Attachment 2 – General Law City and Chart City Pros and Cons Type Pros Cons
General Law
City
Clear statewide framework:
Operations are guided by the
California Government Code,
reducing ambiguity in interpretation
and implementation.
Lower administrative complexity:
Fewer city-specific governance
documents or procedures to
maintain.
Lower legal exposure: Following
established state rules minimizes
litigation risk around governance
authority.
Cost-efficient: No need to draft,
adopt, or amend a city charter;
avoids election costs.
Predictable processes for staff:
Standardized rules streamline
training, onboarding, and
compliance.
Limited local autonomy:
Must adhere to state-mandated
procedures even when they do
not align well with local priorities
or operational efficiency.
Less flexibility in procurement
and contracting:
Required to follow Public
Contract Code rules that may
slow project delivery.
Governance rules are fixed:
Changes to council structure,
election sequencing, or
administrative organization are
constrained by state law.
Innovation constraints:
Difficult to pilot or tailor policies
because statewide uniformity
often limits local customization.
Charter City Greater control over municipal
affairs:
Ability to create local rules for
elections, contracting, governance
structure, public works delivery, and
other local functions.
Local procurement flexibility:
Cities may adopt alternative bid
thresholds, design-build processes,
and other tools that can accelerate
projects and reduce costs.
Governance customization:
Can adjust council size, district
election structures, term limits, or
the form of government through the
charter.
Higher legal risk:
Cities must continually assess
whether a given issue is a
“municipal affair” or a “matter of
statewide concern,” which can
lead to litigation if unclear.
Requires significant legal and
administrative capacity:
Drafting, maintaining, and
interpreting a charter will
demand more time from the City
Attorney’s Office.
Costly to adopt or amend:
Charter processes require voter
approval, specialized drafting,
and extensive community
engagement.
Attachment 2 – General Law City and Chart City Pros and Cons Policy innovation:
Ability to design tailored programs
reflecting local needs rather than
applying statewide norms.
Opportunity for cost savings:
More flexible public contracting
rules can improve efficiency in
capital projects.
Stronger local identity: A charter
can codify community values and
governance priorities.
Not exempt from matters of
Statewide Concern:
Despite broader autonomy, state
mandates still apply in areas
such as housing (RHNA, SB
35), environmental laws, ethics,
transparency, elections
administration, and labor
standards.
Ongoing maintenance:
Charters often need periodic
updates as legal standards
evolve, creating long-term
administrative obligations.