Chula Vista City Council
July 26, 2022

Charter Update Proposal for Council Consideration
for Possible Placement on the
November 2022 Ballot

GLEN GOOGINS
City Attorney
July 26, 2022

JAMES SCOFIELD
Charter Review Comm. Chair

MEGAN MCCLURG
Deputy City Attorney
1 Background
 As previously described, the City Council established the CRC to advise and make recommendations to the City Council and the City Manager on issues affecting the provisions of the City Charter (CVMC 2.29.020)  Over the past year, with input from many City departments, in particular the City Clerk and the City Attorney’s office, the CRC has undertaken an extensive review of the entire Charter  The result of that group effort was a comprehensive Charter update proposal designed to conform with current State laws and City administrative practices, eliminate outdated provisions, clarify ambiguous terms, add headings and definitions, reformat and reorganize and, in general, make the Charter easier to understand and use
 On July 1, 2022 the CRC transmitted its draft proposal to Council for your preliminary review and consideration. Both underline/strikeout and “clean” versions were provided to facilitate review  On July 12, 2022 the item was formally presented to Council and your initial feedback was solicited  On July 13, the CRC met at its regularly scheduled meeting, discussed Council’s feedback, and ultimately confirmed its original recommendations.
 Tonight, along with a read out of the CRC July 13th discussions, and some additional technical changes, the proposed Charter update is again presented for Council consideration and possible action 2 July 12, 2022 Council Comments
 Councilmember Galvez requested that staff provide the CRC with all agenda materials and video related to the 2012 Charter amendment item that added section 503.1 titled “Legislative Council” to the City Charter  Staff provided all CRC members with the agenda materials and video from 2012 the next morning. Staff also made the CRC aware that a previous CRC presented changes to the Legislative Council provisions to Council in 2016  The CRC determined that it remains comfortable with the proposed Legislative Council language, and the CRC recommends that Council consider such amendment as drafted and presented  Councilmember McCann asked the CRC to consider maintaining the qualified elector requirement for board and commission members who sit on decision making boards and commissions, mandating a certain period of City residency when residency is required, and allowing the use of ranked choice voting at municipal elections.

Councilmember Galvez similarly expressed an interest in alternative forms of voting.  The CRC determined that the qualified elector versus residency requirement issue for board and commission members was fully considered and discussed, and the CRC requests that the council consider such amendment as drafted and presented  The City Attorney’s office has advised CRC that residency duration mandates are legally problematic and can provide confirmation of that advice if Council desires
 The CRC agreed that alternative forms of voting, including ranked choice, is a worthy topic of future consideration, but would not be feasible for the November 2022 ballot given the substantial amount of work required and limited time available 3 Three Categories of Current Changes
 Level 1
• Non-substantive; corrections; clarifications; elimination of redundancy; reorganization  Level 2:
• Minimally substantive; reflect changes in law, technology, and best practices; would not alter current City practices or the general intent of existing Charter provisions
 Level 3
• More substantive
• Most derived from previous Council referrals or otherwise recommended by CRC and presented to Council in 2020 4 Level 1 Changes
 Not substantive; corrections; clarifications; elimination of redundancy; reorganization  Reflected throughout the Charter
 Examples:
• moving and consolidating Article III elections provisions to Article IX entitled “Elections” • deleting outdated provisions regarding the creation of and transition to council districts • deleting previously repealed Charter Sections and renumbering accordingly • replacing gender specific references
• adding subheadings to sections with substantial text to make more readable/accessible • adding key defined terms
5 Level 2 Changes
 Minimally substantive; reflect changes in law, technology, and best practices; would not substantially alter current City practices or the general intent of existing Charter provisions  Examples:
• makes Council-City Manager form of government explicit [Section 205] • specifies what it means to run again (submit nomination papers) in the context of a previously termed-out candidate [Section 300(E)
• Allows any action taken at a “regular” meeting to also be taken at a “special” meeting [Section 308] • allows City to publish legal notices as permitted by law (instead of always in a newspaper) [Section 313] • section regarding “illegal contracts” references extensive state law in this area [Section 509] • requires Council ratification of temporary department head appointments that exceed one year in duration; temporary appointments for Classified Service positions now allowed for one year [Section 704] • changes the nomenclature for City elections to align with terms used state-wide [throughout] • deletes obsolete Capital Outlays and Department Trust Funds [Old Sections 1013 and 1014] • makes violations of the Charter punishable as infractions or misdemeanors instead of just $50 infractions  Note: Proposed changes to Civil Service rules, although not substantive, are nonetheless subject to “meet and confer obligations with bargaining groups [Section 606 and Article VII] 6 Level 3 Changes

1. Board & Commission Membership Requirement
• Referral from previous Council to Commission
• Changes from qualified elector requirement to residency requirement for most boards and commissions

2. Suspension of Elected Officials with Felony Charges Pending • Recommended by previous CRC in 2020
• Updated to clarify no salary during period of suspension, but maintain health benefits and includes back pay provision

3. City Attorney Residency and Experience Requirements
• Residency requirement recommended by previous CRC in 2020 • Increased experience requirement from seven years practicing law to ten years 7 Level 3 Changes (cont.)

4. Converts Legislative Council Provisions to Conflict Council Provisions • Drafted by the City Attorney
• Maintains an alternative legal advisor to Council when the City Attorney has a conflict of interest but limits to situations where conflict actually exists

5. Mail in Ballot System for Special Elections
• Suggested for consideration by the City Clerk’s Office and recommended by previous CRC in 2020 • Allows use of an all-mail ballot option to fill Council vacancies at special elections 8 Summary of Changes since July 1 draft
 Consistency between sections with regard to when a vacancy occurs for elected officials and board and commission members [sections 303(A), 503(H), and 602(C)]  Clarification requested by Mid-Managers/Professional Bargaining Unit with respect to the temporary appointment of department heads [section 704(A)]
 Clarification of the relationship between state law and local law enactments [section 1205]  Other minor clean ups and corrections
 All changes made since the original draft was sent to you are highlighted in yellow in the track/changes version of the proposed amended Charter attached to this agenda item  As recently as this morning, additional needed corrections have been identified, none of which is substantive.
 An additional correction is required to the ballot measure language to conform with state law requirements regarding the particular wording of the question 9 Value and Costs of Moving Forward
 Charter Project Purpose/Value:
• Make the Charter easier for constituents, staff, and all to read, understand, and implement • Enhance/clarify City’s “home-rule” authority
• Reduce costs (eliminate of newspaper publication requirements; mail ballot alternative for special elections) • Reduction in staff time in analyzing and interpreting Charter provisions  Costs
• One comprehensive measure, with link to draft on City’s website: $195,000 • Full charter language presented (a) within the general sample ballot - $450,000; or (b) in a separate supplemental booklet - $625,000. Note that option (a) or (b) would be determined by the Registrar of Voters, depending on the available space in the general sample ballot.
• Any additional, shorter measures (6 pages or less): $165,000 10 Ballot Considerations
 Option for One or More Measures
 Level 1 and 2 changes may be combined into a single, comprehensive ballot measure [recommended by CRC]  Some or all Level 3 changes could be combined into the Level 1 and Level 2 comprehensive measure [supported by CRC]; and/or
 One or more Level 3 changes could be presented as separate ballot measures [in Council discretion]  Form of the ballot question must comply with State law requirements  Limit of 75 words
 Must enumerate “new” city powers
 Option to direct the City Clerk to prepare the “impartial analysis” of proposals affecting the “organization or salaries” of the City Attorney’s office  Ability to authorize a designee member to submit arguments in favor of the measure(s) [CVMC

2.50.150], and function of CRC to prepare and submit proposed ballot arguments in favor of proposed Charter changes [CVMC 2.29.030]
11 Other Considerations
 Since 2000, there have been 13 charter amendments presented to voters at the ballot; 11 have passed and 2 have failed to obtain voter approval
The last “comprehensive” update of the City Charter occurred in 1978 Because an appropriation is involved, a four-fifths vote of the City Council will be necessary to place the item on the November 2022 ballot
 November 2014 (public works contracting, fill council vacancies with 12-25 months remaining)  November 2012 (creation of council districts and mandatory runoff elections)  June 2012 (limit authority and compensation of City Attorney, establish term limits, and authorize office of Legislative Council)  November 2008 (make City Attorney an elected position)  November 2006 (2 items: provide for one year wait out period before seeking re-election, council vacancy election vs. appointment)  June 2006 (limit ability to use eminent domain to address economic blighting conditions)  November 2000 (3 items: allow appointment of non-electors to certain advisory boards, remove term limits for mayor and council, change term limits to three consecutive terms and wait out period to three years)  March 2000 (2 items: amend Mayor’s salary, allow option of design-build projects) 12 Next Steps
 Tonight:
• Council take such action as it deems appropriate to proceed, or not, with November 2022 ballot measure(s) • Provide direction in regard to preparation of an Impartial Analysis and Arguments in Favor of any measure(s) • Schedule an item for the August 9th City Council meeting, if necessary  Prior to August 12th:
• Complete any required meet and confer process
• City Clerk to forward all necessary documents to the County Registrar 13 Questions?
Staff and the CRC Chair are available for questions.
14 Draft Single Ballot Measure Example
“Shall the measure modifying the City Charter to conform with current State laws and City administrative practices, eliminate outdated provisions, clarify ambiguous terms, add headings and definitions, reformat and reorganize, and provide additional authority for City Council to act at special meetings, suspend elected officials with pending felony charges, allow mail ballot elections for elected office vacancies and to align bonded debt limit requirements with State provisions for general law cities be adopted?”
15 Draft Additional Ballot Measure Example
“Shall the measure modifying section 503 of the Charter of the City of Chula Vista relating to the qualifications of the City Attorney to require the City Attorney to be a resident of the City of Chula Vista and to have ten years of legal experience instead of seven be adopted?” 16