AGENDA CORRESPONDENCE
RECEIVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR
PUBLIC REVIEW PRIOR TO THE
MEETING
AGENDA NO: 7c
MEETING DATE: July 22, 2025
2 Dear City Council,
How does one lease this building without the kitchen? Will the kitchen be blocked off? Would the City charge more if the kitchen were included? Sincerely,
Betty Winholtz
AGENDA CORRESPONDENCE
RECEIVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR
PUBLIC REVIEW PRIOR TO THE
MEETING
AGENDA NO: 9a
MEETING DATE: July 22, 2025
2 Circular 230 Disclosure: Pursuant to U.S. Treasury Department Regulations, we are required to advise you that, unless otherwise indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this communication, including attachments and enclosures, is not intended or written to be used, and may not be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
THIS MESSAGE MERELY CONTAINS THE AUTHOR'S GENERAL COMMENTS AND DOES NOT ESTABLISH AN ATTORNEYCLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
22 July 2025
Subject: Item 9.a, July 22, 2025 Morro Bay Council
Dear Mayor and City Council:
Procedure is power under the rule of law. The changes proposed in item 9.a are not merely housekeeping. They create new powers, especially for the Mayor, and change relationships between Council, staff and the public with serious consequences. This item should be tabled for a more thorough and transparent discussion.
We were surprised to see Item 9.a with such extensive proposed changes to council policies and procedures on the agenda. We assume this item was properly discussed, a committee identified, action steps proposed, and agendized at some point in the past, though we apologize we do not remember that happening.
The appropriate way to create, discuss and adopt policy changes binding on this and future Councils should use a known committee including qualified people selected by the full Council, not just “as recommended by Mayor Wixom and staff”.
There are many ways to constitute this committee. In the past when issues arose with the Council policy, the Council appointed a subcommittee of two Members who worked out a draft and returned it to Council for public discussion. However, the committee could be composed of qualified people who are NOT within the Morro Bay jurisdiction. We think similar policies must be widely available as models and it would be reasonable to expect best standards are also available in peer organizations like the California League of Cities.
Though there are many points in the proposal needing further discussion before adoption (the confidentiality, public comment and teleconferencing sections come to mind), we want to focus briefly on the final, apparently all new section of the policy in Chapter 8: Enforcement. A couple points:
Section 8.2.2 outlines the evaluation of a complaint against a Council member. The committee to make the evaluation includes the Mayor (or Mayor Pro Tem if the Mayor is the subject of the complaint), City Attorney, and City Manager. They are to “determine the validity of the complaint and, if appropriate, an initial course of action as discussed below.” This group of people is not qualified to determine the “validity” of anything at this point in the process. They may also be implicated in the subject of the complaint in a way that precludes their ability to be objective.
Further in section 8.2, the same committee would also decide if a substance of a complaint constitutes a “minor” or “major” violation of the Code of Conduct or other City policies. These terms are not defined in a way that eliminates the possibility of bias. This matters because a “major” violation would be referred to outside counsel possibly leading to a public hearing.
The public hearing described in section 8.2.6 would put the Council Member who is the subject of the complaint in a trial-like setting at which the “rules of evidence to [sic] not apply” and is not conducted as an “adversarial proceeding.” In other words, normal due process would not take place, the ultimate decision would be taken by the elected Council based on public testimony of unknown and unrestricted quality, and public punishments could be doled out.
This is no way to run a Council. Please start over.
Sincerely,
Marlys McPherson and Glenn Silloway
Morro Bay, CA
2 1.3.6.5 For both the council's and the audience's sake, the motion should be repeated each time.
1.3.7.2 The last line in this paragraph contradicts the preceding paragraph, and is illegal.
2.3 ACCESS TO COMMUNICATIONS / TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS I disagree that computers and phones should be offered to council members free of charge. The financial quote in the Fiscal Impact section only refers to the cost of providing phones, not including the cost of computers. Since council compensation was doubled 4 years ago, the 5 members can afford their own devices.
4.6 PRIVATE SOCIAL MEDIA AND DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS acknowledges that private devices are subject to the Brown Act, so there is no need to offer personal devices for free from the city to the council member.
5.6.3 “PRIVATE, PERSONAL, CONFIDENTIAL” MAIL In the first paragraph of this section, it states, "If mail has not been retrieved from the Council Members mailbox within two business days," 2 days seems too short of a time period. What if the council member is out of town for more than 2 days?
The Conclusion states, "Once finalized, staff will incorporate relevant policy updates into the Advisory Bodies Handbook and bring that back for approval at a future meeting." The Rec/Parks Commission has formally forwarded desired changed to its By-Laws; when Council changes return to be included in the Advisory Handbook, may the Rec/Park changes be include?
Sincerely,
Betty Winholtz