hearings. But if you do not specify who organizes them, how many days’ notice residents must be given, and when the minutes must be published, every new hearing will be held under different rules.

It’s like replacing the front door of a house but leaving the old locks, keys, and wiring in place. On the outside, everything looks new, but it’s inconvenient to use — and in some cases, even dangerous.

That’s why updating the charter must begin with a thorough review of local regulations.

WHAT WE’RE DOING IN THE KANIV AND TROSTYANETS COMMUNITIES

We Build Ukraine, in partnership with the “MHP-Community” Foundation, is implementing a project to support the Kaniv City Territorial Community in Cherkasy Oblast and the Trostyanets Settlement Territorial Community in Vinnytsia Oblast.

We aren’t starting from scratch, nor are we providing the communities with a ready-made template.

First, We Build Ukraine experts analyze existing charters, council bylaws, and other local regulations. We examine which rules are already in effect, which are outdated, where documents contradict one another, and where necessary procedures are entirely absent.

After that, together with the communities, we prepare updated versions of the charters, amendments to the bylaws, and rules for applying key instruments of resident participation.

This is very practical work.

We need to determine who can initiate public hearings; what a realistic number of signatures should be; how to submit a local initiative; how much time the council will have to review it; how residents of a specific village can raise issues that are important specifically to them; and what role village heads will play in this process. How to combine online tools with in-person meetings.

Representatives of local government bodies, civil society organizations, and active residents are involved in this work. The draft documents will undergo public discussion, and the suggestions received must be reviewed before the charters are submitted to the councils for consideration.

It is important to us that, as a result, the community receives not a legally flawless text that no one will ever open, but a clear set of rules that people will actually use.

VOTING IS NOT ENOUGH

Even the best charter will not come to life the moment the council votes on it.

Once it is adopted, local government staff must know how to apply the new procedures. The website must feature clear instructions, application forms, and contact information for the responsible officials. Village heads must understand how to help residents submit initiatives. Council members must know how to handle community proposals.

And people need to know that these opportunities even exist.

A charter does not take effect the moment a council decision is signed. It takes effect when a resident opens the document, finds the right procedure, and is able to follow it from the first step all the way to receiving a response.

Communities must comply with the law by the end of 2026. But that is only an external deadline.

The real challenge is much broader. We need to agree on the rules for living together in the community.

Who can raise important issues — and how. How do local authorities explain their decisions? How does a resident’s voice become not just a comment on social media, but a proposal that must be considered?

The charter won’t solve all of the community’s problems. Just as traffic rules don’t eliminate all traffic jams. But without clear rules, every intersection turns into an argument over who should yield the right of way.

 #Communities #LocalGovernment #LocalDemocracy #WeBuildUkraine #Reforms #EuropeanIntegration #CommunityDevelopment