10b
26-89762
CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM
Report: Charter Review - Update and Direction on Potential Charter Amendments Pertaining to Council-Manager Governance, Council Compensation, Civil Service System, Elected vs. Appointed City Clerk and City Treasurer, and Miscellaneous Matters
1. Motion to Note and File, and Provide Direction to Staff
COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for April 14, 2026 calendar
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report follows up the reports of November 4, 2025, and March 24, 2026, related to potential amendments to the City Charter. During the March 24, 2026, meeting, the Council deliberated on potential Charter amendments related to civil service, council- manager governance, elected vs. appointed City Clerk and City Treasurer, and miscellaneous issues, in addition to a follow-up regarding Council districts, directly elected Mayor and Council compensation.
RECOMMENDATION
That, if Council is so inclined, it provide direction on potential Charter amendments for the November 2026 election.
ANALYSIS
On November 4, 2025, the Council received a status update on the activities of the Charter Review Committee (“Committee”) regarding consideration of Charter amendments relating to Council districts, directly elected Mayor, Council compensation matters and some miscellaneous matters. On March 24, 2026, the Council discussed potential Charter amendments related to civil service, council-manager governance, elected vs. appointed City Clerk and City Treasurer, and miscellaneous issues, in addition to a follow-up regarding Council districts, directly elected Mayor and Council compensation. The reports for the November 4, 2025, and March 24, 2026, discussions, including the recommendations of the Committee Committee are set forth in Exhibits 1 and 2, respectively.
The Council provided direction or reached majority consensus on some of the 10b 2
26-89762
discussion items, while not reaching consensus and needing additional briefing or additional time to consider other items.
Rule of Three Whole Scores: Three councilmembers agreed with a proposal to amend the Charter to allow hiring managers to interview candidates within the top three whole scores rather than just the top three ranked candidates; one councilmember expressed general support for the concept while requesting additional briefing; and another councilmember needed additional time to make a decision.
Length of Probationary Period: Four councilmembers agreed with a proposed Charter amendment to change the length of the probationary period to a maximum of 18 months, with public safety sworn personnel remaining at 12 months.
Promotional Reallocation: Neither a majority nor a consensus was achieved on this item, with one councilmember expressing support, another councilmember needing additional briefing and other councilmembers not expressing opinions. At-Will Department Heads: Three councilmembers expressed support for making City department heads at-will instead of part of the classified service. Others expressed no opinion or needed to further evaluate.
Council approval of Hiring/Discharge of Councilmembers: Two councilmembers opposed removal of the Charter provision requiring Council approval for the City Manager’s hiring or removal of department heads, while one councilmember supported the City Manager having sole authority over the hiring and discharge of department heads. Other councilmembers expressed no opinion or the need for further briefing.
Non-interference provision: Three councilmembers supported the proposal to include a Charter provision that would prohibit councilmember interference in the administrative function and duties of the City Manager, while one councilmember opposed it.
Council districts and directly elected Mayor: Two councilmembers opposed a transition to Council districts and directly elected Mayor and one councilmember expressed a desire to set aside this issue from the November 2026 election. Two councilmembers did not express a preference or a position. Council compensation: Two councilmembers expressed a preference for a model tying councilmember salary to area median income (AMI), with one of those councilmembers expressing an opinion that any adjustment should not be applicable to the term of any sitting councilmember. Two councilmembers expressed support for maintaining consistency with state law provisions, supporting the Committee’s recommendation for a Charter provision requiring the Council to review and consider adjustments in accordance with state law every two years.
Elected vs. Appointed City Clerk and City Treasurer: Two councilmembers supported keeping the positions as elected positions, while two councilmembers supported converting the positions into appointed positions. Independent Audit Commission and Reexamination of Finance Positions: The Council did not express opposition to the Committee studying these issues. 10b 3
26-89762
Timing and Cost Issues
As noted previously, Charter amendments that “alter procedural or substantive protections, rights, benefits or employment status” of local government employees – such as the proposed civil service Charter amendments - must be placed on the ballot of a statewide general election, e.g. November 2026, November 2028. Other Charter amendments may occur at a statewide primary election, which coincides with the City’s general municipal election.
At the March 24, 2026, meeting, some councilmembers expressed a willingness to put the civil service amendments, along with other potential amendments, on the ballot for November 2026, but a decision has not been made.
As noted in Report to Council dated March 24, 2026 - if the Council desires to place Charter measures on the ballot for the November 2026 election, it will have to call a special election to be consolidated with the statewide general election that is run by Los Angeles County. The preliminary cost estimate to have a consolidated special election in November 2026 for ballot measures is $525,000 and $585,000, depending on the number of pages the ballot measures take up on the ballot. If the Council desires to place Charter amendments on the November 2026 ballot, it must do so no later than August 4, 2026.
Additional Information on Council Compensation
During prior discussions, councilmembers have expressed support – although direction has not been given – for tethering councilmember compensation to area median income (AMI), most notably having the councilmember serving as mayor receiving a salary equal to 100% of AMI and all other councilmembers receiving a salary equal to 80% of AMI. In pertinent part, state law defines AMI as follows:
“‘Persons and families of median income’ means persons and families whose income does not exceed the area median income, as adjusted by the department for family size in accordance with adjustment factors adopted and amended from time to time by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937.
As used in this section, ‘area median income’ means the median family income of a geographic area of the state, as annually estimated by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937.”
Federal and state law require adjustment of the area median family income determination based on family size. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) and the California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) calculate AMI with a family of four as the base and then adjust 10b 4
26-89762
AMI for household size from household sizes 1 person to 8 persons. HCD’s 2025 AMI determinations for household sizes 1 to 8 is as follows:
Household
size
123 4
(Base)
5678
Median
Income ($)
–L.A.
County
74600 85300 95950 106600 115150 123650 132200 140700
If the Council desires to place a Charter amendment on the ballot to tie council salary to area median income, staff recommends it refer to the definition of “area median income” as established pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 50093 and establish the household size for which the AMI determination will be made. For the sake of clarity, if AMI is chosen as the benchmark for Council salary, the Charter amendment language should indicate when the adjustment to salary will be made in conjunction with changes to AMI.
Further, it was suggested at the last meeting that, if a Charter amendment is submitted to tie Council salary to AMI, it not be applicable to the term of any sitting councilmember.
Staff note that this would – in literal terms – provide for different salaries for different councilmembers based upon which term they were elected. This potentially raises legal and fairness concerns. To address concerns that a salary increase not take effect immediately, the Council could adopt a provision similar to Government Code section 36516.5, which provides:
“A change in compensation does not apply to a council member during the council member's term of office. This prohibition shall not prevent the adjustment of the compensation of all members of a council serving staggered terms whenever one or more members of the city council becomes eligible for a salary increase by virtue of the council member beginning a new term of office.”
In this regard, a Charter amendment could tie the adjustment to AMI (or other benchmark or formula) to the time that at least one councilmember begins a new term.
Finally, for reference purposes and because there is councilmember support for the Committee’s recommendation to utilize state law provisions related to councilmember salary with a biennial review process, state law authorizes the City Council to adjust the salary from the current $1,430 per month to $2,550 per month which is the cap under state law for cities with populations over 150,000 up to 250,000. A city that adjusts the cap to $2,550 per month may make further adjustments up to 5% since the last adjustment or CPI (not to exceed 10%) since 2024, whichever is greater.
Compensation of, and Term Limits for, City Clerk/City Treasurer At its April 2, 2026, meeting, the Committee voted to recommend that the Council put on 10b 5
26-89762
the ballot two Charter amendments regarding the City Clerk and City Treasurer. First, the Committee unanimously recommended a Charter amendment that would prohibit a reduction in compensation paid to the City Clerk and City Treasurer beginning 30 days before the deadline to file nomination papers through the terms of their respective offices.
The recommended Charter amendment language is as follows:
Article IV Officers and Employees Generally.
§ 3 Compensation.
(b) Compensation and increase in compensation of city clerk and city treasurer.
The city treasurer and city clerk shall be compensated as directed by the council commensurate with the responsibilities of their offices, which compensation shall not be decreased during the terms of their respective offices. When Whenever percentage increases are granted to other city officers and executives employees generally, the council may grant shall also consider granting comparable percentage increases to the city clerk and the city treasurer. The compensation of the city clerk and city treasurer may also be increased during the terms of their respective offices by vote of the electors. In no event shall any increase or decrease in compensation of the city treasurer or city clerk be approved or take effect during the period starting thirty days before the deadline to file nomination papers for the applicable office through the first day of the next term of that office.
Second, by a vote of 5 to 3, the Committee recommended a Charter amendment that would impose a three-term limit on service as City Clerk or City Treasurer, either by election or appointment; exempt from such limit a partial term of less than one-half the full term of office; and apply only to terms of office beginning after the election at which such term limits are adopted by the electorate. Thus, such limits would mirror in all respects those applicable to members of the City Council.
The Committee will continue its discussion regarding minimum qualifications for City Clerk and City Treasurer at its next regular meeting, along with discussion of a Charter- authorized Audit Commission.
STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The Charter Review Committee is comprised of 12 Glendale residents representing a broad cross-section of the community. The meetings are open to the public and are televised on GTV6.
10b 6
26-89762
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report at this time. The preliminary cost estimate to have a consolidated special election in November 2026 for ballot measures is $525,000 and $585,000, depending on the number of pages the ballot measures take up on the ballot, which has not been included in the FY 2025-26 budget. Staff will provide an assessment of fiscal impacts if Council directs staff to finalize and submit Charter amendment language to the Council.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
This activity involves organizational and administrative activities of the government related to election procedures and eligibility requirements, and such internal procedural and eligibility changes have no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. As such, this action is not a “project” subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 14 Cal. Code Regs § 15378.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.
ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
1. Council may choose among the options provided by staff.
2. Council may choose an alternative not identified by staff.
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:
Michael J. Garcia, City Attorney
Prepared by:
Michael J. Garcia, City Attorney
Approved by:
Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager
EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
1. Staff Report on Update on Activities of Charter Review Committee, November 4, 2025
2. Staff Report on Update on Activities of Charter Review Committee, March 24, 2026