Charter City Initiative
JUNE 2, 2026
1 Introduction/Agenda
1. Receive a Presentation on the following topics :
• City Council Charter Initiative and Work Plan
• City of Fremont: Overview of Current Structure
• General and Charter Cities Overview
• Form of Government: Overview and Comparative Data
• Appointment Authority: Overview and Comparative Data
• Compensation and Staffing: Overview and Comparative Data • Charter Advisory Committee Recommendations
2. Conduct a Public Hearing
3. Deliberate and Provide Direction to Staff
2 Charter Initiative Background
and Approved Workplan
3 Background – Council Action
• On February 17, 2026, the City Council approved Vice-Mayor Yajing Zhang’s referral to direct staff to initiate the process for preparing a new City Charter for consideration by Fremont voters in November 2026.
4 Background – Council Action
• On March 3, 2026, the City Council approved the staff recommendation to:
1. Adopt a resolution establishing a seven-member Charter Advisory Committee;
2. Approve preliminary Charter development workplan and direct staff to proceed with implementation; and
3. Announce a call for applications to serve on the Charter Advisory Committee.
5 Background – Timeline
6 Community engagement
activities to inform the public
and solicit input
March 18 – May 8
City Council’s adoption of Vice
Mayor Zhang’s referral
February 17
City Council’s adoption of a resolution
establishing the Charter Advisory
Committee (CAC) and Workplan
March 3
City Council
Approves the
Mayor’s CAC
Appointments
March 20
CAC conducts meetings to
accomplish the Workplan
March 18 – April 27
Background – Timeline
7 Completion of CAC’s
Recommendation
Memorandum
April 27
City Council Meeting –
Public Hearing #1
June 2
City Council Meeting –
Public Hearing #2
July 7
City Council Meeting –
Final Vote
July 28
Deadline for Placement
of proposed City Charter
on ballot
August 7
Background – Workplan
The City Council established the following topics in its Charter Work Plan:
8 Governance Structure:
• Form of Government
• Council Authority
• Meeting Structure
• Council Voting
Executive Roles:
• Executive Authority
• Appointment Authority
Term Limits:
• Council Term Limits
• Mayor Term Limits
Council Compensation
and Office Support:
• Council Salary
• Staffing Options
• Budget Considerations
City of Fremont:
Overview of Current Structure
9 City of Fremont – Current Structure
• General Law City: A general law city under the laws of the State of California. • Form of Government: Operates as a Council-Manager form of government where the City Council is responsible for policy decisions and the City Manager is responsible for management of the day-to-day operations of the City.
• Council Composition: Composed of six Councilmembers elected by district and one Mayor elected at-large, serving a four-year term with a two-term limit.
10 City of Fremont – Current Structure
• City Council Authority: Responsible for setting policy, adopting the budget, approving City legislation, and appointing City Manager and City Attorney. • Mayoral Functions: Mayor is a member of the City Council and votes as such.
Mayor also serves as chair and ceremonial head of the City government. • Council Staffing: The City Council is supported by staff in the City Manager’s Office and City Clerk’s Office.
11 City of Fremont – Current Structure
Council Compensation:
• Salary: Mayor and Councilmembers receive a monthly salary of $4,623.83 and $2,602.56, respectively.
• Benefits: Elected officials may also receive $455.00 in health benefit allowance and a 7.25%-7.5% contribution to their retirement plan with the City.
12 General and Charter Cities:
Overview and Comparative Data
13 General Law City and Charter City Overview
14 General Law City
Derive their corporate
powers from general
laws enacted by the
California legislature.
(357 cities)
Charter City
Derive their corporate
powers directly from the
California Constitution,
subject to limitations of their
respective charters and
enactments of the legislature
on matters of statewide
concern. (125 cities)
Charter City Overview
• California Constitution: The state constitution authorizes voters to adopt a city charter.
• Charter Drafting: There are two ways to initiate the drafting of a charter:
(1) A city’s voters elect a charter commission to draft a charter, or (2) A city council drafts the charter.
• Fremont Process: The City Council selected the second option. 15 Charter City Overview
• City Constitution: A charter operates as a “constitution” for a city. • Home Rule: The “home rule” provision of the California Constitution (art XI, section 5(a)) affirmatively grants charter cities supremacy over “municipal affairs.”
• Impact: This means that a charter city is subject only to conflicting provision in the state of federal constitutions and preemptive state law on matters of statewide concern.
16 Charter City Overview
• Municipal Affairs: The California Constitution (art. XI, § 5(b)) provides broad categories of “municipal affairs” that a charter city has supremacy over, including:
(1) The regulation and government of a city police force (2) Subgovernment in all or part of a city
(3) Conduct of city elections
(4) Appointment or election of municipal officers and employees • Courts: Beyond these core functions, the courts determine what constitutes a municipal affair versus a matter of statewide concern on a case-by-case basis.
17 Charter City Overview
• Alameda County: Eight cities in Alameda County have adopted a charter, most with a Council-Manager form of government:
18 1. Alameda
2. Albany
3. Berkeley
4. Emeryville
5. Hayward
6. Oakland
7. Piedmont
8. San Leandro
• Charter length ranges from 2 pages (Emeryville) to 121 pages (Oakland).
Charter City Overview
• Common Reasons for Charter Adoption:
(1) Special local conditions create needs that cannot be adequately met by the general laws (e.g., power to implement a real property transfer tax) (2) To tailor the organization and elective offices to address unique local needs (e.g., establish local elections rules, change form of government) (3) Free themselves from the requirements of some California general laws (e.g., establish council salaries different from Gov. Code requirements). 19 Form of Government:
Overview and Comparative Data
20 Form of Government Overview
Data on Governance Models for California Cities:
• 482 incorporated cities in California
• 357 general law cities
• 125 charter cities
(Source: California State Controller’s Office)
• 98% of cities operate under a Council-Manager form of government. • Five cities operate as a Strong Mayor or Mayor-Council form of government:
• Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Oakland, and Fresno. 21 Form of Government Overview
Council-Manager Form of Government:
• City Council has the authority to set policy, appoint a city manager to execute council policy, and appoint certain city officials (e.g., city attorney and city clerk).
Note: In a general law city, city councils are empowered to appoint city officers, including the city manager, the city attorney, the city treasurer, the city clerk, the police chief, and the fire chief, among others.
22 23
24 Form of Government Overview
Strong Mayor Government:
• Political and administrative authority is concentrated in the Mayor.
Mayor is a full-time position with authority to hire a city administrator, hire many department heads, present a budget to the city council, and has veto power over city council legislation.
25 26
Form of Government Overview
Mayor-Council Government:
• This is a shared power structure. Mayor and City Council share governing authority over appointment of officers and personnel, legislation, and budget. The mayor may have authority to appoint chief administrative officer and staff for the mayor and city council, but subject to confirmation by the city council.
27 28
Form of Government Overview
29 Form of Government Overview
30 Form of Government Overview
Variation of Form:
• San Bernardino, CA: Mayor presides over the meeting with no voting authority. Mayor serves as a tie-breaking vote and may veto an item approved by fewer than five votes.
• Long Beach, CA: Mayor may deliberate at City Council meetings and has veto power over legislation.
• Alameda, CA: Mayor may take command of the Police and Fire Departments and govern by proclamation during an emergency. 31 City Council Appointment Authority:
Overview and Comparative Data
32 City Council Appointment Authority
33 Mayor-Council Appointment Authority
34 City Council Appointment Authority
(Charter Cities – 25 City Survey)
35 In the surveyed charter cities with a Council-Manager form of government:
• 38% appoint the City Manager and City Attorney (similar to Fremont). • 20% also appoint City Clerk.
• 28% also appoint a City Treasurer/Auditor.
• One City authorizes appointment of all department heads (Piedmont). * Note: Some cities authorize their city councils to confirm department heads. 58%
Key Considerations
36 Key considerations regarding additional appointment authority for the City Council:
• May result in shared sense of investment and accountability in appointment decisions.
• May provide sense of greater public trust in City leadership and appointment decisions.
• Appointment decisions may be guided by political influence instead of merit/qualifications.
• May impact recruiting and result in fewer qualified candidates.
Executive Recruiter Feedback
• Across California cities, City Council engagement in additional appointments uncommon
• Reduces candidate pool because it signals a shift away from Council/Mgr form of government, which top candidates seek
• When Council confirmation exists, it's seen more as ratification of a hiring decision
• Many cities have informal processes for informing and seeking input from Mayor/City Council regarding key appointments
37 Compensation and Staffing:
Overview and Comparative Data
38 General Law City Council Salary Limitations
California Government Code Section 36516.
…..
(E)
In cities over 150,000 up to and including 250,000 in population, up to and including two thousand five hundred fifty dollars ($2,550) per month
…..
(4)
The salary of council members may be increased beyond the amount provided in this subdivision by an ordinance or by an amendment to an ordinance, but the amount of the increase shall not exceed the greater of either of the following:
(A) An amount equal to 5 percent for each calendar year from the operative date of the last adjustment of the salary in effect when the ordinance or amendment is enacted. (B) An amount equal to inflation since January 1, 2024, based upon the California Consumer Price Index, which shall not exceed 10 percent for each calendar year. (5) No ordinance shall be enacted or amended to provide automatic future increases in salary. 39 Fremont Compensation Structure
• The Fremont Municipal Code 2.05.060 governs current salaries and compensation increases for Fremont City Councilmembers and the Mayor.
• California Government Code Section 36516 authorizes city councils, via ordinance, to set salaries and salary increases.
• California Government Code Section 36516.1 authorizes city councils, via ordinance, to authorize additional compensation for the mayor in addition to the base councilmember salary.
40 Fremont Compensation Structure
41 Fremont Municipal Code: Compensation increases shall be reviewed during each budget cycle and increases shall be considered commensurate with the Consumer Price Index – All Urban Consumers, San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward Metropolitan Area in an amount not to exceed four percent. Any increase to the councilmembers’ salaries shall become effective only upon commencement of a new council term of office following adoption of an ordinance authorizing the increase. Any increase to the mayor’s additional compensation (the amount that exceeds the councilmembers’ salary amount) shall become effective as set forth in the ordinance adopting the increase.
Last City of Fremont Official Pay Increase: 7.2% (annualized at 3.1% per year) enacted on December 10, 2024
Next City of Fremont Official Pay Increase: Consideration in 2026 for possible December 2026 Implementation
Compensation Considerations
42 Total Compensation: All forms of compensation inclusive of salary, health benefits, and all other benefits with financial value are included in analysis Regional Markets: Focus on comparative agencies within same region to align cost of living and community factors
Part-time vs. Full-time: These are practical descriptions and are not legal definitions.
Typical features of a “part-time” council or mayoral position include the ability for that official to maintain additional outside employment and lower levels of pay.
Key Considerations for Compensation
POTENTIAL ADVANTAGES OF FULL-TIME
PAID COUNCIL AND MAYOR
-Full pay may align better with community
expectations and workload/time
commitment demands of the position
-Full time pay may broaden the pool of
potential candidates by reducing economic
barriers to achieving office
-Full-time pay may allow representatives to
focus more (or all) of their time on the work
of the elected body
POTENTIAL DISADVANTAGES OF FULL-
TIME PAID COUNCIL AND MAYOR
-Creating an economic incentive to achieve
and maintain office may create a permanent
political class of representatives in the future
-Future representatives, dependent upon
maintaining a salary, may act to preserve that
economic benefit, to the exclusion of long-
term good governance
-Full-time assignment would suggest that
representatives may not maintain concurrent
outside employment, limiting some types of
candidates
43 For further reading: Stanford Law Review – Compensating City Councils (review.law.stanford.edu/wp- content/uploads/sites/3/2018/03/70-Stan.-L.-Rev.-839.pdf) Charter Cities Surveyed for Comparison
Alameda
Albany
Berkeley
Emeryville
Hayward
Mountain View
Oakland
Palo Alto
Piedmont
Richmond
San Jose
San Leandro
San Mateo
Santa Clara
Santa Rosa
Sunnyvale
Vallejo
44 45
Survey Summary and Cost Implications
Modeled Group Median Compensation Annual Cost Implications of Model (applied to 6 CMs)
All Surveyed Agencies $59,320 ($135,757)
Part Time Agencies Only $51,992 ($91,783)
Full Time Agencies Only $147,392 ($664,185)
Current Fremont Compensation $36,694 N/A
Modeled Group Median Compensation Annual Cost Implications of Model
All Surveyed Agencies $70,017 ($9,067)
Part Time Agencies Only $63,863 ($2,914)
Full Time Agencies Only $254,940 ($193,990)
Current Fremont Compensation $60,949 N/A
Councilmember
Mayor
Fremont Compensation Structure
46 Elected Position Monthly Salary Monthly
Benefits
Monthly Total
Compensation
Annual Total
Compensation
Fremont Mayor $4,624
$455 $5,079 $60,949
Fremont Councilmember $2,603 $455 $3,058 $36,694
Fremont Municipal Code: Health Benefit Allowance is not regulated by State Law. The City Council could adjust its current HBA via resolution under existing law/structure.
Current City of Fremont represented full-time employee HBA: $2,900/month Annual value of adjusting HBA to align with full-time COF represented employees: $29,340/year 47 Potential HBA Increase (Part-Time)
Elected Position Monthly Salary Monthly
Benefits
Monthly Total
Compensation
Annual Total
Compensation
Fremont Mayor $4,624 $455 $5,079 $60,949
Fremont Councilmember $2,603 $455 $3,058 $36,694
Current:
If Mayor and Councilmembers receive HBA benefit commensurate with the City of Fremont’s ‘part-time’ employees:
Elected Position Monthly Salary Monthly
Benefits*
Monthly Total
Compensation
Annual Total
Compensation
Median Total
Compensation-
Part-Time Cities
Fremont Mayor $4,624 $1,450* $6,074 $72,886 $63,863
Fremont
Councilmember $2,603 $1,450* $4,053 $48,631 $51,992
*This reflects 50 percent of the monthly HBA amount for the ‘full-time’ City of Fremont employees. 48 Potential HBA Increase (Full-Time)
Elected Position Monthly Salary Monthly
Benefits
Monthly Total
Compensation
Annual Total
Compensation
Fremont Mayor $4,624 $455 $5,079 $60,949
Fremont Councilmember $2,603 $455 $3,058 $36,694
Current:
If Mayor and Councilmembers receive HBA benefit commensurate with the City of Fremont’s ‘full-time’ employees:
Elected
Position
Monthly
Salary
Monthly
Benefits
Monthly Total
Compensation
Annual Total
Compensation
Median Total
Compensation –
Full-Time Cities
(only 3 in survey)
Median Total
Compensation –
All Surveyed Cities
Fremont Mayor $4,624 $2,900 $7,524 $90,286 $254,940 $70,017 Fremont
Councilmember $2,603 $2,900 $5,503 $66,031 $147,392 $59,320 Legal Limitation for HBA Increase
49 • Under State law, the HBA for a part-time elected official may only be increased commensurate with the equivalent part-time employee HBA rate.
• City Council may define ‘part-time’ as a percentage and recommend an HBA increase to match that percentage (i.e., if part-time is defined as 75%, an HBA equal to 75% of the full- time employee rate is permitted).
Staffing Survey*
Agency Pop. Position Title Top of Range
Salary**
# of Budgeted
Positions
City of San Jose*** 990,138
Administrative Assistant $100,900 2
Executive Assistant $109,894 9
Principal Office Specialist $90,679 1
Secretary to Mayor $105,574 1
Senior Office Specialist $81,485 2
Staff Specialist $100,900 1
50 * Survey results are displayed for Cities with apparent direct staff budgeted to elected officials in published budget documents.
** Salary range only. Total compensation typically includes additional 30%-40% benefit load/expense. *** Council aids are not included in City of San Jose published document but would be accounted for in a more comprehensive staffing survey.
Staffing Survey*
Agency Pop. Position Title Top of Range
Salary**
# of Budgeted
Positions
City of Oakland 439,418
Council Admin Assistant $84,033 5.5
Council Assistant $130,362 16.4
Exec Asst to the City Council $118,290 1
Special Asst. to Mayor III $245,912 12
City of Berkeley 120,257
Assistant to Mayor $170,895 4
Legislative Aid $153,586 19
City of Santa Clara 130,256
Assistant to City Manager $274,020 1
Assistant to Mayor & Council $165,412 1
Management Analyst $167,957 1
51 Staffing Survey*
Agency Pop. Position Title Top of Range
Salary**
# of Budgeted
Positions
City of Richmond 115,505
Administrative Analyst $109,315 2
Administrative Assistant $99,831 1
Associate Management Analyst $144,508 1
Executive Assistant I $91,274 1
Project Coordinator $158,959 1
52 * Survey results are displayed for Cities with apparent direct staff budgeted to elected officials in published budget documents.
** Salary range only. Total compensation typically includes additional 30%-40% benefit load/expense.
Staffing Survey*
Agency Pop. Position Title Top of Range
Salary**
# of Budgeted
Positions
City of San Leandro 87,826 Administrative Assistant II $95,968 1 City of Vallejo 124,268 Executive Assistant to the
Mayor $88,568 1
City of Alameda 77,238 Principle Executive Assistant $121,700 .5 53 * Survey results are displayed for Cities with apparent direct staff budgeted to elected officials in published budget documents.
** Salary range only. Total compensation typically includes additional 30%-40% benefit load/ expense.
Charter Advisory Committee Recommendations
54 Workplan
The Charter Advisory Committee developed recommendations on Work Plan topics:
55 Governance Structure:
• Form of Government
• Council Authority
• Meeting Structure
• Council Voting
Executive Roles:
• Executive Authority
• Appointment Authority
Term Limits:
• Council Term Limits
• Mayor Term Limits
Council Compensation
and Office Support:
• Council Salary
• Staffing Options
• Budget Considerations
Governance Structure
Committee Recommendation:
• Maintain a Council-Manager form of government
operating under a city charter.
• Mayor and City Council to maintain their
current part-time status.
56 Executive Roles
Committee Recommendation:
• City Manager maintains appointment authority
over department heads (except for City Attorney),
subject to confirmation by the City Council.
57 Council Compensation and Office Support
Committee Recommendation:
• Match the Health Benefit Allowance (HBA) of elected
officials to that of the City’s full-time represented
employees.
• Allocate 1.5 employees to support the Mayor
and City Council.
58 Term Limits
Committee Recommendation:
• City Council: Increase the term limit to
three consecutive four-year terms.
• Mayor: Increase the term limit to three
consecutive four-year terms.
• Currently, the offices of Mayor and Council
have a two-term limit each.
59 Implementation of Recommendations
Implementation Options: Each of the Charter Advisory
Committee’s recommendations can be implemented by:
1. Adoption of City ordinances under existing general law authority, or
2. Adoption of City charter.
60 Fiscal Impact
Description Cost
Estimated cost to place a proposed City Charter on the November 2026 ballot $610,690 - $854,966 (one- time)
Potential annual cost (estimate) of total compensation for the Mayor and Councilmembers, ranging from a ‘part-time’ to a ‘full-time’ HBA scenario $364-672 - $486,472
per year*
Total annual cost (estimate) of 1.5 employees directly supporting the Mayor and Councilmembers $253,655 per year*
61 *The net increase to the City’s annual, ongoing General Fund expenditure is estimated to be $337,214 to $459,014
Next Steps
1. Council Questions for Staff;
2. Open the Public Hearing;
3. Close the Public Hearing;
4. Council Comments; and
5. Council Direction.
62