AR A ATTACHMENT A — Pasadena City Council, June 10, 2024 (part 1 of 3)

FINAL REPORT
Approved on May 23, 2024
Pasadena Charter
Study Task Force
Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Final Report
Table of Contents City Clerk’s Office
i
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................i Introduction............................................................................................................................. 1 Scope of Work................................................................................................................................ 1 City Charters................................................................................................................................... 2 Task Force Meetings and Objectives............................................................................................. 4 City Council Vacancies.............................................................................................................. 5 Background .................................................................................................................................... 5 Task Force Deliberations on City Council Vacancies...................................................................... 5 Recommended Charter Language on Council Vacancies .............................................................. 7 Vice Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore ........................................................................................ 9 Background .................................................................................................................................... 9 Task Force Deliberations on the Vice Mayor............................................................................... 10 Recommended Charter Language on the Vice Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore........................ 10 Term Limits for the Mayor and Council ................................................................................... 12 Background .................................................................................................................................. 12 Task Force Deliberations on Term Limits..................................................................................... 12 Recommended Charter Language on Term Limits...................................................................... 14 Timing of Mayoral Elections.................................................................................................... 15 Background .................................................................................................................................. 15 Task Force Deliberations on the Timing of Mayoral Elections .................................................... 15 Task Force Recommendation on Timing of Mayoral Elections ................................................... 16 Campaign Contribution Limits................................................................................................. 17 Background .................................................................................................................................. 17 Task Force Deliberations on Campaign Contribution Limits ....................................................... 17 Task Force Decision on Campaign Contribution Limits ............................................................... 19 Council Compensation............................................................................................................ 20 Background .................................................................................................................................. 20 Task Force Deliberations on Compensation ................................................................................ 21 Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Final Report
Table of Contents City Clerk’s Office
ii
Task Force Recommendations on Compensation ....................................................................... 21 Recommendations of the Charter Study Task Force ................................................................ 24 Filling a Council District Vacancy.................................................................................................. 24 Vice Mayor/Mayor Pro Tempore................................................................................................. 24 Term Limits for the Mayor and Council ....................................................................................... 25 Timing of the Mayor’s Election.................................................................................................... 25 Campaign Contribution Limits..................................................................................................... 25 Mayor/Council Compensation..................................................................................................... 26 Redline Version of Recommended Charter Language .............................................................. 27 Clean Copy of Recommended Charter Language ..................................................................... 33 Minutes of the Task Force Meetings ....................................................................................... 39 Consultant and City Staff Reports to the Task Force ................................................................ 40 Task Force Membership – Biographies/Applications ............................................................... 41 Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Final Report
Executive Summary City Clerk’s Office
i
Executive Summary

THE PASADENA CITY CHARTER
The City Charter establishes the organization, powers, functions, and essential procedures of the City of Pasadena. The Charter is, in effect, the City’s constitution, carrying the force and effect of law and defining the framework within which the City operates. It also establishes the relationship between the City’s government and its residents. The Charter addresses such issues as elections, terms of office, and the City’s governance structure. Establishing or amending the Charter requires a municipal election, and any changes to the Charter require a majority of votes cast by registered voters within the City. Pasadena’s City Charter was originally adopted in 1901 and has been amended by the voters 55 times since its adoption, most recently on March 5, 2024.

THE CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
In Fall 2023, the City Council convened a Charter Study Task Force comprised of City residents representing the seven Council districts and the Mayor, as well as At Large City representatives.

The Council directed the Task Force to examine and make recommendations to the Council on the following topics:
• Vacancy Appointment Process for Mayor and City Council - Consider options for allowing Special Elections (Charter Sections 403 and 404)
• Vice Mayor Appointment Process, Timing, and/or Length of Term (Charter Sections 401 and 407)
• Term Limits for the Mayor and City Council
• Campaign Contribution Limits
• Timing of Mayoral Election (Charter Sections 401 and 406) • City Council Compensation, broadly, as well as dedicated childcare and eldercare allowances for members of the City Council (City Charter Section 405) The City Council assigned the City Clerk, City Attorney, and City Manager to support the work of the Task Force and approved a contract with Baker Tilly, LLP’s Public Sector Advisory Group to provide technical support and expertise in the areas of charter study. Baker Tilly was also hired to assist in the development of the Task Force’s final report.

The Task Force held 10 public meetings between December 2023 and May 2024, thoroughly analyzing, deliberating, and considering input on all matters within its Council-directed scope.

The Task Force made eight recommendations requiring amendments to the Charter and several recommendations that can be implemented without amending the Charter. The Task Force’s recommendations are summarized below in order of priority as determined by the Task Force.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Final Report
Executive Summary City Clerk’s Office
ii

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Council Vacancy Appointments
The Task Force recommends the following changes to the vacancy appointment process for members of the City Council elected by District:

1. Council appointment within 75 days for Council District vacancies occurring with less than two years remaining on the unexpired term. Add a six-month residency requirement for any individual seeking appointment to a Council District vacancy, and add “death” as a cause of vacancy.

2. Special election for Council District vacancies occurring with more than two years remaining on the unexpired term, or if the Council fails to make an appointment within 75 days (in lieu of “chosen by lot”).

Vice Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore
The Task Force recommends the following changes to the process for filling Mayoral vacancies and selecting a Vice Mayor:

3. Mayor Pro Tempore selected from amongst the Council to serve if a vacancy occurs in the Mayor’s seat. Mayor Pro Tempore assumes the duties of Mayor until seat is filled at the next general municipal election.

4. Vice Mayor elected annually from amongst the Council at the organizational meeting in December, and serves a one-year term. Vice Mayor exercises the duties of the Mayor during the Mayor’s absence.

Term Limits
The Task Force recommends establishing term limits as follows:

5. Councilmember can serve no more than three consecutive terms as Councilmember.

At least a four-year hiatus is required from the seat, and then the member may serve two additional terms. Total term limit is no more than five terms in Council District seats. Elected partial terms of two years or more count towards the term limit. Term limits are applicable to terms of office beginning on or after January 1, 2025.

6. Mayor can serve no more than three consecutive terms. At least a four-year hiatus is required from the Mayor’s seat, and then the member may serve two additional terms as Mayor. Total term limit is no more than five terms in the Mayor’s seat.

Elected partial terms of two years or more count towards the term limit. Term limits are applicable to terms of office beginning on or after January 1, 2025.1 1 The vote to recommend establishing Term Limits for Mayor and City Council was five members in favor, three members in opposition, and two members absent (see Page 12 of this report and the CSTF Minutes from the February 7 and March 14, 2024 meetings for additional detail).

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Final Report
Executive Summary City Clerk’s Office
iii
Timing of Mayoral Election

7. The Task Force recommends no changes to the timing of the Mayoral election.

Campaign Contribution Limits

8. The Task Force recommends establishing campaign contribution limits by ordinance:
$1,000 per person/entity, per election for Council District races, and $2,500 per person/entity, per election for Mayor races. Recommendation is contingent on City Attorney’s Office establishing a framework for enforcement.2

9. The Task Force also recommends amending the Charter, if an ordinance is adopted, to restrict changes to the ordinance to occur no more frequently than once every two election cycles, after enactment or amendment.

Council Compensation

10. The Task Force recommends the City Council convene the Council Compensation Committee as soon as possible, and recommends amending the Charter to require that the Council Compensation Committee convene no less than once every five years.

Additional Task Force Recommendations Not Requiring Charter Amendments

11. Vacancy: Council to establish by ordinance the details and process for Council District vacancy appointments, including a process for robust public outreach and engagement.

12. Vice Mayor: Vice Mayor selection process to consider seniority and the benefit of rotation of the role of Vice Mayor.

13. Term Limits: Council to adopt a formal onboarding process for new Councilmembers and implement a Council-driven public information process to encourage individuals to run for public office.

14. Council Compensation: Council Compensation Committee to discuss the issue of "family care" as a broader category than childcare (or eldercare), consider CPI increases for certain Council office benefits, and revise methods of reimbursement to increase efficiency and transparency.

CONCLUSION
The Task Force’s Charter amendment recommendations are presented to the City Council for consideration for placement on the November 5, 2024 general election ballot, or at a subsequent election as determined by the Council. The additional recommendations not requiring Charter amendments are presented to the City Council for consideration for implementation at the appropriate time, and as determined by the Council.
2 The vote to recommend establishing Campaign Contribution Limits for Mayor and City Council was seven members in favor, two members in opposition, and one member absent (see Page 17 of this report and the CSTF Minutes from the March 28, April 25, and May 9, 2024 meeting for additional detail).

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Final Report
Introduction City Clerk’s Office
1 Introduction
Scope of Work
Following a series of discussions held in September, October, and November 2023, the Mayor and City Council convened a Charter Study Task Force comprised of residents of the City representing the seven Council districts, Mayor, and two At Large City representatives. The Task Force examined and made recommendations on the following topics:
• Vacancy Appointment Process for Mayor and City Council - Consider options for allowing Special Elections (Charter Sections 403 and 404)
• Vice Mayor Appointment Process, Timing, and/or Length of Term (Charter Sections 401 and 407)
• Term Limits for the Mayor and City Council
• Campaign Contribution Limits
• Timing of Mayoral Election (Charter Sections 401 and 406) • City Council Compensation, broadly, as well as dedicated childcare and eldercare allowances for members of the City Council (City Charter Section 405)
The topics assigned to the Task Force focus on substantive governance issues related to the City Council. The Task Force’s charge is to study and fully examine each topic, and provide recommendations on whether or not to amend the City Charter in each instance. In addition, recommendations by the Task Force are made in priority order. This will assist the City Council as it considers the more pressing ballot questions/issues to submit to voters as part of the upcoming November 5, 2024 General Municipal Election.

This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Task Force and includes one section for each subject. The Task Force is proposing amended Charter language on Council Vacancies, the Vice Mayor position, the creation of a Mayor Pro Tempore position, Term Limits, Council Compensation Committee, and Campaign Contribution Limits. In addition, the Task Force provides policy recommendations related to assigned topics that do not necessarily warrant Charter amendments. With regard to the Timing of the Mayoral Election, the Task Force discussed the matter fully but recommended no changes.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Final Report
Introduction City Clerk’s Office
2 The report also includes an overview of ranked choice voting (RCV).

Although RCV was not within the assigned scope of the Task Force, ranked choice voting is included because members of the Task Force and several members of the public who submitted written comments and/or testified in-person or virtually at Task Force meetings raised the subject.

The following exhibits are included in an Appendix to this report: (1) redline and clean versions of proposed Charter language; (2) Task Force meeting minutes; (3) Consultant and City staff reports, including written comments from members of the public; and (4) Task Force member applications.

City Charters
The California Constitution authorizes the adoption of a city charter and provides that the provisions contained in such a charter have the force and effect of state law. Specifically, the “home rule” provision affirmatively grants charter cities supremacy over “municipal affairs” while the state of California retains authority over statewide matters. A City Charter is often referred to as a city’s constitution. The primary advantage of a charter is that it affords greater authority, control, and flexibility over city governance issues than the provisions provided by state law for general law cities. Amongst other topics, a charter city can address elections, terms of office, compensation, and the municipality’s governance structure.

Today, Pasadena is one of 121 cities in California with its own Charter. The remaining 361 cities operate as general law cities under the general laws of California.

The Pasadena City Charter was originally adopted in 1901 and has been amended 55 times by Pasadena voters. Establishing or amending a city’s charter requires a municipal election, and any proposed amendment must be approved by a majority of votes cast by registered voters within the city.

The most recent amendments to the Pasadena City Charter occurred on March 5, 2024, when Pasadena voters approved Charter Amendment Measures R, S, and T, which are technical in nature.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Charter Study Task Force and Support Team City Clerk’s Office 3 Charter Study Task Force and Support Team
Pasadena City Charter Study Task Force Members
Ken Chawkins, Chair District 6
Marcus Hatcher, Vice Chair District 3
Vince Farhat Mayor
Lena Louise Kennedy District 1
Margaret McAustin District 2
Liberty McCoy District 5
Paul Novak District 4
Diana Carbajal Mejia At Large
Raul Salinas At Large
Andy Wilson District 7
Note: The redacted application of each Task Force member is included in the Appendix.

City Officials
The City Council assigned City Clerk Mark Jomsky to provide primary staff support to the Task Force, including preparation and posting of Task Force agendas and minutes, coordinating the meeting schedule and technical support, and creating and maintaining a dedicated Task Force webpage to ensure all information is posted online and publicly accessible. The City Clerk and City Clerk staff also performed research, authored reports, and presented historical and contextual information as part of the Task Force’s deliberative process.

City Attorney/City Prosecutor Michele Bagneris and her staff attended all meetings to provide legal advice, prepare and present responses for information, and participated in Task Force discussions, as necessary. Alex Souto, Deputy City Manager, was also present at all Task Force meetings representing the City Manager’s Office and assisted in the preparation of reports, as well as researched and drafted City Charter language to capture recommended changes agreed on by the Task Force.

Baker Tilly LLP
The City of Pasadena engaged Baker Tilly LLP to advise the Task Force and support City staff. The team included Jay Trevino, Project Director, Shauna Clark, Special Advisor, and Al Zelinka, Director, all from Baker Tilly’s Public Sector Advisory group. Public Sector Advisory. Baker Tilly prepared the work plan and attended all Task Force meetings. They wrote statistical and analytical reports, assisted in the development of the final report, as well as providing administrative support to the Task Force.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Charter Study Task Force and Support Team City Clerk’s Office 4 Task Force Meetings and Objectives
The Task Force held an organizational meeting on December 9, 2023, at which time Ken Chawkins was elected Chair, and Marcus Hatcher was elected Vice Chair. City Clerk Jomsky presented the scope of work and proposed timeline. City Attorney Bagneris gave presentations on the Brown Act, as well as an overview of the powers of Charter cities. Baker Tilly presented a draft work plan as consultant support to the Task Force.

In addition to the January 20, 2024 meeting, the Task Force held two meetings per month thereafter; on February 7 and 22, March 14 and 28, April 11 and 25, and May 9 and 23 (meeting minutes and video recordings are posted online and available for public review). Each of these Task Force meetings focused on the assigned topics, with each topic undergoing at least two meeting rounds of framing of the issue, allowing for requests and responses for additional information and research, providing opportunities for public comment, and deliberation. The Charter Study Task Force considered the impetus behind assigned topics, studied the experiences of other cities, and sought out best practices in municipal governance.

The Task Force emphasized public participation, perspective, and discourse from all members of the community. Task Force members carefully reviewed and considered correspondence submitted through the City Clerk’s Office and listened to in-person and virtual public comments made at Task Force meetings. While the majority of Task Force meetings took place in the Pasadena City Hall Council Chamber, the Task Force did conduct two meetings in the community. On April 11, 2024, the Task Force held a meeting at Robinson Park Recreation Center, and on May 9, 2024, the Task Force held a meeting at H&H Jivalagian Youth Center.

During deliberations, if members concluded that changing the Charter might not be the best approach to an assigned topic, the body discussed and considered alternative approaches, including through policy approvals by the City Council, such as codified ordinances in the Pasadena Municipal Code. Overall, the Task Force sought to recommend Charter changes that addressed particular problems in an impactful but reasonable manner.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
City Council Vacancies City Clerk’s Office
5 City Council Vacancies
Vacancy appointment process for members of the City Council and options for amending the Charter to call for a special election to fill a vacancy
Background
In June 2022, the Honorable John Kennedy was re-elected to his third term as the District 3 Councilmember. Sadly, he passed away in July 2022 before his second term ended. In September and December 2022, the City Council appointed Justin Jones to complete Councilmember Kennedy’s second term and first two years of his third term. During and after the appointment process, community members and members of the City Council raised questions and concerns about the appointment process and the inability of District residents to vote on an elected representative to fill the unexpired term.

Currently, City Council vacancies are defined in Charter Section 403 and filled pursuant to Charter Section 404. These sections assign authority to the remaining members of the City Council to appoint a successor within 75 days of the vacancy occurring. If an appointment is not made within the required timeframe, the replacement is then chosen by lot. Whether selected by appointment or by lot, the person holds office for the remainder of the unexpired term until the next City general election.

Task Force Deliberations on City Council Vacancies
Task Force members discussed Charter Sections 403 and 404 on January 20; February 7; and February 22, 2024. They also reviewed state codes and compared the charters and municipal codes of nine comparable cities.

Although triggered by different timing or circumstances, every general law city and the nine comparison cities have a mechanism for appointing a qualified voter to a vacant Council seat. In general, special elections only occur if the Council fails to appoint.

On February 22, 2024, City Clerk Jomsky gave an in-depth presentation on the costs, timing, and methods for conducting special elections to fill vacancies on the City Council.

The Task Force considered and discussed:
• Advantages and disadvantages of filling vacancies by appointment • Whether the 75-day appointment period was too long
Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
City Council Vacancies City Clerk’s Office
6 • The need to include “death” as a cause of vacancy in Section 403 of the Charter
• The appropriate length of time for the Mayor and Council to fill a vacancy before an election is triggered
• Calling a special election in lieu of making an appointment • Define the appointment process by ordinance, or other document, to clearly articulate to the community the steps to be followed by Council leading up to a vacancy appointment
• The need for public outreach during the appointment process • Residency requirements for Council vacancy applicants • The concept of ranked choice voting
• Appointment followed by election if the appointment is not made within the official period (currently 75 days)
• A process that allows the district or city residents to call an election by petition
• Concerns that filling appointments by special election would leave the district without representation for up to a year
• Appointing an interim or caretaker to serve the district until the outcome of a special election
• The Charter provision that requires the Council to draw lots in the event they deadlock on an appointment
The Task Force considered cost and timing issues associated with conducting special stand-alone elections to replace the current appointment process to fill vacancies on the City Council. Using the recent District 3 vacancy as a case-study on cost, City staff provided information on estimated costs for an on-cycle special election in comparison with a special stand-alone election:
• Estimated cost for District 3 consolidated election on March 5, 2024 (on-cycle) is $58,929 (LA County Election Cost Estimator) • Estimated cost for District 3 stand-alone election on March 4, 2025 (off-cycle) is $892,000 (Estimate Letter prepared by Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters )
City staff also presented information on the estimated cost for conducting a citywide stand-alone election to fill a vacancy in the Mayor’s seat, with conservative estimates exceeding $5 million per election.

Lastly, the Task Force discussed timing issues in calling special stand-alone elections with less than two years remaining on an unexpired term. Staff presented possible timelines for a properly noticed special stand-alone election that might take as long as 120 to 180 days from the time a vacancy occurs. Consideration of these factors helped to inform the Task Force’s Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
City Council Vacancies City Clerk’s Office
7 recommendations regarding the appropriateness of appointing replacements or choosing to call special elections when vacancies occur.

Recommended Charter Language on Council Vacancies
After considering and discussing Council Vacancies over three meetings, the Task Force recommended the following changes to the Charter:

Recommendation 1
If a vacancy occurs among any member of the City Council that represents a Council District, and less than two years remain on the unexpired term for that office, the remaining members of the City Council shall, within 75 days after such occurrence, appoint a qualified resident voter of the unrepresented Council District; the appointee shall hold office until the office is filled at the next general municipal election. Any person seeking an appointment to a Council District vacancy shall be a resident in the district where the vacancy occurred for not less than one hundred and eighty (180) days immediately preceding the vacancy. The City Council shall adopt an ordinance to codify the appointment process to fill vacancies for Council District seats, which includes public notice and public input.

Recommendation 2
If two or more years remain on the unexpired term, or if there is less than two years remaining on the unexpired term and the City Council cannot agree on one person to fill the vacancy within 75 days of the vacancy occurring, the office shall be filled by special election. The special election shall be called by the remaining members of the City Council within thirty (30) days of the vacancy occurring, or at the next regular meeting of the City Council following the expiration of the 75-day deadline. The special election shall be held on the next regularly established primary municipal, general municipal, district, county, or state election date not less than 114 days from the call of the special election, unless the Council chooses to call a special election at an earlier point in time. The unexpired term shall be filled in either the primary or general special election, upon certification of the election results where one candidate receives a majority of the votes cast for the vacant office, consistent with City Charter Section 1204. Nothing herein provided shall limit the power of the City Council to provide by ordinance for the continuity of the City Government in the event of war, enemy-caused disaster, or common accident in which a majority of the members of the City Council are killed, missing, or injured so as to be unable to perform their duties.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
City Council Vacancies City Clerk’s Office
8 Relevant motions from the February 22, 2024, meeting:

A motion to recommend amending the Charter to require the City Council to make an appointment to fill a vacancy in a Council District seat if two years or less remain on an unexpired term, and call an election if two years or more remain on an unexpired term, was supported by the Task Force, but not unanimously, with six members voting in favor, one member in opposition, and three members absent.

A motion to recommend amending the Charter to maintain the 75-day period for the City Council vacancy appointment process, eliminate the Charter provision that stipulates a vacancy will be filled by lot (should the Council fail to timely appoint a person to fill the vacancy), and to add “death” as a cause of vacancy, was unanimously supported by the Task Force, with seven members voting in favor, and three members absent.

A motion to recommend the calling of a special election if the Council fails to timely appoint a person to fill the vacancy, was supported by the Task Force, but not unanimously, with four members voting in favor, three members opposing, and three members absent.

A motion to recommend a residency requirement of six months for those individuals seeking to be appointed to the City Council to fill a vacant unexpired term be added to the Charter, was unanimously supported by the Task Force, with seven members voting in favor, and three members absent.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Vice Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore City Clerk’s Office
9 Vice Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore
Vice Mayor Appointment Process, Timing, and/or Length of Term (Charter Sections 401 and 407)
Background
City Charter Section 407 currently states, “At its organizational meeting, the City Council shall elect from among the Councilmembers a Vice Mayor who shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Mayor during the latter’s absence or disability.” Prior to 2018, the Council’s Organizational meeting occurred annually on the first Monday in May. At the time, it was the Council’s practice that the Vice Mayor serve two oneyear terms. Then, as part of a Charter Amendment in 2018 to align the timing of City elections with statewide election dates, the timing of the Council’s Organizational meeting was changed to occur in December on the fifth Monday following the November statewide election date held in even years. With the Council’s Organizational meeting now rescheduled to occur once every two years, and the Vice Mayor selection prescribed to occur at the Organizational meeting, the process to select the Vice Mayor changed from annually in May to every two years in December. Additionally, and unchanged from prior practice, it is the Council’s tradition (though not required) to select the most senior member of the Council who had not yet previously served as Vice Mayor, to be the next Vice Mayor. A consequence of this tradition is that long-standing members of the Council may not serve more than once as Vice Mayor.

Both the issue of the two-year appointment of Vice Mayor (as a by-product of the City’s switch to even-year election dates) and the practice of selecting a member who has not yet served as Vice Mayor was the impetus behind the City Council assigning the topic for Task Force review.

In other cities in California, a Mayor Pro Tempore or Vice Mayor position exists to preside over meetings when the Mayor is absent. When a vacancy occurs in the Mayor‘s position, in most cities, the Council selects the successor from among its members.

Currently, Pasadena City Charter Section 404 states, in part, that in case of a Mayoral vacancy, the Vice Mayor shall, “...assume the duties of the office of the Mayor until the office shall be filled at the next regular general election....” This aspect of the Vice Mayor‘s role and duties contained in the current Charter was discussed and consider by the Task Force as part of its assigned scope of work to provide a recommendation on how the Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Vice Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore City Clerk’s Office
10 Council can deliberatively select a member of the Council to assume the duties of the Mayor during a vacancy.

Task Force Deliberations on the Vice Mayor
The Task Force considered and discussed:
• The process for choosing a Vice Mayor/Mayor Pro Tempore in other cities, including by rotation, which in the City of Glendale occurs monthly
• Selecting an interim Mayor from among the remaining members of the Council if a vacancy occurs
• The need for quick selection when filling a Mayoral vacancy • The process for selecting the Vice Mayor that had previously occurred annually and now occurs once every two years
• Determining a basis for appointing the Vice Mayor, including pros and cons for selecting based on seniority or rotational order • Choosing from among the remaining members of the City Council to assume the duties of the Mayor until the next election
• Creating a Mayor Pro Tempore position, to be selected from among the remaining members of the City Council, to assume the duties of Mayor in the event of a vacancy as an alternative to the Vice Mayor automatically assuming the Mayor’s duties
• Requiring five affirmative votes to select the Mayor Pro Tempore position
Recommended Charter Language on the Vice Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore
The Task Force voted to recommend by Charter Amendment the creation of a Mayor Pro Tempore position in the event of a vacancy in the Office of the Mayor, and changing the timing and length of term for the selection of a Vice Mayor to occur annually in December and for a term of one year:

Recommendation 3
Section 407 – The Mayor Pro Tempore
In the event of a vacancy in the Office of the Mayor, the City Council shall elect from among the remaining Councilmembers, a Mayor Pro Tempore who shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Mayor until the office shall be filled at the next general election.

The assumption of the duties of the Mayor Pro Tempore shall not require that the Mayor Pro Tempore relinquish his or her seat as a Councilmember elected or appointed from a district.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Vice Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore City Clerk’s Office
11 A motion to recommend amending the Charter to create a Mayor Pro Tempore position, to be selected by the City Council from the remaining members, and to assume the duties of the Mayor in the event of a vacancy until filled at the next general municipal election, was unanimously supported by the Task Force, with none absent.

Recommendation 4
Section 408. – The Vice Mayor
At its organizational meeting held annually in December, the City Council shall elect from among the Councilmembers a Vice Mayor who shall serve for one year and exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Mayor during the latter's absence.

A motion to recommend amending the Charter to change the timing of the Vice Mayor selection to occur annually in December, with the Vice Mayor to serve for a term of one year, was supported unanimously by the Task Force, with none absent.

The Task Force also unanimously recommended that when selecting the Vice Mayor, the Council consider seniority and allow for rotational participation, though neither factor need be a requirement.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Term Limits for the Mayor and Council City Clerk’s Office 12 Term Limits for the Mayor and Council
Term Limits for the Mayor and Council
Background
Charter Section 401 establishes four-year terms for the Mayor and the Council. There are no limits in the Charter to the number of terms an individual may serve as Mayor or Councilmember. As of 2018, 123 of California’s 482 cities (26%) and nine of the state’s fifty-eight counties (16%) had term limits for elected governing officials. Charter cities accounted for fifty-five of the 123 cities (45%) with adopted term limits.

There was a rapid uptick in the number of cities with term limits between 2018 and 2022 when voters in another 27 cities enacted them. Today, approximately 148 of California’s 482 cities (31%) have term limits, and the remaining 334 cities (69%) do not have term limits.

Task Force Deliberations on Term Limits
The Task Force discussed term limits on February 7 and March 14, 2024. On February 7, 2024, Baker Tilly reported on the nine comparison cities and found that Glendale, Long Beach, and Santa Monica have term limits set at three terms. Anaheim, Santa Barbara, and Torrance limit their elected officials to two terms. Both Anaheim and Torrance allow Councilmembers who have exhausted all terms to take a hiatus of two years and four years (respectively), and then run again.

During their deliberations, Task Force members discussed the advantages and disadvantages of term limits including the tradeoff between more opportunity for new voices and perspectives and the election of new members resulting in a loss of experienced and well-liked elected officials.

Members also considered and discussed:
• The framework for term limits, including the number of terms, the number of years, or a combination of both
• Positives and negatives of barring an elected official from running for re-election once terms have been exhausted (i.e., lifetime bans), or permitting a hiatus (of a specified time) away from the elected office to reset the term-limit clock
• Whether term limits should be the same for the Mayor as for the Council District seats
• Whether a partial term of less than two years should count as a full term
Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Term Limits for the Mayor and Council City Clerk’s Office 13 • The timing of when term limits would commence, which state law requires to be prospective only
• An onboarding program for new Mayors and members of the Council • Outreach to attract more people to run for public office in Pasadena On February 7, 2024, the Task Force asked Baker Tilly to identify officials in California cities with term limits, and to coordinate a dialogue with the Task Force at a meeting so that Task Force members and community participants might learn about the experiences of other cities with term limits, especially before and after the change to term limits.

On March 14, 2024, Dr. Julian Gold, Mayor of Beverly Hills, and Michael MacDonald, City Clerk of Ventura, spoke via Zoom about the advent of term limits in their respective cities and answered questions from the Task Force. Dr. Gold reported that he was instrumental in putting term limits on the Beverly Hills ballot in 2022, noting that voters approved the Beverly Hills measure by 82%. In both cities, there were Council Members who had been re-elected several times, and that this fact was part of the impetus to consider adopting term limits.

Mr. MacDonald stated his support for term limits but noted a specific problem in Ventura. The most senior members of the City Council had been in office for only three years. Term limits adopted in 2016 had created a high rate of turnover on the Council and resulted in a lack of experienced Council Members remaining to lead the City and mentor newer elected officials. Dr. Gold, however, noted that many former Council Members in Beverly Hills are available, and do in fact mentor and train newly elected Council Members.

Shauna Clark of Baker Tilly and City Clerk Jomsky reported on responses to surveys and other data collected from approximately 35 cities. Ms. Clark explained that impacts are difficult to determine because term limits in many municipalities are either too new or had been in place for so long that the initial perspectives on impacts were not available. She did note that based on reports provided by some cities, term limits brought more candidates into local elections.

A point of emphasis made during deliberations by the Task Force focused on state law provisions, which require that term limits apply prospectively.

If adopted in November 2024, the effective date for term limits in Pasadena would be January 1, 2025, and would therefore apply to members of the Pasadena City Council elected in November 2026 and 2028.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Term Limits for the Mayor and Council City Clerk’s Office 14 Recommended Charter Language on Term Limits
On March 14, the Task Force voted to recommend by Charter Amendment limits of three terms for members of the Council, including the Mayor.

Following a four-year hiatus, a termed-out Councilmember or Mayor would be allowed to run again for two additional terms. After a total of five terms, the elected official would not be permitted to seek the office previously held again.

Recommendation 5
No person may serve more than three consecutive terms of office as a Councilmember. Following a period of hiatus of not less than four years away from the office of
Councilmember, a person may serve two additional terms in the office of Councilmember. In no event shall any person serve more than five terms in the office of Councilmember.

Any term of elected service of two years or more shall count towards a full term for purposes of this section. The
limitation on the number of terms shall apply only to terms of office that began after January 1, 2025.

Recommendation 6
No person may serve more than three consecutive terms of office as Mayor. Following a period of hiatus of not less than four years away from the office of Mayor, a person may
serve two additional terms in the office of Mayor. In no event shall any person serve more than five terms in the office of Mayor. Any term of elected service of two years or more shall count towards a full term for the purposes of this section. The limitation on the number of terms shall apply to terms of office that began after January 1, 2025.

The motion to recommend amending the Charter to establish term limits (as detailed above) was supported by the Task Force, but not unanimously, with five members voting in favor, three in opposition, and two absent.

In addition to the recommended Charter Amendments, the Task Force unanimously recommended that the City Council adopt policies to formalize a Council-driven public information process to encourage and inform community members to consider running for office, as well as a well-designed onboarding process for new Councilmembers. The onboarding process should utilize resources and programs offered by municipal organizations such as the League of California Cities.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Timing of Mayoral Elections City Clerk’s Office
15 Timing of Mayoral Elections
Timing of Mayoral Elections
Background
As directed by the City Council, the Task Force examined the timing of Mayoral elections in relation to issues of fairness and equity for members of the Council seeking to run for the Mayor’s seat. Currently, four Councilmembers (Districts 1, 2, 4, and 6) are on the same electoral cycle as the Mayor. Since their election timing aligns with the Mayor’s race, those four Councilmembers must decide between seeking re-election to their Council seat and running for Mayor (candidates are prohibited from appearing twice on the same ballot, and so cannot run for two different elected positions at the same election). The three Councilmembers in Districts 3, 5, and 7 are provided, what some characterize as a “free ride,” in that they are not required to make the same decision. Since these three seats run on an opposite schedule to the Mayor’s seat, each Councilmember can run for Mayor and still retain their Council District seat if unsuccessful.

While changing the terms or election dates for Mayor might create opportunities for all Pasadena Councilmembers to seek the Mayor’s seat without having to choose between that and re-election, any of the solutions discussed by the Task Force had various drawbacks and downsides.

Task Force Deliberations on the Timing of Mayoral Elections The Task Force considered the timing of Mayoral elections on February 22 and April 11, 2024. One potential option considered and discussed in February was to change the length of the Mayor’s term from four years to either two-year or six-year terms. Members of the Task Force expressed concerns with issues related to two-year and six-year terms for Mayor.

Another potential option considered and discussed in February was to move the Mayor’s election “off cycle” from the Council elections and occur in odd years rather than even years.

On April 11, 2024, as requested by the Task Force, Baker Tilly and the City Clerk reported on the costs, consequences, and challenges of holding the Mayor’s election off cycle. Of the 88 cities in Los Angeles County, only Redondo Beach and Whittier3 hold elections that are not coordinated with 3 The City of Vernon was not included because it holds elections every year.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Timing of Mayoral Elections City Clerk’s Office
16 county, statewide and federal elections. These cities had invested in the equipment needed to conduct an election, including voting equipment, computers, staff resources, consultants, and software for tallying the vote.

Whittier apparently is now considering a change to their municipal election dates to coincide with statewide dates, citing low voter turnout in City elections (when compared with statewide election date turnout rates).

Another potential option considered and discussed by the Task Force related to a suggestion to conduct the Mayor’s election to coincide on Gubernatorial primary and general elections, and all other Council District elections held as plurality elections on Gubernatorial and Presidential November general election dates (highest vote wins, with no run-off). This option would allow Councilmembers to compete for the Mayor’s seat in the primary election and still have the option to run for re-election in the general election (unless the Councilmember was involved in a run-off for the Mayor’s seat). City Clerk Jomsky presented a PowerPoint presentation on the details of such an option, as well as adding another variation to include an off-cycle runoff election for any Council District seat to occur eight weeks after certification of the general municipal election.

Ultimately, the Task Force did not support any of the aforementioned potential options as a way to resolve the fairness issue and decided to recommend no changes to the Timing of the Mayor’s Election.

Task Force Recommendation on Timing of Mayoral Elections Recommendation 7
No changes be made to the Charter provisions on the timing of the Mayoral election cycle.

A motion to recommend to the City Council that no changes be made to the Charter regarding the timing of the Mayoral election cycle was unanimously supported by the Task Force, with two members absent.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Campaign Contribution Limits City Clerk’s Office
17 Campaign Contribution Limits
Campaign Contribution Limits
Background
Campaign Contribution Limits (CCLs) set limits to the amount of money a candidate can receive from a single source during an election. California Assembly Bill (AB) 571, became effective on January 1, 2021, and requires cities and counties to adopt local contribution limits or default to the state limits, currently $5,500. Prior to January 1, 2021, Pasadena and many cities in California had no contribution limits.

Contribution limits were discussed by the Council and the Legislative Policy Committee when AB 571 was first signed into law. While initially, the Council sought to maintain the status quo of no limits, following discussion and public input, the Council decided to take no action, and default to AB 571 statewide campaign contribution limits. At the time of setting the scope and charge of the Task Force, the Council asked the Task Force to review this issue and provide a recommendation on contribution limits.

Task Force Deliberations on Campaign Contribution Limits The Task Force discussed campaign contribution limits on March 28, April 25, and May 9, 2024. 4 The Task Force received written and oral public comments in support of and opposition to campaign contribution limits.

As part of this discussion, the Task Force examined the potential nexus between lower limits, and the diversion of donations to, and increase of activity by, Independent Expenditure Committees (IECs). The Task Force asked Baker Tilly and City staff to research whether a causal connection existed between lower limits and independent expenditures. The Task Force also considered the impact of independent expenditures on anti-corruption measures.

Independent Expenditures
An independent expenditure entails funding a communication expressly advocating for or against a clearly identified candidate, without coordination with said candidate. Unlike direct campaign contributions, independent expenditures are viewed as political speech, and enjoy some First Amendment protections, and therefore, face no financial limitations on contributions or expenditures.

IECs play a significant role in electoral processes, operating outside the purview of candidates’ campaigns. IECs spend money on behalf of, but not at the behest of candidates. Under the 4 See the meeting minutes for additional detail on the Task Force’s discussion and public comment on this issue, as well as the staff reports for written correspondence received.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Campaign Contribution Limits City Clerk’s Office
18 1976 Supreme Court decision Valeo v. Buckley, governments cannot curtail or require more disclosure of independent expenditures without running afoul of the First Amendment.

On April 25, 2024, City Clerk Mark Jomsky presented data on independent expenditure activities reported in the cities of Anaheim, Burbank, Irvine, Pasadena, and Santa Ana. Shauna Clark, Baker Tilly, presented data gathered from Burbank and the California Secretary of State’s Office reporting on independent expenditures in statewide elections. The data showed a rise in independent expenditures since AB 571 became effective, but the sample size was too small to prove a causal connection to AB 571.

Ultimately, a direct causal relationship between lower limits was not conclusively proven.

However, in certain scenarios, with the right issues and circumstances present, independent expenditures clearly provides an alternative pathway for money to play a role in local campaigns and affect local election results.

Anti-corruption Measures and Transparency
At the request of the Task Force, the City Attorney provided information on the newly enacted state law known as the Levine Act, which prohibits parties of a proceeding before the elected body from contributing more than $250 to an elected official’s campaign during the pendency of a proceeding before that elected body. The Levine Act also restricts Councilmembers, and their respective agents, from soliciting or accepting campaign contributions above $250 for the twelve months prior to a proceeding. Contributions from unions are statutorily exempt from the Levine Act and the City’s Taxpayer Protection Act.

Task Force members also considered and discussed the impacts of the Levine Act and Pasadena’s Article XVII “Taxpayer Protection Act” (TPA) as both relate to campaign contributions.

Shifting Campaign Contribution Limit Enforcement to the City The Task Force discussed potential consequences and costs in the City adopting contribution limits different from the limits set by AB 571. Under the rules of AB 571, any local entity that follows state default contribution limits can refer enforcement matters to the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). If the local entity adopts different limits than the state default campaign contribution limits, then enforcement falls to the local entity. Following is an excerpt from the FPPC’s posted FAQ on AB 571 regulations:
“If a city or county imposes contribution limits, is the Commission responsible for enforcing those limits?
No. The Commission will not regulate the administration or enforcement of the penalties. Cities or counties with existing limits or that adopt their own limits are not subject to the state limit and may impose their own penalties for violations.” Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Campaign Contribution Limits City Clerk’s Office
19 If the City adopts local campaign contribution limits, City staff would investigate and enforce the campaign disclosure provisions of the Political Reform Act. The Task Force discussed and raised concerns regarding the potential politicized nature and estimated costs surrounding enforcement of campaign contribution limits. In response to a request for cost estimates for City Attorney/City Prosecutor enforcement of campaign contribution limits, City staff cited the potential impact at $50,000 to $100,000 annually, at a minimum.

Task Force Decision on Campaign Contribution Limits
On May 9, following public input and thorough discussion, the Task Force voted to recommend campaign contribution limits be set by ordinance.

Recommendation 8
It is recommended that the City Council set by ordinance campaign contribution limits in the amount of $2,500 per person/entity, per election for the Mayor’s race; and $1,000 per person/entity, per election for each Council District race.

This recommendation is subject to the City Attorney’s Office establishing a framework for enforcement equivalent to or exceeding the enforcement provided by the FPPC.

A motion to recommend the City Council establish by ordinance campaign contribution limits (as detailed above) was supported by the Task Force, but not unanimously, with seven members voting in favor, two in opposition, and one absent.

Recommendation 9
It is recommended that the City Charter be amended to include a provision, “If the City Council adopts an ordinance implementing campaign contribution limits different than state limits, the ordinance may be amended no earlier than following the 2nd election cycle after its enactment or amendment.

A motion to recommend a Charter provision be added (in the event an ordinance implementing campaign contribution limits is adopted) was unanimously supported by the Task Force, with nine members voting in favor, zero in opposition, and one absent.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Council Comensation City Clerk’s Office
20 Council Compensation
Consider City Council compensation broadly, as well as
dedicated to childcare and elder care allowances
Background
On March 14 and March 28, 2024, the Task Force examined Charter provisions on compensation for the Mayor and Council, including childcare and eldercare (which was later recommended to be termed by the Task Force as “Family Care”).

Compensation as defined in Charter Section 405 and the Pasadena Municipal Code includes:
• Salaries, (sometimes called wages or stipends)
• Health and Welfare Benefits (Health and dental insurance, life insurance) • General Office expenses (telecommunications, internet, childcare) • One-time office expenses for the purchase of a computer and mobile phone • Out-of-pocket, reimbursable expenses which might include mileage or travel State Law on Council Compensation
Article XI § 5 (b) of the State of California Constitution empowers charter cities to determine the level of compensation for elected officials. At present in Pasadena, the Mayor’s monthly stipend is $2,794 plus benefits, and the monthly stipend for Councilmembers is $1,830 plus benefits. The stipend amount is increased on July 1st of each year by the Consumer Price Index percentage (as calculated pursuant to the Pasadena Municipal Code), but not to exceed 5%.

Compensation in general law cities complies with California government code provisions, linking compensation to population. Traditionally, compensation for general law cities was set at a minimal amount. However, as a result of the adoption of Senate Bill 329 in 2023, base salary compensation increased for these elected officials. For similarly sized general law cities as Pasadena, Councilmembers in cities with a population over 75,000 and up to and including 150,000 can currently receive $1,900 per month.

Charter Section 405 and Municipal Code Sections 2.05.210 and 2.05.220 The City of Pasadena’s method for setting salaries and benefits for the Mayor and City Council is set forth in City Charter Section 405, and the implementation of salaries and benefits is detailed in the Pasadena Municipal Code.
• Charter Section 405 – Formation of a compensation committee that makes recommendations on salaries and benefits (hereinafter “Council Compensation Committee”)
• Municipal Code Section 2.05.210 – Incorporates recommendations from the Compensation Committee on stipends (salaries)
• Municipal Code Section 2.05.220 – Provisions on benefits and reimbursement Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Council Comensation City Clerk’s Office
21 Task Force Deliberations on Compensation
The Task Force considered and discussed:
• Time commitments of the Mayor and Council, recognizing the workload that averages twenty hours per week for a Councilmember and more for the Mayor • Acknowledging the current strong City Manager/City Council form of government that recognizes the presence of professional full-time staff and diminishes the need for full-time salaried elected leaders
• The support currently provided by full-time, City-employed District Liaisons and the Liaison to the Mayor (also sometimes referred to as “Field Representatives”) • Salary and benefit comparisons with other cities, and if other cities employee equivalent staff support (District Liaisons)
• The salary setting process, including the appointment of a Council Compensation Committee
• The fact that a Council Compensation Committee has not convened since 2000 • The advantages and disadvantages of changing the method for establishing salaries and benefits
• Recommending that the Council appoint a Council Compensation Committee as soon as possible
• Keeping compensation low enough to avoid a full-time Mayor or Council, but high enough to promote diversity on the City Council (so that service on the City Council is not prohibitive due to financial constraints)
The Task Force discussed whether the Council Compensation Committee should be convened or whether the process should be changed. The City Attorney explained that per the Charter, Council Compensation Committee convened during a calendar year must disband after October 1 of each year.

Task Force Recommendations on Compensation
The Task Force adopted the following recommendations by unanimous vote:

Recommendation 10
(a) That the City Council convene the Council Compensation Committee as soon as possible, while also considering the October 1 provision contained in the City Charter, and to do so on a more regular basis;
(b) That the Council Compensation Committee consider replacing the term childcare with "family care" to incorporate a broader category of eligible reimbursements, and include Consumer Price Index (CPI) increases for certain benefits, not including stipends or health and welfare benefits, to support and promote diversity on the City Council, and revise methods of reimbursement to increase efficiency and transparency; and Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Council Comensation City Clerk’s Office
22 (c) Direct City staff to provide the Council Compensation Committee with copies of the report from Baker Tilly, a summary of State Senate Bill 329, and the meeting minutes from March 14 and March 28 Task Force meetings as background information.

Recommendation 11
The Task Force recommended by Charter Amendment that the Council Compensation Committee be required to meet not less than once every five years.

A motion to amend the Charter to require the City Council to convene the Council Compensation Committee not less than once every five years was unanimously supported by the Task Force, with nine members voting in favor, zero against, and one absent.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Ranked Choice Voting City Clerk’s Office
23 Ranked Choice Voting
Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) is not included in the Task Force’s assigned topics, nor was there a recommendation made by the Task Force on this issue. RCV did receive some attention by the Task Force in response to public comment and input and requested follow-up information from City staff to better understand the issue. In short, RCV allows voters to select—or “rank”— candidates for office in order of preference. If no one candidate receives 50% of the first-choice votes, the last place candidate is eliminated, and their second-place votes are reallocated among the remaining candidates. The process repeats itself until a winner is selected.

Proponents say that RCV increases the civility of elections (opponents are less likely to attack one another if attempting to garner 2nd and 3rd ranked votes from voters), reduces election costs, and produces results in a single election (no runoff necessary).

RCV is currently not an option provided by the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk. It also requires a separate voting system, hardware, software, and an extensive voter education campaign to implement. As happens in Alameda County, voters receive two ballots during statewide elections: the normal County ballot for federal, state, and local ballot measures, and the City RCV ballot.

The Task Force determined that the topic of RCV requires additional research and information, likely as its own charter study topic. If the City Council decided to pursue RCV, at a minimum, the Task Force would need authority from the City Council to continue this work, as well as additional time and resources to properly understand the positives and negatives associated with a change to RCV election format.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Recommendations of the Charter Study Task Force City Clerk’s Office 24 Recommendations of the Charter Study Task Force
Filling a Council District Vacancy
Recommendation 1 Appointment to Fill Council District Vacancy If a vacancy occurs among any member of the City Council that represents a Council District, and less than two years remain on the unexpired term for that office, the remaining members of the City Council shall, within 75 days after such occurrence, appoint a qualified resident voter of the unrepresented Council District; the appointee shall hold office until the office is filled at the next general municipal election. Any person seeking an appointment to a Council District vacancy shall be a resident in the district where the vacancy occurred for not less than one hundred and eighty (180) days immediately preceding the vacancy. The City Council shall adopt an ordinance to codify the appointment process to fill vacancies for Council District seats, which includes public notice and public input.

Recommendation 2 Special Election to Fill Council District Vacancy If two or more years remain on the unexpired term, or if there is less than two years remaining on the unexpired term and the City Council cannot agree on one person to fill the vacancy within 75 days of the vacancy occurring, the office shall be filled by special election. The special election shall be called by the remaining members of the City Council within thirty (30) days of the vacancy occurring, or at the next regular meeting of the City Council following the expiration of the 75-day deadline. The special election shall be held on the next regularly established primary municipal, general municipal, district, county, or state election date not less than 114 days from the call of the special election, unless the Council chooses to call a special election at an earlier point in time.

The unexpired term shall be filled in either the primary or general special election, upon certification of the election results where one candidate receives a majority of the votes cast for the vacant office, consistent with City Charter Section 1204. Nothing herein provided shall limit the power of the City Council to provide by ordinance for the continuity of the City Government in the event of war, enemy-caused disaster, or common accident in which a majority of the members of the City Council are killed, missing, or injured so as to be unable to perform their duties.

Vice Mayor/Mayor Pro Tempore
Recommendation 3 Mayor Pro Tempore
Section 407 – The Mayor Pro Tempore
In the event of a vacancy in the Office of the Mayor, the City Council shall elect from among the remaining Councilmembers, a Mayor Pro Tempore who shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Mayor until the office shall be filled at the next general election. The assumption of the duties of the Mayor Pro Tempore shall not Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Recommendations of the Charter Study Task Force City Clerk’s Office 25 require that the Mayor Pro Tempore relinquish his or her seat as a Councilmember elected or appointed from a district.

Recommendation 4 Vice Mayor
Section 408. – The Vice Mayor
At its organizational meeting held annually in December, the City Council shall elect from among the Councilmembers a Vice Mayor who shall serve for one year and exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Mayor during the latter's absence.

Term Limits for the Mayor and Council
Recommendation 5 Council Term Limits
No person may serve more than three consecutive terms of office as a Councilmember. Following a period of hiatus of not less than four years away from the office of Councilmember, a person may serve two additional terms in the office of Councilmember. In no event shall any person serve more than five terms in the office of Councilmember. Any term of elected service of two years or more shall count towards a full term for purposes of this section. The limitation on the number of terms shall apply only to terms of office that began after January 1, 2025.

Recommendation 6 Mayor Term Limits
No person may serve more than three consecutive terms of office as Mayor.

Following a period of hiatus of not less than four years away from the office of Mayor, a person may serve two additional terms in the office of Mayor. In no event shall any person serve more than five terms in the office of Mayor. Any term of elected service of two years or more shall count towards a full term for the purposes of this section. The limitation on the number of terms shall apply to terms of office that began after January 1, 2025.

Timing of the Mayor’s Election
Recommendation 7 Timing of Mayor’s Election
No changes be made to the Charter provisions on the timing of the Mayoral election cycle.

Campaign Contribution Limits
Recommendation 8 Campaign Contribution Limits (Ordinance) It is recommended that the City Council set by ordinance campaign contribution limits in the amount of $2,500 per person/entity, per election for the Mayor’s race; and $1,000 per person/entity, per election for each Council District race.

This recommendation is subject to the City Attorney’s Office establishing a framework for enforcement equivalent to or exceeding the enforcement provided by the FPPC.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Recommendations of the Charter Study Task Force City Clerk’s Office 26 Recommendation 9 Campaign Contribution Limits (Charter Amendment) It is recommended that the City Charter be amended to include a provision, “If the City Council adopts an ordinance implementing campaign contribution limits different than state limits, the ordinance may be amended no earlier than following the 2nd election cycle after its enactment or amendment.

Mayor/Council Compensation
Recommendation 10 Mayor/Council Compensation
(a) That the City Council convene the Council Compensation Committee as soon as possible, while also considering the October 1 provision contained in the City Charter, and to do so on a more regular basis;
(b) That the Council Compensation Committee consider replacing the term childcare with "family care" to incorporate a broader category of eligible reimbursements, and include Consumer Price Index (CPI) increases for certain benefits, not including stipends or health and welfare benefits, to support and promote diversity on the City Council, and revise methods of reimbursement to increase efficiency and transparency; and (c) Direct City staff to provide the Council Compensation Committee with copies of the report from Baker Tilly, a summary of State Senate Bill 329, and the meeting minutes from March 14 and March 28 Task Force meetings as background information.

Recommendation 11 Mayor/Council Compensation (Charter Amendment) The Task Force recommended by Charter Amendment that the Council Compensation Committee be required to meet not less than once every five years.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Redline Version of Recommended Charter Language City Clerk’s Office 27 Redline Version of Recommended Charter Language

Except as provided in subsection B, the term of office of the Mayor and Councilmembers shall be four years.

B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Charter, to transition to new election dates starting in 2018, the terms of office of the Mayor and Councilmembers elected in 2015 shall expire in December 2020 and the terms of office of Councilmembers elected in the year 2017 shall expire in December 2022.

C. Beginning in the year 2020, the terms of office of the Mayor and Councilmembers elected from Districts 1, 2, 4, and 6 shall commence in the year 2020 and in each fourth anniversary of the year 2020, and the terms of office of the Councilmembers elected from Districts 3, 5, and 7 shall commence in the year 2022 and in each fourth anniversary of the year 2022. The terms of office of the Mayor and Councilmembers shall commence at the time of the City's organizational meeting held on the fifth Monday following the statewide general election and until their respective successors are elected and have duly qualified.

D. No person may serve more than three consecutive terms of office as a Councilmember.

Following a period of hiatus of not less than four years away from the office of Councilmember, a person may serve an additional two terms in the office of Councilmember.

In no event shall any person serve more than five terms in the office of Councilmember. Any term of elected service of two years or more shall be considered a full term for purposes of this section. The limitation on the number of terms shall apply only to terms of office that begin after January 1, 2025.

E. No person may serve more than three consecutive terms of office as Mayor. Following a period of hiatus of not less than four years away from the office of Mayor, a person may serve an additional two terms in the office of Mayor. In no event shall any person serve more than five terms in the office of Mayor. Any term of elected service of two years or more shall be considered a full term for purposes of this section. The limitation on the number of terms shall apply only to terms of office that began after January 1, 2025. (Sec. 401 amended by vote of the people 6-5-2018: Sec. 401 amended by vote of the people 11- 3-1998: Sec. 401 amended by vote of the people 3-9-1993: Sec. 401 amended by vote of the people 11-4-1980, effective January 1, 1981.) Section 402. - ELIGIBILITY.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Redline Version of Recommended Charter Language City Clerk’s Office 28 The Mayor and each Councilmember shall be a qualified elector of the City. Each Councilmember shall be a resident of the district from which the Member is elected or appointed.
(Sec. 402 amended by vote of the people 11-3-1998: Sec. 402 amended by vote of the people 3- 9-1993: Sec. 402 amended by vote of the people 6-8-1976, effective August 1, 1976.) Section 403. - VACANCY DEFINED.

If the Mayor shall cease to be a resident of the City or if any Councilmember shall cease to be a resident of the district, respectively, from which elected or appointed, or if either the Mayor or any Councilmember shall be absent without permission of the City Council from all regular City Council meetings within a period of 60 consecutive days from the last regular meeting attended, shall resign, shall be adjudged legally incompetent, shall be deceased, or shall be otherwise barred from holding office by reason of state or federal law, that office shall thereupon be declared vacant by a majority vote of the City Council. (Sec. 403 amended by vote of the people 11-3-1998: Sec. 403 amended by vote of the people 3- 9-1993: Sec. 403 amended by vote of the people 11-4-1980, effective January 1, 1981.) Section 404. - VACANCY—APPOINTMENT OR SPECIAL ELECTION.

If a vacancy occurs in the office of Mayor, Vice Mayor shall assume the duties of the office of Mayor until the office shall be filled at the next general municipal election the remaining members of the Council shall, after such occurrence, elect a Mayor Pro Tempore from amongst the remaining members of the City Council. The Vice Mayor Pro Tempore shall assume the duties of the office of Mayor until the office shall be filled at the next general municipal election. The assumption of the duties of the Vice Mayor Pro Tempore shall not require that the Vice Mayor Pro Tempore relinquish his or her seat as a Councilmember elected or appointed from a district. If a vacancy occurs among any other members of the City Council, the remaining members shall within 75 days after such occurrence appoint a qualified resident voter of the unrepresented district who shall hold office until the office is filled at the next general municipal election. If the City Council cannot agree on one person to fill the vacancy, the replacement shall be chosen by lot.

If a vacancy occurs among any member of the City Council that represents a Council District, and less than two years remain on the unexpired term for that office, the remaining members of the City Council shall within 75 days after such occurrence appoint a qualified resident voter of the unrepresented Council District who shall hold office until the office is filled at the next general municipal election. Any person seeking an appointment to a Council District vacancy shall be a resident in the district for not less than one hundred and eighty (180) days immediately preceding the vacancy occurring. The City Council shall adopt by ordinance the process to fill vacancies for Council District offices.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Redline Version of Recommended Charter Language City Clerk’s Office 29 If two or more years remain on the unexpired term, or if the City Council cannot agree on one person to fill the vacancy within 75 days of the vacancy occurring, the office shall be filled by special election. The special election shall be called by the remaining members of the City Council within thirty (30) days of the occurrence of such vacancy, or at the next regular meeting of the City Council following the expiration of the 75-day deadline. The special election shall be held on the next regularly established primary municipal, general municipal, district, county, or state election date not less than 114 days from the call of the special election, unless the Council chooses to call a special election at an earlier point in time. The unexpired term shall be filled in either the primary or general special election, upon certification of the election results where one candidate receives a majority of the votes cast for the vacant office, consistent with City Charter Section 1204.

Nothing herein provided shall limit the power of the City Council to provide by ordinance for the continuity of the City Government in the event of war, enemy-caused disaster, or common accident in which a majority of the members of the City Council are killed, missing, or injured so as to be unable to perform their duties.
(Sec. 404 amended by vote of the people 11-3-1998: Sec. 404 amended by vote of the people 3- 9-1993.)
Section 405. - COMPENSATION.

Pursuant to an ordinance adopted by the City Council authorizing the formation of a Committee on City Councilmembers' Compensation ("the Committee"), each member of the City Council shall nominate one person to the Committee, subject to the approval of the City Council. The duties of the Committee shall be to study, take public input, and make recommendations regarding the compensation paid to members of the City Council and benefits to which the members of the City Council are entitled including, but not limited to, insurance, expense allowances and reimbursement. The Council Compensation Committee shall be convened not less than once every five years.

Each member of the Committee shall be an elector of the City. In making their nominations, City Councilmembers shall consider persons recommended by representatives of the fields of higher education, labor, business, and organizations reflecting the diversity of the City. No person shall be eligible for membership on the Committee who is, or within five years prior to his or her appointment was, an officer or employee of the City; or who has, within five years prior to his or her appointment, had any personal or business-related contractual relation with the City.

The nominee of the Mayor shall act as temporary chair of the Committee, with the power to fix the time and place of the Committee's first meeting. At such meeting, the Committee shall elect a Chair and a Vice-Chair and shall adopt such rules as it deems necessary to conduct its business. The provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act shall govern the conduct of meetings of the Committee. Records of the Committee shall be maintained as public records as provided by State law. The Committee shall gather such information as it deems necessary to complete its duties, and prior to making its recommendation, shall hold at least one duly noticed public hearing for the purpose of seeking public input. The City Manager shall provide office space, Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Redline Version of Recommended Charter Language City Clerk’s Office 30 staff assistance and supplies for the work of the Committee. Committee members shall serve without compensation, other than reimbursement for reasonable expenses pursuant to City ordinance.

If such report is not timely submitted or is not adopted by a majority of the members of the Committee, the Committee's recommendation shall be deemed to be a recommendation for no change. The Committee shall cease to exist thirty (30) days after its report is submitted to the City Council.

The City Council may take no action on the recommendation, or it may, by ordinance, adjust the compensation paid to members of the City Council by an amount not to exceed the recommendations of the Committee. No action which increases the compensation of the City Council in excess of the level recommended by the Committee may be taken without a vote of the people. Any ordinance adopted pursuant to a recommendation of the Committee shall be adopted by a 2/3 majority vote and shall be subject to referendum as provided in this Charter.

Once compensation has been initially established as provided in this section, no increase in the annual compensation shall be greater than five percent for each calendar year following the operative date of the most recent change for the compensation. No more than one ordinance establishing the compensation of City Council members may be adopted in any two-calendar year period. Any compensation and benefits fixed as a result of this Section shall constitute full compensation for the services of the City Council member and the maximum benefits provided to the City Council member by the City.

Until such time as the City Council adopts an ordinance as provided herein, Councilmembers shall continue to receive the compensation in effect as of the effective date of the Section.
(Sec. 405 amended by vote of the people 11-3-1998: Sec. 405 amended by vote of the people 3- 9-1993: Sec. 405 amended by vote of the people 11-4-1980, effective May 4, 1981.) Section 406. - THE MAYOR.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Redline Version of Recommended Charter Language City Clerk’s Office 31 (Sec. 406 amended by vote of the people 6-5-2018: Sec. 406 amended by vote of the people 11- 3-1998: Sec. 406 amended by vote of the people 3-9-1993.) Section 407 – THE MAYOR PRO TEMPORE
In the event of a vacancy in the Office of Mayor, the City Council shall elect from among the Councilmembers, a Mayor Pro Tem who shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Mayor.

Section 4087. - THE VICE MAYOR.

At its organizational meeting held annually in December, on the fifth Monday following the statewide general election held in November of even years, and the fifth Monday following the first Tuesday after a Monday in November in odd years, the City Council shall elect from among the Councilmembers a Vice Mayor who shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Mayor during the latter's absence or disability.
(Sec. 407 amended by vote of the people 11-3-1998: Sec. 407 amended by vote of the people 3- 9-1993.)
Section 4098. - POWERS VESTED IN THE CITY COUNCIL.

All powers of the City shall be vested in the City Council subject to the provisions of this Charter and to the Constitution of the State of California. The City Council is empowered to carry into effect the provisions of this Charter, to execute the powers vested in the City, and to perform all duties and obligations imposed upon the City by State law. (Sec. 408 amended by vote of the people 3-9-1993.)
Section 4109. - OFFICERS APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL.

The City Council shall appoint and may remove the City Manager, City Attorney, City Prosecutor, and City Clerk.

The City Prosecutor shall prosecute misdemeanor offenses arising out of violations of the law of the State and ordinances of the City.
(Sec. 410 amended by vote of the people 3-9-1993.)
Section 4110. - ORGANIZATION OF CITY OPERATIONS AND ACTIVITIES.

The City Council shall, by ordinance, provide for the organization of all city operations and activities into functional units and may modify and change the organization from time to time.

This organization shall be accomplished through the creation and establishment, by ordinance, of city departments, offices and agencies, advisory boards, commissions, and committees. In establishing departments, offices, agencies, boards, commissions and committees, the Council Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Redline Version of Recommended Charter Language City Clerk’s Office 32 shall provide for the functions, powers, and duties of each such department, office, agency, board, commission, or committee created.

The City Council may, by ordinance, abolish, consolidate, modify, or separate any department, office, agency, board, commission, or committee, and may assign, reassign, or modify any functions, powers, or duties.
(Sec. 411 amended by vote of the people 3-9-1993: Sec. 410 amended by vote of the people 6- 8-1976, effective August 1, 1976.)
Section 4121. - PROHIBITIONS.
(A) Neither the Mayor nor any City Council member shall be eligible to hold any paid office created by the City Council while a member thereof and until one year after the expiration of the term for which he or she was elected.
(B) Except for purposes of inquiry, the Mayor, the City Council, and its members shall deal with the administrative service under the City Manager solely through the City Manager, and neither the Mayor, the City Council nor its members shall attempt to influence or to direct any subordinates of the City Manager.
(Sec. 412 amended by vote of the people 11-3-1998: Sec. 411 amended by vote of the people 3- 9-1993.)
Section 4132. - OFFICIAL BONDS.

The City Council may, by ordinance, require any city officer or employee to give and execute to the City an official bonds for the faithful performance of official duties. The Premium therefor shall be paid by the City.
(Sec. 413 amended by vote of the people 3-9-1993.)
Section 414. - CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS.

If the City Council adopts an ordinance implementing campaign contribution limits different than state default limits, the campaign contribution limit ordinance may be amended no earlier than following the 2nd election cycle after its enactment or amendment.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Clean Copy of Recommended Charter Language City Clerk’s Office 33 Clean Copy of Recommended Charter Language

ARTICLE IV - THE CITY COUNCIL
Section 401. - NUMBER AND TERM
A. There shall be a City Council consisting of a Mayor and seven Councilmembers. The seven Councilmembers shall be nominated and elected by district as provided in this Charter. Except as provided in subsection B, the term of office of the Mayor and Councilmembers shall be four years.

D. No person may serve more than three consecutive terms of office as a Councilmember.

Following a period of hiatus of not less than four years away from the office of Councilmember, a person may serve an additional two terms in the office of Councilmember.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Clean Copy of Recommended Charter Language City Clerk’s Office 34 The Mayor and each Councilmember shall be a qualified elector of the City. Each Councilmember shall be a resident of the district from which the Member is elected or appointed.
(Sec. 402 amended by vote of the people 11-3-1998: Sec. 402 amended by vote of the people 3- 9-1993: Sec. 402 amended by vote of the people 6-8-1976, effective August 1, 1976.) Section 403. - VACANCY DEFINED.

If a vacancy occurs in the office of Mayor, the remaining members of the Council shall, after such occurrence, elect a Mayor Pro Tempore from amongst the remaining members of the City Council. The Mayor Pro Tempore shall assume the duties of the office of Mayor until the office shall be filled at the next general municipal election. The assumption of the duties of the Mayor Pro Tempore shall not require that the Mayor Pro Tempore relinquish his or her seat as a Councilmember elected or appointed from a district.

If two or more years remain on the unexpired term, or if the City Council cannot agree on one person to fill the vacancy within 75 days of the vacancy occurring, the office shall be filled by special election. The special election shall be called by the remaining members of the City Council within thirty (30) days of the occurrence of such vacancy, or at the next regular meeting of the City Council following the expiration of the 75-day deadline. The special election shall be held on the next regularly established primary municipal, general municipal, district, county, or state Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Clean Copy of Recommended Charter Language City Clerk’s Office 35 election date not less than 114 days from the call of the special election, unless the Council chooses to call a special election at an earlier point in time. The unexpired term shall be filled in either the primary or general special election, upon certification of the election results where one candidate receives a majority of the votes cast for the vacant office, consistent with City Charter Section 1204.

The duties of the Committee shall be to study, take public input, and make recommendations regarding the compensation paid to members of the City Council and benefits to which the members of the City Council are entitled including, but not limited to, insurance, expense allowances and reimbursement. The Council Compensation Committee shall be convened not less than once every five years.

The nominee of the Mayor shall act as temporary chair of the Committee, with the power to fix the time and place of the Committee's first meeting. At such meeting, the Committee shall elect a Chair and a Vice-Chair and shall adopt such rules as it deems necessary to conduct its business. The provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act shall govern the conduct of meetings of the Committee. Records of the Committee shall be maintained as public records as provided by State law. The Committee shall gather such information as it deems necessary to complete its duties, and prior to making its recommendation, shall hold at least one duly noticed public hearing for the purpose of seeking public input. The City Manager shall provide office space, staff assistance and supplies for the work of the Committee. Committee members shall serve without compensation, other than reimbursement for reasonable expenses pursuant to City ordinance.

Not later than October 1 of the year the Committee is appointed, the Committee shall submit to the City Council a report adopted by a majority of the members of the Committee recommending either that no change be made in the compensation paid to members of the City Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Clean Copy of Recommended Charter Language City Clerk’s Office 36 Council, or that change, either an increase or a decrease, be made and the amount thereof. If such report is not timely submitted or is not adopted by a majority of the members of the Committee, the Committee's recommendation shall be deemed to be a recommendation for no change. The Committee shall cease to exist thirty (30) days after its report is submitted to the City Council.

Until such time as the City Council adopts an ordinance as provided herein, Councilmembers shall continue to receive the compensation in effect as of the effective date of the Section. (Sec. 405 amended by vote of the people 11-3-1998: Sec. 405 amended by vote of the people 3- 9-1993: Sec. 405 amended by vote of the people 11-4-1980, effective May 4, 1981.) Section 406. - THE MAYOR.

The Mayor shall be nominated and elected by the voters of the City at large for a term of four years, except as provided in Section 401 (B). The Mayor shall be a voting member of the City Council and shall preside at meetings of the City Council. The Mayor shall act as chief executive of the City in performing all acts required to be performed under the laws of the State of California and this Charter. The Mayor shall be recognized as the official head of the City for all ceremonial purposes, by the Courts for the purpose of serving civil process and by the Governor of the State for military purposes. The Mayor shall have a voice and vote in all proceedings of the City Council and shall perform such other duties as may be prescribed by this Charter or as may be imposed by the City Council consistent with his or her office.
(Sec. 406 amended by vote of the people 6-5-2018: Sec. 406 amended by vote of the people 11- 3-1998: Sec. 406 amended by vote of the people 3-9-1993.) Section 407 – THE MAYOR PRO TEMPORE
In the event of a vacancy in the Office of Mayor, the City Council shall elect from among the Councilmembers, a Mayor Pro Tem who shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Mayor.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Clean Copy of Recommended Charter Language City Clerk’s Office 37 Section 408. - THE VICE MAYOR.

At its organizational meeting held annually in December, on the fifth Monday following the statewide general election held in November of even years, and the fifth Monday following the first Tuesday after a Monday in November in odd years, the City Council shall elect from among the Councilmembers a Vice Mayor who shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Mayor during the latter's absence.
(Sec. 407 amended by vote of the people 11-3-1998: Sec. 407 amended by vote of the people 3- 9-1993.)
Section 409. - POWERS VESTED IN THE CITY COUNCIL.

The City Council shall appoint and may remove the City Manager, City Attorney, City Prosecutor, and City Clerk.

The City Prosecutor shall prosecute misdemeanor offenses arising out of violations of the law of the State and ordinances of the City.
(Sec. 409 amended by vote of the people 3-9-1993.)
Section 411. - ORGANIZATION OF CITY OPERATIONS AND ACTIVITIES.

The City Council shall, by ordinance, provide for the organization of all city operations and activities into functional units and may modify and change the organization from time to time.

This organization shall be accomplished through the creation and establishment, by ordinance, of city departments, offices and agencies, advisory boards, commissions, and committees. In establishing departments, offices, agencies, boards, commissions and committees, the Council shall provide for the functions, powers, and duties of each such department, office, agency, board, commission, or committee created.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Clean Copy of Recommended Charter Language City Clerk’s Office 38 (Sec. 410 amended by vote of the people 3-9-1993: Sec. 410 amended by vote of the people 6-8- 1976, effective August 1, 1976.)
Section 412. - PROHIBITIONS.
(A) Neither the Mayor nor any City Council member shall be eligible to hold any paid office created by the City Council while a member thereof and until one year after the expiration of the term for which he or she was elected.
(B) Except for purposes of inquiry, the Mayor, the City Council, and its members shall deal with the administrative service under the City Manager solely through the City Manager, and neither the Mayor, the City Council nor its members shall attempt to influence or to direct any subordinates of the City Manager.
(Sec. 411 amended by vote of the people 11-3-1998: Sec. 411 amended by vote of the people 3- 9-1993.)
Section 413. - OFFICIAL BONDS.

The City Council may, by ordinance, require any city officer or employee to give and execute to the City an official bonds for the faithful performance of official duties. The Premium therefor shall be paid by the City.
(Sec. 412 amended by vote of the people 3-9-1993.)
Section 414. - CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Minutes of the Task Force Meetings City Clerk’s Office
39 Minutes of the Task Force Meetings

OPENING
ROLL CALL:

Staff:
01 CITY OF PASADENA

CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
DECEMBER 9, 2023 - 10:00 A.M.

CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBER, ROOM S249
100 NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE, PASADENA, CA 91101

SPECIAL MEETING
The City Clerk Mark Jomsky called the special meeting of the Charter Study Task Force to order at 10:04 a.m.

Member Ken Chawkins
Member Vince Farhat
Member Marcus Hatcher
Member Lena Kennedy (Arrived at 10:43 a.m.)
Member Margaret McAustin
Member Liberty McCoy
Member Diana Carbajal Mejia
Member Paul Novak
Member Jacque Robinson-Baisley (Absent)
Member Raul Salinas
Member Andy Wilson (Absent)
Michele Beal Bagneris, City Attorney/City Prosecutor
Mark Jomsky, City Clerk
Alexander Souto, Deputy City Manager
Sandra Robles, Sr. Assistant City Clerk

WELCOME, OATH OF OFFICE, SELF-INTRODUCTIONS OF TASK

FORCE MEMBERS, AND CITY STAFF
Mark Jomsky, City Clerk, administered the oath of office to each member of the Charter Study Task Force (CSTF) present.

Task Force members, City staff, and consultants provided selfintroductory comments.

Following discussion, by consensus of the Task Force, the information was received and filed.

ELECTION OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
City Clerk Jomsky introduced the item, and requested nominations for the position of Chair of the Charter Study Task Force.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Salinas, seconded by Member Farhat, to nominate Member Ken Chawkins to serve as Chair to the Task Force. (Motion unanimously approved) (Absent: Members Kennedy, Robinson-Baisley, Wilson)
12/09/2023
MOTIONS:

Chair Chawkins expressed gratitude to the Task Force for electing him to serve as Chair. He then opened the floor for nominations for Vice Chair.

Member Farhat moved, seconded by Member Novak, to nominate Member Marcus Hatcher to serve as Vice Chair to the Task Force.

Following discussion, Member Salinas moved, seconded by Member Mejia, to nominated Member Margaret McAustin to serve as Vice Chair to the Task Force.

Discussion ensued regarding the role of the Vice Chair, the pros and cons of possibly selecting two co-Vice Chairs to serve, as well as options for one Vice Chair to serve for a period, and then a second Vice Chair to serve for the remaining period.

Following discussion Member McAustin withdrew her name from consideration for Vice Chair, and the motion was withdrawn.

VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion to elect Member Marcus Hatcher to serve as Vice Chair.

Member Lena Kennedy
arrived at 10:43 a.m., and
was sworn in to serve on
the Task Force by City
Clerk Jomsky.
02 AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Members Farhat, Hatcher, McAustin, McCoy, Mejia,
Novak, Salinas, Chair Chawkins
None
Members Kennedy, Robinson-Baisley, Wilson
None

BROWN ACT/PUBLIC RECORDS ACT/CITY CHARTER BASICS -

TRAINING AND REVIEW CONDUCTED BY CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE
Michele Beal Bagneris, City Attorney/City Prosecutor, presented a PowerPoint presentation on the item, including an introduction of City Charter basics, review of the Brown Act open meeting requirements, public records, the City's social media policy, and parliamentary procedure; and responded to questions.

In response to questions related to outreach of Task Force meetings, City staff confirmed that the Task Force meeting information will be shared with the Public Information Office and distributed through normal channels of the City.

Following discussion, by order of the Chair, and consensus of the Task Force, the information was received and filed.

REVIEW OF CITY COUNCIL APPROVED CHARGE, SCOPE, AND

TIMELINE FOR CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
City Clerk Jomsky reviewed the item as part of a PowerPoint presentation, discussing the Task Force's scope, charge, and proposed timeline in detail; and responded to questions. 12/09/2023
Member Hatcher left the
meeting at 11 :51 a.m.
03 City staff responded to questions related campaign finance, contribution limits, Council compensation, special elections held in Pasadena, and the process and method for the Task Force to submit its recommendations for City Council consideration.

Following discussion, by order of the Chair, and consensus of the Task Force, the information was received and filed.

INTRODUCTION OF BAKER TILLY CONSUL TING TEAM;

PRESENTATION AND REVIEW OF CONSULTANT WORK PLAN
Shauna Clark and Carol Jacobs, representing the Baker Tilly Consultant Team, introduced themselves, and Ms. Clark reviewed a PowerPoint presentation for the item; and responded to questions.

Ms. Clark responded to questions regarding the process the staff, consultant team, and Task Force will use to complete the work plan for each topic, including how members of the public can comment or give public testimony on matters under consideration and/or previously decided by the Task Force.

Following discussion, by order of the Chair, and consensus of the Task Force, the information was received and filed.

SETTING TIME AND MEETING LOCATION FOR REGULAR

MEETINGS
City Clerk Jomsky reviewed the proposed regular meeting schedule of the Charter Study Task Force, explained that regular meetings of the Task Force will be held in the Council Chamber to accommodate hybrid in-person and virtual format for public and community member participation, and responded to questions.

It was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Member McCoy, to approve the Pasadena City Council Chamber as the regular meeting location for the Task Force, as well as setting the following dates and times as regular meetings of the Task Force:

Saturday, January 13, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.; Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 6:00 p.m.; Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 6:00 p.m.; Thursday, February 22, 2024 at 6:00 p.m.; Thursday, March 14, 2024 at 6:00 p.m.

Thursday, March 28, 2024 at 6:00 p.m.; Thursday, April 11, 2024 at 6:00 p.m.; Thursday, April 25, 2024 at 6:00 p.m.; Thursday, May 9, 2024 at 6:00 p.m.; and Thursday May 23, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. (Motion unanimously approved) (Absent: Members Hatcher, RobinsonBaisley, Wilson) 12/09/2023
ADJOURNMENT:

ATTEST:

City Clerk
04 On the order of the Chair, the special meeting of the Charter Study Task Force was adjourned at 11 :55 a.m.

Charter
~ Study Task Force
12/09/2023
ATTEST:

PASADENACHARTERSTUDYTASKFORCE
JANUARY 13, 2024 - 10:00 A.M.

PASADENA CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBER
100 NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE, ROOM S249
The regular meeting of the Pasadena Charter Study Task Force, scheduled for Saturday, January 13, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. was cancelled as ordered and posted.

KENcii7 ~ Kl: , Chair
Pasadena Charter Study Task Force
01/13/2024

CITY OF PASADENA

CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
JANUARY 20, 2024 - 10:00 A.M.

CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBER, ROOM S249
100 NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE, PASADENA, CA 91101
TELECONFERENCE LOCATION: SUNRIVER RESORT, BUSINESS CENTER 17600 CENTER DRIVE SUNRIVER, OR 97707

OPENING
ROLL CALL:

Staff:
01 SPECIAL MEETING
The Chair called the special meeting of the Charter Study Task Force to order at 10:01 a.m., and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Member Vince Farhat (participated remotely)
Member Lena Louise Kennedy
Member Margaret McAustin
Member Liberty McCoy
Member Diana Carbajal Mejia
Member Paul Novak
Member Jacque Robinson-Baisley (Absent)
Member Raul Salinas
Member Andy Wilson
Vice Chair Marcus Hatcher
Chair Ken Chawkins
Michele Beal Bagneris, City Attorney/City Prosecutor
Mark Jomsky, City Clerk
Alexander Souto, Deputy City Manager
Sandra Robles, Sr. Assistant City Clerk
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 9, 2023 SPECIAL

MEETING
It was moved by Member McAustin, seconded by Member Salinas, to approve the meeting minutes, as submitted.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Members Farhat, Kennedy, McAustin, McCoy, Mejia,
Novak, Salinas, Vice Chair Hatcher, Chair Chawkins
None
Member Robinson-Baisley
Member Wilson

DISCUSSION ON VACANCY APPOINTMENT PROCESS FOR

MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND OPTIONS FOR

AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER TO ALLOW FOR THE CALLING

OF A SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL A VACANCY
City Clerk Jomsky provided introductory comments, and Shauna Clark, Baker Tilly, reviewed the staff report as part of a PowerPoint presentation, including election terminology, special stand-alone election information; and responded to questions.
1/20/2024
02 City Clerk Jomsky provided additional details on the City's capabilities to administer stand-alone special elections, and in response to questions, noted that cost and voter turnout rates are issues to consider when conducting a special stand-alone election.

Following discussion, Chair Chawkins and Member Wilson asked staff to provide comparative information related to costs for administering special and regular elections.

Member Salinas raised the issue that within Section 403 of the City Charter, death as a reason for a vacancy was not part of the definition, in that Charter section, and suggested that this issue be addressed as part of any improvements made to this section.

Member McAustin raised the issue of the 75-day timeframe for the Council to make an appointment to fill a vacancy. She noted that prior appointments required the City Council to determine the steps and requirements on how to fill each vacancy. She suggested that efficiencies and public transparency of the process would be achieved if the City Council formally adopted a vacancy appointment process, so that it was clearly defined prior to a vacancy occurring (it was suggested by ordinance).

Member Farhat suggested that staff also include information on the cost of Rank Choice Voting as part of the cost comparison for regular and special stand-alone elections.

Member Kennedy suggested that the issue of implementing a residency requirement be considered, whereby an applicant for City Council would need to show proof of living in the Council District for a certain period of time prior to seeking the appointed office. Member McAustin suggested that the residency requirement could be set for the period prior to the vacancy occurring.

City Attorney Bagneris stated that staff will look at residency requirements in terms of constitutionality to ensure that any requirements would be legally enforceable.

Member Wilson requested that consideration be given to having similar, or the same, residency requirements for candidates seeking City Council seats as applicants seeking appointment to a vacant Council District seat, citing the need to be consistent.

Ed Washatka, Pasadena resident, advocated for Charter Study Task Force meetings to be held at locations in the community, vacancies on the City Council to be filled by special election, and residency requirements implemented for seats on the City Council.

Tim Wendler, Pasadena resident, spoke on Rank Choice Voting (including its benefits) as an alternative to conducting primary and general elections with runoffs.
1/20/2024
03 Various members of the Task Force stated their support for recommending that the City Council formally adopt the vacancy appointment process by ordinance, and that the adopted appointment process include a community outreach/engagement requirement.

There was also supporting consensus for eliminating the Charter provision that stipulates that a Council District vacancy would be filled by lot (if the deadline to make an appointment expires).

The Task Force discussed various scenarios, as well as pros and cons, for filling a vacancy by appointment, including consideration given to requiring appointments for scenarios of one year or less remaining on the term (as well as other timeframes).

Member McAustin suggested that the public outreach and community engagement requirement include at least one public meeting as part of the adopted process in the district where there is a vacancy, to maximize public participation during an appointment.

Following discussion on when to call a special stand-alone election, City Clerk Jomsky suggested one possible option would be to authorize the City Council to make an appointment within a certain timeframe (i.e., 60 days or 75 days), and if no appointment is made, the City Council would then be required to call a special election.

Vice Chair Hatcher advocated for consideration of a petition process that would allow the community to require a special election by petition in the event that there is a lack of support for either an appointment process, or after the appointment is made by the City Council.

In response to comments by Member Wilson, staff was asked to report back with scenarios detailing best, medium, and worst-case scenarios for vacancy in terms of the length of time a seat on the City Council would remain vacant due to appointment, as well as the time leading up to a special election.

Member Novak stated his concerns with outcomes that result in a lengthy vacancy on the City Council, and spoke in support of solutions that provide clear and defined direction to the Council on how to proceed.

Member Salinas requested staff to include in its review of the petition process, criteria/details to consider in moving such an option forward.

Member Wilson asked that as part of the additional information, staff include the threshold of signatures needed for a petition to be found sufficient to trigger an election (i.e., 5% or 10% of the registered voters of the district).

Member Kennedy requested more information on options for an interim appointee/caretaker during a Council District vacancy until an election is held, and whether the "caretaker" would be a staff person or member of the public. Member Mejia requested information on any peer cities that utilize a "caretaker" role, with Member Novak noting that the Los 1/20/2024
RECESS
04 Angeles City Council's "caretaker" role is not allowed to vote at a City Council meeting.

There was general consensus among the Task Force that the option of maintaining the Council's authority to make appointments to fill a vacancy on the City Council {in certain circumstances) should be retained.

By order of the Chair, and consensus of the Task Force, the information was received and filed, with staff to return with the additional requested information detailed above.

The Charter Study Task Force meeting recessed at 12:03 p.m. and reconvened at 12:21 p.m.

DISCUSSION ON VICE MAYOR APPOINTMENT PROCESS, TIMING

OF VICE MAYOR ELECTION, LENGTH OF TERM TO SERVE AS

VICE MAYOR, AND DUTIES RELATED TO VACANCY IN THE

MAYOR'S OFFICE
City Clerk Mark Jomsky provided an overview of the issues related to the Vice Mayor position, and Shauna Clerk, Baker Tilly, presented a PowerPoint presentation on the item, with both responding to questions.

Ed Washatka, Pasadena resident, stated that the City Council should not base its decision in choosing a Vice Mayor solely on length of service on the City Council, and also advocated for a vacancy of the Mayor's position to be treated the same as a vacancy for a Council District position.

Following discussion, Member Wilson suggested that the term of office for the Vice Mayor should be a rotational one-year term. He also stated that in terms of a vacancy in the Mayor's position, he agreed with the public speaker that it should be treated the same as a vacancy on the City Council. Regarding an interim/caretaker position until an election can be held, Member Wilson suggested that the City Council should select from among the Council an interim Mayor to serve, rather than having the Vice Mayor automatically become the Mayor ( or interim Mayor).

Member Farhat noted that the selection of the interim Mayor by the City Council following a vacancy would have to be conducted quickly, to ensure continuity of government, especially in the event of an emergency declaration, etc.

Discussion ensued regarding the role of Vice Mayor (excluding the role of the Vice Mayor stepping into the Mayor's position during a vacancy, which was discussed separately), recommending the selection of the Vice Mayor to occur on an annual basis with a term of one year, and with the Council to consider seniority and rotational participation when selecting, but not making either factor a requirement in selecting. 1/20/2024
ORIGINAL MOTION:
05 There was also discussion on the longer-term role of the Vice Mayor in terms of a vacancy in the Mayor's position, and recommending that the selection of an interim Mayor to fill the vacancy (until filled at an election) occur at the time of the vacancy, and not automatically filled by the Vice Mayor, with consideration given to experience and ability to serve in that capacity.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Salinas, seconded by Member Wilson, to recommend to the City Council the selection of the Vice Mayor to occur on an annual basis with a term of one year, the Council to consider seniority and rotational participation when making the selection (not making either factor a requirement), and the selection of the Vice Mayor occurring at the City's annual organizational meeting on the fifth Monday following the statewide General Election in even years, and the fifth Monday following the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of odd years.

Member Mejia requested a friendly amendment to add one-year term limits for the Vice Mayor role. Following discussion, the friendly amendment was withdrawn.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Members Farhat, Kennedy, McAustin, McCoy, Mejia,
Novak, Salinas, Wilson, Vice Chair Hatcher, Chair
Chawkins
None
Member Robinson-Baisley
None
The Task Force returned to the discussion of the Vice Mayor's role when a vacancy occurs in the Mayor's position (due to resignation, long-term absence, or death).

Member Farhat spoke in support of recommending to the City Council that the City Charter be amended to create a Mayor Pro Tern position, with the Council to select from among the remaining members a Mayor Pro Tern to serve in the role of Mayor in the event of a vacancy, on an interim basis (without having to relinquish their Council District seat) until the position of Mayor is filled at a future election (timing to be determined), and require four affirmative votes of the City Council in order to approve the selected Mayor Pro Tern.

Member Wilson pointed out that in the event the Council selects the sitting Vice Mayor to serve as a Mayor Pro Tern, the Council would then need to select a new Vice Mayor to ensure both roles are filled (and also noted that the recommended provisions for the Vice Mayor selection occur at an organizational meeting).

It was moved by Member Salinas, seconded by Member Farhat, to recommend to the City Council that the City Charter be amended to create a Mayor Pro Tern position in the event of a vacancy in the Mayor's position, with the Council to select from among the remaining members a Mayor Pro Tern to assume the duties of the Mayor on an 1/20/2024
AMENDED MOTION:
06 interim basis (without having to relinquish their Council District seat) until the vacant position of Mayor is filled at a future election (timing to be determined), with the Mayor Pro Tern selection needing four affirmative votes of the seven remaining Councilmembers.

The Task Force discussed the issue of requiring four affirmative votes to select the Mayor Pro Tern versus the current City Charter requirement that an action of the Council requires five affirmative votes.

Following discussion, Member Wilson requested a friendly amendment to the motion to remove the four affirmative votes to select the Vice Mayor, keep the five affirmative vote threshold that is currently in the City Charter, and have it apply to the selection of the Mayor Pro Tern.

It was moved by Member Salinas, seconded by Member Farhat, to recommend to the City Council that the City Charter be amended to create a Mayor Pro Tern position in the event of a vacancy in the Mayor's position, with the Council to select from among the remaining members a Mayor Pro Tern to serve in the role of Mayor on an interim basis (without having to relinquish their Council District seat) until the vacant position of Mayor is filled at a future election (timing to be determined).

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Members Farhat, Kennedy, McAustin, McCoy, Mejia,
Novak, Salinas, Wilson, Vice Chair Hatcher, Chair
Chawkins
None
Member Robinson-Baisley
None

DISCUSSION ON TASK FORCE MEMBERS ATTENDING AND

SPEAKING AT PUBLIC FORUMS AND COMMUNITY MEETINGS TO

DISCUSS CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE WORK
Chair Chawkins presented information on recent invitations he and other members of the Task Force have received to speak at public forums or community meetings regarding the work of the Charter Study Task Force. He requested that members of the Task Force communicate with the City Clerk, City Attorney, and Chair when such invitations occur to ensure efficiency and coordination.

City Attorney Bagneris reminded the Task Force that if they attend and speak at a community meeting or forum, that they are speaking as an individual and not on behalf of the Task Force or the City.

Member Kennedy asked that the issue of Task Force meetings being held out in the community, as opposed to only at City Hall, be agendized for discussion at the next meeting.

Member Wilson suggested that each Task Force member reach out to their Councilmember to possibly participate in upcoming District meetings and to provide information on the work of the Task Force, why 1/20/2024
ADJOURNMENT:
07 Charter Study is occurring, what it means, etc., since these issues will likely be on the ballot for the November General Election.

Following discussion, by order of the Chair, and consensus of the Task Force, the information was received and filed.

On the order of the Chair, the special meeting of the Charter Study Task Force was adjourned at 1 :55 p.m.

KEN CHA I S, Chair
Charter Study Task Force
1/20/2024
ATTEST:

MaJJI
City Clerk

PASADENA CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
JANUARY 25, 2024 - 6:00 P.M.

PASADENA CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBER
100 NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE, ROOM S249
The regular meeting of the Pasadena Charter Study Task Force, scheduled for Thursday, January 25, 2024, at 6:00 p.m. was cancelled as ordered and posted.
e~- KEN cXf INs,chair
Pasadena Charter Study Task Force
01/25/2024

CITY OF PASADENA

CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
FEBRUARY 7, 2024-6:00 P.M.

CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBER, ROOM S249
100 NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE, PASADENA, CA 91101

OPENING
ROLL CALL:

Staff:

PUBLIC COMMENT

OLD BUSINESS
01 The Chair called the meeting of the Charter Study Task Force to order at 6:01 p.m., and led the Pledge of Allegiance. (Absent: None) Member Vince Farhat
Member Lena Louise Kennedy
Member Margaret McAustin
Member Liberty McCoy
Member Diana Carbajal Mejia
Member Paul Novak
Member Raul Salinas
Member Andy Wilson
Vice Chair Marcus Hatcher
Chair Ken Chawkins
Michele Beal Bagneris, City Attorney/City Prosecutor
Mark Jomsky, City Clerk
Alexander Souto, Deputy City Manager
Christine Sao, Assistant City Clerk
Dennis Jebbia, residence not stated, advocated for the Task Force to meet with tenants, landlords and homeowners in the City to discuss proposed charter amendments to Measure H.

Following public comment, Michele Beal Bagneris, City Attorney/City Prosecutor, provided information on the authority and scope of the Task Force, which does not include reviewing and/or considering amendments to the Charter related to Measure H.

Member McAustin asked staff to forward the comments of the public speaker to Pasadena Rental Housing Board and/or City Manager.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JANUARY 13, 2024 CANCELED

MEETING
It was moved by Member Salinas, seconded by Member McAustin, to approve the meeting minutes, as submitted. (Motion unanimously approved) (Absent: None)

FOLLOW UP INFORMATION PERTAINING TO CONSIDERATION

OF VACANCY APPOINTMENT PROCESS FOR MEMBERS OF THE

CITY COUNCIL AND OPTIONS FOR AMENDING THE CITY

CHARTER TO ALLOW FOR THE CALLING OF A SPECIAL

ELECTION TO FILL A VACANCY
02/07/2024
02 Mark Jomsky, City Clerk, presented a PowerPoint with follow-up information from the January 20, 2024 Task Force meeting, including information on special stand-alone elections, timing, and costs; reviewed an example of a special stand-alone election held by the City of Los Angeles to fill a vacancy in a Council District in 2023, and the potential nexus of estimated costs for hypothetical stand-alone election for City Council District 3; reviewed rank choice voting information; and responded to questions
Member Kennedy spoke on the importance and value of community input when it comes to City Council appointments to fill a vacancy; and on the need to consider the many impacts and benefits to the community when choosing between appointments by the City Council and special elections.

Member Novak advocated for developing "if-then" scenarios for determining how to fill a vacancy by appointment or by special standalone election to ensure clear direction to the City Council on how to proceed in the event of a vacancy.

Ed Washatka, Pasadena resident, emphasized the need to
choose democracy over costs, and advocated for holding special elections to fill vacancies on the City Council.

Kermit McCoy, Pasadena resident, spoke in support of the City holding special elections to fill vacancies on the City Council.

Member McAustin requested that staff provide the meeting minutes from the last discussion on this item so the Task Force can have in front of them the motions, discussion, and relevant issues/decision points.

Member Wilson spoke in support of an appointment process when there is one year or less remaining on the term, and that the City Council should adopt a detailed appointment process by ordinance, which emphasizes the importance and value of community input. If the remaining term is greater than one-year, he supported providing the City Council with discretion on conduct a special election, making an appointment (based on the situation), or a combination of appointment and special election.

Following discussion, Vice Chair Hatcher suggested that an appointment process for City Council vacancies should be conducted if the remaining length term is eighteen months.

Member McAustin stated her concerns with the 75-day appointment process, as she believes that period is too long, and suggested a shorter time-period to make an appointment.

Member McCoy spoke on the need to factor in the marginal benefits the City is receiving by utilizing a special election process due to the timing aspects.
02/07/2024

NEW BUSINESS
03 Member Novak noted that unless there is four years remaining on a term (or almost four years), there may not be a huge advantage of a special election process over the appointment process.

Member Wilson spoke in support of recommending the City Council adopt an ordinance to codify the appointment process, and supported a reduced appointment period within 60 days.

Following discussion, the Task Force, by consensus, directed staff to:
• Focus on Optional Motion No. 2 from Slide No. 14 of the PowerPoint presentation: "Length of Term Determines Method:

Allow a 75-day appointment if term will last less than a year (or two years) or call special election if term will be more than one year (or two years)"; and
• Incorporate a recommendation that the City Council adopt an ordinance to codify the appointment process for transparency and efficiency purposes, and with the appointment process to include a mandatory public engagement and notice requirement to ensure public participation and awareness.

By order of the Chair, and consensus of the Task Force, the information was received and filed, with staff to return with additional information.

CONSIDERATION OF TERM LIMITS FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY

COUNCIL
Chair Chawkins introduced the item and noted that the discussion on term limits is intended as an initial framing of the issue, and that the item will return for further discussion at a future Task Force meeting.

He encouraged the Task Force to consider the issues and request any follow-up information from staff and the consultants needed for future deliberations and what to recommend to the City Council.

City Clerk Jomsky reported that the City Clerk's Office received ten letters on the issue of term limits, with seven in favor of implementing term limits, two letters in opposition, and one letter stating pros and cons, with all of correspondence distributed to the Task Force, posted online, and made part of the record for this item.

Shauna Clerk, representing Baker Tilly, presented a PowerPoint presentation on the item, including information on the existence of term limits in comparison cities, and advantages and disadvantages of term limits; and responded to questions.

Anthony Manousos, Pasadena resident, advocated for term limits for the Pasadena City Council.

Discussion ensued on the role and impact of Councilmembers serving in a part-time capacity, which impacts the pool of individuals able to run and serve on the City Council, the need to understand term limits and the relationship with compensation for elected officials, the 02/07/2024
04 consequences of not recommending term limits, and the possible impacts this would have on women and people of color who have been directly impacted by term limits (or the lack thereof).

In response to questions, City Clerk Jomsky provided information on the various cities with full-time ( compensated) mayors and councilmembers, but stated that staff can return with information on compensation at a future meeting.

The Task Force discussed the consultant's stated advantages and disadvantages of term limits, with some noting that term limits should be viewed as an advantage by increasing interest in running for office for an open seat (rather than against an established incumbent), and conversely that term limits may foster a "revolving door" forcing seasoned Councilmembers from office and causing instability on the Council. It was also noted that incumbency may provide an unfair playing field for challengers, and by implementing term limits, it creates more opportunities.

Member Wilson advocated for separate term limits for the Mayor and Councilmember elected officials.

Member Farhat spoke in opposition to recommending a lifetime ban for elected officials in the City of Pasadena.

Member McCoy asked staff to provide information on how term limits were implemented in comparison cities, either by initiative measure or by Council proposal.

Member Salinas asked staff to provide information on Political Action Committees that are active and registered in the City of Pasadena; and recommended staff contact Fernando Guerra, faculty member at Loyola Marymount University, who tracks election data for information on term limits.

In response to questions by Members Salinas and McAustin, Michele Beal Bagneris, City Attorney/City Prosecutor, agreed to provide additional information on the "Levine Act", and responded to questions.

Member McAustin expressed concerns with allowing Councilmembers to seek election on the Pasadena City Council once they term out of office, but was supported of allowing term-out Councilmembers to run for Mayor.

Member Kennedy asked staff to provide information on other municipalities that have term limits for elected officials longer then twelve years.

Chair Chawkins summarized the discussion on the item, and asked staff to seek out additional input from elected officials that have experienced term limits, or staff or other nonpartisan individuals on the dynamics of term limits. He stated that he hopes the Task Force can 02/07/2024

FUTURE MEETING

SCHEDULE
get a sense of how term limits affect governance, elected representation, and staff; provide information on the unintended consequences and benefits generated from implementing term limits for elected officials; and return to the Task Force for further consideration.

By order of the Chair, and consensus of the Task Force, the information was received and filed, with staff to return with additional information.

CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES TO THE CHARTER STUDY TASK

FORCE REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE AND REGULAR

MEETING LOCATION
City Clerk Jomsky provided a brief summary of the Task Force's regular meeting schedule, proposed remote meeting dates and locations, and responded to questions.

Member Farhat spoke in support of Task Force meetings occurring off site, and in the community, including at the Jackie Robinson Center.

Member Wilson and Chair Chawkins echoed comments related to holding meetings off site.

Following discussion, on the order of the Chair, and by consensus of the Charter Study Task Force, direct staff to schedule remote meetings on March 14, 2024 and April 11, 2024, with consideration given to an additional meeting date to be determined.

Member Wilson spoke on the need to distribute the Task Force meeting schedule to the community, including utilizing the City's newsletters.

Chair Chawkins asked staff to determine if the Task Force will be able to present an update to the City Council on their work and utilize the opportunity to request the Councilmembers disseminate the Task Force meeting schedule.

ADJOURNMENT: On the order of the Chair, the meeting of the Charter Study Task Force was adjourned at 8:46 p.m.
= ~ air
Charter Study Task Force
05 02/07/2024

CITY OF PASADENA

CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
FEBRUARY 22, 2024 - 6:00 P.M.

CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBER, ROOM S249
100 NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE, PASADENA, CA 91101

OPENING
ROLL CALL:

Staff:

PUBLIC COMMENT

APPROVAL OF

MINUTES

OLD BUSINESS
01 The Chair called the meeting of the Charter Study Task Force to order at 6:08 p.m., and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Member Vince Farhat
Member Lena Louise Kennedy (Absent)
Member Margaret McAustin
Member Liberty McCoy (Absent)
Member Diana Carbajal Mejia
Member Paul Novak
Member Raul Salinas
Member Andy Wilson (Absent)
Vice Chair Marcus Hatcher
Chair Ken Chawkins
Javan Rad, Chief Assistant City Attorney
Mark Jomsky, City Clerk
Christine Soo, Deputy City Clerk
No one appeared for public comment on matters not on the agenda.

Member Farhat requested that the January 20, 2024, minutes be amended to correct the spelling of "Mayor Pro Tern" to "Mayor Pro Tern", which occurs several times on Page 5 (last three paragraphs), and Page 6 (first four paragraphs).

Mark Jomsky, City Clerk, also stated that on Page 3 of the January 20, 2024 minutes, the seventh paragraph will be amended to include the word "provide", to read " ... and spoke in support of solutions that provide clear and ... "; and the February 7, 2024 minutes will be amended to correct the spelling of Chair Chawkins name.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Member McAustin, to approve the minutes of January 20, 2024 (special meeting) and February 7, 2024, as amended and as detailed above; and January 25, 2024 minutes, as submitted. (Motion unanimously approved) (Absent: Members Kennedy, McCoy, Wilson)

CONSIDERATION OF VACANCY APPOINTMENT PROCESS FOR

MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND OPTIONS FOR

AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER TO ALLOW FOR THE CALLING

OF A SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL A VACANCY
City Clerk Jomsky provided an oral summary of the staff report, presented a PowerPoint presentation on possible amendments to the City's Charter submitted for discussion, and responded to questions. 02/22/2024
Motion:
02 Regarding the language submitted by staff for discussion, Member Salinas recommended that the following sentence be amended as follows: "If more than two years remain on the unexpired term, or the City Council cannot agree on one person to fill the vacancy, then the office s-hal-1 may be filled at a regular or special municipal election ... ", which provides the City Council the ability to decide whether or not to call for a regular or special municipal election.

In response to this suggestion, Member McAustin pointed out that the Task Force had previously determined that a vacant City Council seat with more than two years remaining on the term would require an election to fill the vacancy, and changing the word "shall" to "may" as proposed by Member Salinas does not align with previous discussions on the matter.

Members McAustin, Farhat, and Salinas spoke on the need to allow for public participation when a vacancy occurs on the City Council, and following discussion, spoke in support of a 75-day period to fill a City Council vacancy, which provides sufficient time for staff to notify the community and solicit their input on the matter.

Discussion ensued regarding the 75-day period for the City Council appointment process to fill a vacancy, and whether to allow more time than 75 days to avoid having to call special stand-alone elections.

Member Novak advocated for keeping the language of "shall" rather than providing the Council with an option to call a special election, and spoke in support of not changing the length of the 75-day period to fill a City Council vacancy.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Member Salinas, to maintain the 75-day period for a City Council vacancy appointment process, eliminate the Charter provision that stipulates that a Council District vacancy will be filled by lot, and amend Pasadena City Charter, Section 403, to include "death" as a cause of vacancy. (Motion unanimously approved) (Absent: Members Kennedy, McCoy, Wilson)
Regarding the determination of when the Council must act to make an appointment to fill a vacancy, Vice Chair Hatcher advocated for the Task Force to recommend an appointment if one year or less remains on an unexpired term of a City Council seat, with recognition that cost and democracy are predominant factors, and the Charter should be amended to provide voters an opportunity to select their representative.

Member Novak advocated for recommending that the City Council make an appointment if two years or less remain on an unexpired term of a vacant City Council seat. He also expressed concerns with recommending verbiage that allows the City Council to call an election if they cannot agree on one person to appoint.
02/22/2024
Motion:
03 Following discussion, Member Salinas advocated to amend Section 404. Vacancy Appointment, verbiage " If more than two years remain on the unexpired term, or the City Council cannot agree on one person to fill the vacancy fails to timely appoint, ... " which would trigger an election.

Members McAustin and Farhat spoke in support of Section 404.

Vacancy Appointment, verbiage as " ... remaining members shall within 75 days ... ," specifically leaving the word "shall" in the language as it will be a requirement of the City Council per the City Charter.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Salinas, seconded by Vice Chair Hatcher, to recommend the following verbiage for City Charter, Section 404.-Vacancy - Appointment, " ... if the City Council fails to timely appoint a person to fill the vacancy, then the office shall be filled at a regular or special municipal election for the time remaining on the unexpired term, upon certification of the candidate that receives a majority of the votes cast for that office, consistent with City Charter Section 1204.

The City Council shall adopt by ordinance the process to fill vacancies on the City Council.":

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Members Mejia, Salinas, Vice Chair Hatcher, Chair
Chawkins
Members Farhat, McAustin, Novak
Members Kennedy, McCoy, Wilson
None
Member Farhat spoke on the need for City staff to "to tighten up" the amended language in Section 404, and asked staff to bring back the matter back at a future Charter Study Task Force meeting, and specifically when more Task Force members would be present to help finalize the matter.

With regard to the issue of the length of term remaining to determine when an appointment process should be utilized by the City Council, Vice Chair Hatcher advocated for ensuring the democratic option of the City's residents to elect their representative, and expressed concerns with the City Council appointing an individual for approximately two years of a four-year term.

The Task Force members discussed the pros and cons of the City Council recommending appointments if: a) One year or less remained on the unexpired term; b) 18 months or less remained on the unexpired term; and c) Two years or less remained on the unexpired term. The Task Force members considered the time period required to call, coordinate, and conduct a special election to fill a vacancy on the City Council.

City Clerk Jomsky, provided information on the different time frames of the recommended appointments, and responded to questions. 02/22/2024
Motion:

Motion:
04 Members McAustin and Salinas spoke in favor of Option C (two years or less remained on the unexpired term).

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Member Novak, to amend City Charter Section 404. - Vacancy - Appointment, by recommending that the City Council conduct an appointment process if two years or less remained on an unexpired term:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Members Farhat, McAustin, Mejia, Novak, Salinas, Chair
Chawkins
Vice Chair Hatcher
Members Kennedy, McCoy, Wilson
None
The Task Force discussed the consideration of adding a residency requirement for an appointed position to fill vacancies on the City Council, considering whether to require: a) Residency of at least six months, b) Residency of at least 30 days; and c) Residency at the time a vacancy occurs.

Members McAustin, Mejia, and Farhat spoke in support of a residency requirement of at least six months for an appointed person. Member McAustin noted as part of her consideration and preference, that an appointed individual be part of the community that the person is seeking to represent.

Vice Chair Hatcher and Member Mejia expressed concerns with not having the same residency requirements for individuals seeking the appointed office and candidates seeking the elected office. Vice Chair Hatcher asked staff to provide information on other municipalities residence requirements.

Following discussion regarding the Charge and Scope of the Task Force, Chair Chawkins noted his inclination to pursue the resident requirement for candidates only after formally asking the City Council to add the matter to the Task Force's scope.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Salinas, seconded by Member McAustin, to amend City Charter Section 404. - Vacancy - Appointment, include a residency requirement of at least six months for those seeking to be appointed to the City Council to fill a vacant unexpired term:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Members Farhat, McAustin, Mejia, Novak, Salinas, Vice
Chair Hatcher, Chair Chawkins
None
Members Kennedy, McCoy, Wilson
None
02/22/2024
RECESS

NEW BUSINESS

FUTURE MEETING

SCHEDULE
05 The Charter Study Task Force meeting recessed at 7:47 p.m. and reconvened at 7:57 p.m.

CONSIDERATION OF OPTIONS REGARDING THE TIMING OF THE

MAYOR'S ELECTION
Shauna Clark, representing Baker Tilly, presented a PowerPoint presentation on the item, including information on the City's term lengths and time of elections, cities with two-year mayor terms, advantages and disadvantages of two- and six-year terms, the role of term limits currently under consideration, and responded to questions.

City Clerk Jomsky reported that the City Clerk's Office received two letters providing comments on the matter, one advocating for a six-year term for the Mayor position on the City Council; and the other advocating for the Mayor's election cycle to occur in odd years, which were distributed to the Task Force, posted on line, and made part of the record for this item.

The Task Force discussed prior City Elections, vendors available to assist municipalities with elections, and the pros and cons associated with a mayoral six-year term, moving all Council District elections to the same cycle opposite the Mayor, and the need for staggered Councilmember terms.

Members Farhat and Novak expressed concerns with the Mayoral term being two-years, noting the need for the Mayor to continuously be running for office, and likely not focused on the vision of the City; and optimally having an odd year Mayoral election in order to provide all Councilmembers the same opportunity to run for Mayor without having some to forfeit their seat.

Chair Chawkins requested that the consultant team provide information from other municipalities on options for odd-year Mayoral elections, voter turnout, and associated costs.

By order of the Chair, and consensus of the Task Force, the information was received and filed, with staff to return with the additional requested information detailed above.

CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES TO THE CHARTER STUDY TASK

FORCE REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE AND REGULAR

MEETING LOCATION
City Clerk Jomsky provided an update on the Task Force's regular meeting schedule, and reported that staff has reserved Robinson Park Recreation Center, multi-purpose room for the April 11, 2024 Task Force meeting to occur at 6:00 p.m., and responded to questions.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Member Salinas, to approve the April 11, 2024 Charter Study Task Force meeting at 6:00 p.m., and at Robinson Park Recreation Center, 02/22/2024
ADJOURNMENT:

ATTEST:
06 Multi-Purpose Room, as a regular meeting. (Motion unanimously approved) (Absent: Members Kennedy, McCoy, Wilson)
On the order of the Chair, the meeting of the Charter Study Task Force was adjourned at 8:32 p.m.

A KINS, Chair
Charter Study Task Force
02/22/2024

OPENING
ROLL CALL:

Staff:

CITY OF PASADENA

CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
MARCH 14, 2024 - 6:00 P.M.

CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBER, ROOM S249
100 NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE, PASADENA, CA 91101

REGULAR MEETING
The Chair called the regular meeting of the Charter Study Task Force to order at 6:06 p.m. (Absent: Members Kennedy, Mejia)
Member Vince Farhat
Member Lena Louise Kennedy (absent)
Member Margaret McAustin
Member Liberty McCoy
Member Diana Carbajal Mejia (absent)
Member Paul Novak
Member Raul Salinas
Member Andy Wilson
Vice Chair Marcus Hatcher
Chair Ken Chawkins
Michele Bagneris, City Attorney
Mark Jomsky, City Clerk
Christine Soo, Assistant City Clerk
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 22, 2024 REGULAR

MEETING
It was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Member McAustin, to approve the meeting minutes, as submitted.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Members Farhat, Novak, Salinas, Vice Chair Hatcher,
Chair Chawkins
None
Members McCoy, Wilson
Members Kennedy, Mejia
PUBLIC COMMENT ON No one appeared for public comment on matters not on the agenda.

MATTERS NOT ON THE
AGENDA

OLD BUSINESS CONTINUED DISCUSSION REGARDING THE CONSIDERATION

OF TERM LIMITS FOR THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
01 Shauna Clark, representing consultant - Baker Tilly, introduced Dr.

Julian Gold, Mayor of Beverly Hills, and Michael MacDonald, Ventura City Clerk, as guest speakers sharing their perspectives on the impacts of term limits on City Councils.
03/14/2024
02 Dr. Gold stated that the City of Beverly Hills implemented term limits in 2022, with the ballot measure receiving 82% approval of voters in support. He noted that one of the cons of having term limits is that it hinders a City Council from retaining institutional knowledge over longer periods of time, as members cycle out. He stated that one of the pros of having term limits is that it allows younger voices on the City Council, facilitating difficult discussions on matters important to them.

Mr. MacDonald shared that in the City of Ventura, prior to term limits, a number of Councilmembers had served for decades, which raised the initial question regarding limitations on diverse representation resulting from the lack of City Council turnover. To address this issue, the City of Ventura appointed a Charter Review Committee to study the issues (pros and cons) of preserving institutional knowledge versus fostering an incumbency advantage. He stated that the Charter Review Committee recommended City Council term limits for three four-year terms, which was placed on the ballot, and was subsequently adopted by voters.

In response to Member Farhat's inquiry for a recommended number of terms, Dr. Gold spoke about his personal experience with the learning curve of being an elected official from his first term to this third term, noting that the ease of transitioning to this new role depends on an individual's background and their existing knowledge; he also shared the importance of outgoing Councilmembers planning for successors.

In response to Member Salinas' inquiry regarding the use of social media in campaigns, Dr. Gold stated that it has contributed to increasingly professional campaigns, and organizations are utilizing social media platforms to turn out the vote. Mr. MacDonald shared that social media platforms have increased public outreach efforts.

Following completion of the guest speaker presentations, City Clerk Jomsky reported that two letters in support of term limits and one letter in opposition to term limits were received by the City Clerk's Office, distributed to the Charter Study Task Force, posted online, and made part of the public record.

Shauna Clark provided a presentation on term limits in California cities, methodologies for data collection, and a summary of responses received, including reported advantages and disadvantages with term limits, as provided by responding cities. Ms. Clark and City Clerk Jomsky reported on survey findings and the limitations they faced when collecting responses throughout the state. Ms. Clark explained that impacts were difficult to determine because the implementation of term limits at many municipalities were either too new or had been in place for so long that the initial perspectives were not available. She noted that based on reports provided by some cities with term limits, more individuals were inclined to run for office as incumbents termed out.

She also clarified that if term limits were adopted, current members of the City Council would not be affected until their next election cycle (in 2026 or 2028).
03/14/2024
MOTION:
03 The Task Force discussed incumbency and the potential pros and cons of term limits, including its impact on new ideas, diversity, and retention of institutional knowledge.

Member Salinas advocated for implementing a formal onboarding process for newly elected Councilmembers, which would provide them an opportunity to learn bylaws and meet with City staff.

Vice Chair Hatcher and Member Wilson spoke in support of term limits, stating studies show that term limits increase participation among women and minority candidates, which promotes diverse engagement and fresh ideas.

Member McAustin expressed concerns regarding term limits, pointing out that term limits occur every four years with voters having the opportunity to elect a new representative if they are unhappy with their incumbent's performance. She acknowledged that the expenses and costs of campaigning can deter individuals from running for office. She also spoke in support of implementing an on boarding process for newly elected Councilmembers, and advocated for increased public outreach and education for constituents on what it means to be a Councilmember to encourage more residents to consider candidacy, noting that it takes knowledge and time to consider running for office.

Chair Chawkins suggested recommending a trial period for term limits to provide an opportunity to review and consider these new dynamics and its effect on the City Council prior to full implementation.

Member Farhat spoke in support of recommending term limits to the City Council, as well as recommending a Council-driven public information process to encourage more residents to run for public office, an onboarding process for new Councilmembers, and for a robust description of the Task Force's discussion to be provided as part of the City Council's de novo review of this topic.

Simon Gibbons, Pasadena resident, expressed concerns with the concept of term limits and the length of time needed to fully understand its impact and determine its effectiveness.

Member Salinas expressed concerns regarding the proposed timing to implement term limits, suggesting that term limits may be more beneficial in situations where the elected body exhibits a lack of stability, and stated his preference for a wait and see approach, especially in relation to the effects of the newly implemented Levine Act prior to supporting term limits at this time.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Member Wilson, to recommend amendment(s) to the City Charter to (a) limit the Mayor's position to three consecutive four-year terms, and limit each member of the City Council to three consecutive four-year terms for each district, with a partial term of less than two years not counting towards a full term, (b) grant the elected official, after a four03/14/2024 MOTION:
year hiatus, or after four years in another City Council elected office, eligibility to hold elected office for two additional four-year terms, and (c) set the effective date of term limits in 2026 for Council Districts, 3, 5, and 7, and in 2028 for the Mayor and Council Districts 1, 2, 4, and 6.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Members Farhat, McAustin, McCoy, Wilson, Vice Chair
Hatcher
Members Novak, Salinas, Chair Chawkins
None
Members Kennedy, Mejia
It was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Vice Chair Hatcher, to (a) recommend to the City Council to adopt a formal Council-driven public information process and an onboarding process for new Councilmembers; (b) direct staff to include a robust description of the Task Force's discussion regarding term limits, to be included in the Task Force's Final Report, as well as part of the record provided to the City Council in its de novo review; and (c) suggest to the City Council to set a timeframe to evaluate the impacts of terms limits if/when implemented.

Member McAustin suggested a friendly amendment to make the third recommendation as a separate motion.

Member Farhat and Vice Chair Hatcher accepted the friendly amendment.

AMENDED MOTION: Following discussion, it was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Vice Chair Hatcher, to recommend to the City Council to adopt a formal Council-driven public information process and an onboarding process for new Councilmembers, and direct staff to include a robust description of the Task Force's discussion regarding term limits, to be included in the Task Force's Final Report, as well as part of the record provided to the City Council in its de novo review.

MOTION:
04 Member Salinas mentioned that the League of California Cities offers an onboarding program to educate and help new Councilmembers navigate their new roles.

Chair Chawkins suggested that staff recommend using existing programs, such as the one offered by League of California Cities, as a model for Pasadena to create their own onboarding process.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Members Farhat, McAustin, McCoy, Novak, Salinas,
Wilson, Vice Chair Hatcher, Chair Chawkins
None
None
Members Kennedy, Mejia
It was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Vice Chair Hatcher, to recommend to the City Council to set a time to evaluate the effects of terms limits if/when implemented.
03/14/2024
Member Wilson suggested that in addition to those effects, it could be good practice to have periodic reviews of the City Charter.

SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Following discussion, it was moved by Member Wilson, seconded by Member Farhat, to recommend a review cycle for the City Charter and term limits to determine its impacts.

MOTION TABLED: Following discussion, Member Wilson suggested that the motion be tabled and brought back at a later date as a part of the final recommendations package to the City Council.

NEW BUSINESS

ITEM TABLED
Member McAustin left the
meeting at 8:59 p.m.

MOTION:

ADJOURNMENT:
05 CONSIDERATION OF CITY COUNCIL COMPENSATION,

BROADLY, AS WELL AS DEDICATED CHILDCARE AND

ELDERCARE ALLOWANCES FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY
COUNCIL (City Charter Section 405)**
The Task Force unanimously agreed by consensus to table the new business item to the next meeting and requested that the next meeting start at 5:30 p.m. to provide additional time for discussion.

CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES TO THE CHARTER STUDY TASK

FORCE REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE AND/OR REGULAR

MEETING LOCATION
City Clerk Jomsky announced that the Charter Study Task Force meeting scheduled for Thursday, May 9, 2024, will take place at H&H Jivalagian Youth Center in East Pasadena.

It was moved by Member Salinas, seconded by Member Farhat, to set a new start time of 5:30 p.m. for the Charter Study Task Force meeting on Thursday, March 28, 2024; and to set the time and location for the meeting scheduled for Thursday, May 9, 2024, at 6:00 p.m., at the H&H Jivalagian Youth Center. (Motion Unanimously Approved) (Absent:

Members Kennedy, McAustin, Mejia)
Member Wilson requested additional information pertaining to the amount of time Councilmembers spend on Council-related work and constituency-related matters per month. He suggested that averaging the hours per month would be more considerable than weekly hours, since agendas and the length of Council meetings vary.

Member Farhat requested additional information on District Liaison compensation.

On the order of the Chair, the meeting of the Charter Study Task Force was adjourned at 9:04 P-~
~\'L

KEN CHAWKINS,
~ Chair
Charter Study Task Force
03/14/2024

CITY OF PASADENA

CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
MARCH 28, 2024 - 5:30 P.M.

CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBER, ROOM S249
100 NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE, PASADENA, CA 91101

OPENING
ROLL CALL:

Staff:

PUBLIC COMMENT ON

MATTERS NOT ON THE
AGENDA

NEW BUSINESS
Member Kennedy arrived
at 5:38 p.m.
01 REGULAR MEETING
Vice Chair Hatcher called the regular meeting of the Charter Study Task Force to order at 5:34 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Member Vince Farhat
Member Lena Kennedy (arrived at 5:38 p.m.)
Member Margaret McAustin
Member Liberty McCoy
Member Diana Carbajal Mejia
Member Paul Novak
Member Raul Salinas
Member Andy Wilson
Vice Chair Marcus Hatcher
Chair Ken Chawkins (absent)
Michele Bagneris, City Attorney
Mark Jomsky, City Clerk
Alex Souto, Deputy City Manager
Christine Soo, Assistant City Clerk
APPROVAL OF MINUTES- MARCH 14, 2024 REGULAR MEETING
It was moved by Member McAustin, seconded by Member Salinas, to approve the meeting minutes, as submitted.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

None.

Members Farhat, McAustin, McCoy, Mejia, Novak,
Salinas, Wilson, Vice Chair Hatcher
None
None
Member Kennedy, Chair Chawkins

CONSIDERATION OF CITY COUNCIL COMPENSATION,

BROADLY, AS WELL AS DEDICATED CHILDCARE AND

ELDERCARE ALLOWANCES FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY
COUNCIL (City Charter Section 405)**
City Clerk Jomsky provided introductory remarks and reported that the Charter Study Task Force can address issues of compensation and determine if relative changes need to be made to the Charter; he clarified that an impaneled Council Compensation Committee would be the recommending body. City Attorney Bagneris further stated that 03/28/2024
02 Compensation Committee, the Task Force can discuss the matter in a broader scope, including making recommendations to amend the process for Council Compensation to be studied and/or changed (i.e., eliminating the Council Compensation Committee, requiring more frequent reviews of Council Compensation, etc.). She further stated that the Task Force can suggest modifications to the current level of compensation for the City Council, but unless and until the City Charter is amended, any modifications to City Council compensation must be studied by an appointed Council Compensation Committee.

Shauna Clark, consultant from Baker Tilly, gave a presentation on the compensation process, the current stipends and benefits for Pasadena's Mayor and Councilmembers, comparison of wages and benefits to other cities with similar sizes and attributes, and responded to questions.

Discussion ensued regarding the role of Council District Liaisons, the differences between part-time and full-time Councilmembers, and the hours spent weekly by Councilmembers doing work related to their elected positions.

Member McAustin voiced concerns that increasing compensation might change the role of City Council and more align with full-time professional, elected employees, which is inconsistent with the City's Charter and organizational structure of a City Manager/Council form of government.

Member Farhat stated that consideration of increasing Council compensation should also include the wages received by the District Liaisons.

In regard to childcare and eldercare allowances, Vice Chair Hatcher and Member Wilson expressed concerns with creating inequities in benefits received by Councilmembers if regular City employees do not the same type of benefit.

Given the various aspects of Council Compensation discussion, Member McAustin stated her support for recommending that the City Council convene a Council Compensation Committee as soon as possible.

As a point of clarification on convening the Committee, City Clerk Jomsky and City Attorney Bagneris reported that there is a Charter provision that states "Not later than October 1st of the year the committee is appointed, the Council Compensation Committee shall submit a report to the City Council, recommending either no change be made in compensation, or that change, either an increase or decrease, be made and the amount thereof. If the report is not timely submitted or is not adopted by a majority of the members of the committee, the recommendation shall be deemed to be a recommendation for no change. The committee shall cease to exist 30 days after its report is submitted to the City Council."
03/28/2024
MOTION:

RECESS:

MOTION:
03 Member Novak and Member Kennedy advocated for using the terminology of "family care" instead of "childcare" or "eldercare" as a more comprehensive approach to meet the needs of officeholders.

Member Farhat suggested that a letter be submitted to the City Council to inform them of the Task Force's Council Compensation discussion and to request the Council Compensation Committee be convened soon, given the October 1st sunset date.

Member Farhat made a motion, seconded by Member Salinas, to recommend that (1) the City Council convene the Charter-prescribed Council Compensation Committee, (2) the Committee be more regularly convened (at least once every 4 years), and (3) recommend that the Committee consider broadening childcare
reimbursements/allowances to include family care, and to incorporate Consumer Price Index (CPI) increases, and receive all information from Baker Tilly, as well as the minutes from this Charter Study Task Force meeting.

Member Salinas suggested a friendly amendment to the motion for the Committee to consider the format laid out by CA Senate Bill 329 as a guide and concentrate on issue spotting instead of being positional.

Member Farhat and Member Salinas accepted the friendly amendment to the original motion.

City Clerk Jomsky reported that 3 letters of correspondence, expressing support and/or providing various comments and suggestions pertaining to the increase of council compensation, were received by the City Clerk's Office, distributed to the Task Force, posted online, and made part of the public record for this item.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Member Salinas, to: (1) recommend that the City Council convene the Council Compensation Committee, and do so on a more regular basis; (2) recommend that the Committee discuss the issue of "family care" as a broader category than childcare (or eldercare), and consider CPI increases, other factors to support and promote diversity on the City Council, and revise methods of reimbursement to increase efficiency and transparency; and (3) direct City staff to provide the Committee with copies of the report from Baker Tilly, a brief summary of State Senate Bill 329, and the meeting minutes as background information. (Motion unanimously approved) (Absent: Chair Chawkins)
The Charter Study Task Force recessed at 7:02 p.m., and reconvened at7:15p.m.

Following additional discussion, it was moved by Member Novak, seconded by Member McCoy, to require by charter amendment that the City Council Compensation Committee shall meet not less than once every 5 years. (Motion unanimously approved) (Absent: Chair Chawkins)
03/28/2024
04 Member Farhat requested that at the end of the Task Force's work, consideration be given to the total number of ballot measures resulting from this process, and possibly "repackage" the timing requirement of convening the Charter Compensation Committee as an ordinance rather than as a Charter Amendment measure.

CONSIDERATION OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS
Baker Tilly Consultant Clark gave a presentation on campaign contribution limits, noting the pros and cons of local limits and limits set by the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). Caroline Monroe, Deputy City Attorney, provided information on the Levine Act, which prohibits parties of a proceeding from contributing more than $250 to a Council campaign during the pendency of a proceeding before the Council, as well as restricts Councilmembers from soliciting or accepting a campaign contribution above $250 for the 12 months prior to a proceeding.

Member Novak expressed concerns that adopting new contribution limits may create complications related to tracking and additional work for City staff.

Member Kennedy expressed support to retain the current campaign contribution limits and stated a lack of need to change the limits.

Discussion ensued regarding enforcement of the Levine Act, the FPPC's role, and other cities' disclosure processes to track contributions and donations.

After further research, City Attorney Bagneris reported that the Attorney General may also enforce the Levine Act, and it is a potential misdemeanor subject to a fine of either $10,000 or three times the amount the person failed to report properly or unlawfully contributed, expended, gave, or received, or may be imposed upon the conviction of such a violation.

In response to Member McAustin inquiry regarding the Levine Act's overlap with the City's Taxpayer Protection Amendment (TPA), City Attorney Bagneris stated that although they are similar, the Amendment addresses a different situation where a decision-maker, not just elected officials, would not be able to receive certain benefits (including employment) after voting "yes" or approving certain entitlements or during the negotiation period of a contract, noting that the TPA cannot be eliminated, unless repealed by voters as part of a Charter Amendment.

In response to Member McCoy's inquiry regarding committee funds used to run for different offices, Ms. Clark and City Clerk Jomsky explained that funds can be used by campaigns for a new race, but the candidate/committee is required to open a brand-new bank account for the new campaign, noting that candidates are allowed to donate 03/28/2024
ADJOURNMENT:
05 leftover money from the old campaign to the new campaign and there is no contribution limit for this.

Member Farhat advocated for retaining the current default contribution limits and continue the City's efforts to comply with the Levine Act. He suggested monitoring the effects of the City's TPA and the Levine Act to see if any compliance issues arise before changing contribution limits in the City Charter.

The Task Force discussed independent expenditures, the inability to regulate independent expenditures in campaign races, and the lack of transparency of who contributes funds to independent expenditure committees. The Task Force requested additional information on the effects of independent expenditures in recent elections in peer cities that have adopted campaign contribution limits more restrictive than the state limits set by AB571.

City Clerk Jomsky reported that 4 letters of correspondence, expressing support and/or providing various comments pertaining to campaign contribution limits, were received by the City Clerk's Office, distributed to the Task Force, posted on line, and made part of the public record.

Following discussion, by order of the Vice Chair, and consensus of the Task Force, the information was received and filed pending direction to the consultant for additional information, to be presented at a future Task Force meeting.

CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES TO THE CHARTER STUDY TASK

FORCE REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE AND/OR REGULAR

MEETING LOCATION
City Clerk Jomsky reviewed the proposed meeting schedule, noting the meeting locations of the Charter Study Task Force for the April 11 th meeting to be held at Robinson Park Recreation Center, and for the May 9th meeting to be held at H&H Jivalagian Youth Center.

On the ord~r of the Vice Chair, the meeting of the Charter Study Task Force aslad·ourned at 8:43 p.m.

Charter Study Task Force
03/28/2024

CITY OF PASADENA

CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
APRIL 11, 2024- 6:00 P.M.

ROBINSON PARK RECREATION CENTER, MULTIPURPOSE ROOM
1081 N FAIR OAKS AVE, PASADENA, CA 91103

OPENING
ROLL CALL:

Staff:

REGULAR MEETING
Chair Chawkins called the regular meeting of the Charter Study Task Force to order at 6:06 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Member Vince Farhat
Member Lena Kennedy
Member Margaret McAustin
Member Liberty McCoy
Member Diana Carbajal Mejia
Member Paul Novak
Member Raul Salinas (absent)
Member Andy Wilson
Vice Chair Marcus Hatcher (absent)
Chair Ken Chawkins
Michele Bagneris, City Attorney
Mark Jomsky, City Clerk
Alex Souto, Deputy City Manager
Christine Soo, Assistant City Clerk
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MARCH 28, 2024 REGULAR MEETING
It was moved by Member McCoy, seconded by Member McAustin, to approve the meeting minutes, as submitted.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Members Farhat, Kennedy, McAustin, McCoy, Mejia,
Novak, Wilson
None
Chair Chawkins
Member Salinas, Vice Chair Hatcher
PUBLIC COMMENT ON Jon Fuhrman, Pasadena resident, advocated for a Pro Tern Mayor MATTERS NOT ON THE position and provided suggestions for the method of selection.

AGENDA
01 Allen Shay, Pasadena resident, advocated for the topic of use of technology and accountability for the Pasadena Police Department be agendized and discussed by the Task Force.

Olden Denham, Pasadena resident, spoke on the shooting of Anthony McClain and expressed the need for police reform using the Charter Amendment process.

Michelle White, Pasadena resident, requested the Task Force discuss the matter of campaign contributions from labor unions, who represent City employees.
04/11/2024

OLD BUSINESS
02 Denise Robb, Pasadena resident, expressed support for term limits for Councilmembers, ranked choice voting, and reasonable campaign contribution limits.

Chair Chawkins clarified that the Charter Study Task Force only has the ability to discuss the topics as directed by City Council.

CONSIDERATION OF OPTIONS REGARDING THE TIMING OF
MAYOR'S ELECTION**
Shauna Clark, Baker Tilly consultant, presented a PowerPoint presentation on cost estimates of off-cycle elections and voter turnout rates based on data from other cities in Los Angeles County. She presented a cost analysis if the City were to conduct off-cycle elections.

In response to questions, City Clerk Jomsky clarified that the County of Los Angeles does not conduct elections using ranked choice voting, so the City would be responsible for purchasing equipment and hiring a consultant team to assist in running such an election.

Jonathan Horton, Pasadena resident, expressed concerns for off-cycle elections due to the high costs and low voter turnout, and advocated for a full-time, salaried Mayor.

Member McCoy, Member Farhat, and Member Novak expressed opposition to off-cycle elections due to high costs, low voter turnout, and the ineffectiveness of potentially changing the City Charter to accommodate up to four Councilmembers to run for the Office of Mayor.

Chair Chawkins suggested that one other option that the Task Force might consider would be to conduct the Mayor's Election during the Primary and General elections of the City, and have all other Council District Elections occur during the November General elections as plurality voting elections (highest vote wins, with no run-off), thus allowing Councilmembers to compete for the Mayor's seat without having to forego running for their own District seat.

City Clerk Jomsky presented a PowerPoint presentation detailing the Chair's alternative solution, while also providing additional options for the Task Force to consider, including plurality elections for the Mayor and Councilmembers, plurality elections for only Councilmembers, and an option where the City could conduct a run-off election for any Council District seat that did not achieve a 50%+1 majority in the General election, that would occur eight weeks after the declaration of the General election results.

Members of the Task Force thanked the Chair and City Clerk for considering and presenting these additional options but opposed adjusting the timing of elections to essentially allow four members of the City Council to run for the Mayor's position without having to forgo seeking their own elected seats.
04/11/2024
MOTION:

NEW BUSINESS
03 Task Force members acknowledged the current advantage for Council Districts 3, 5, and 7, but agreed that the disadvantage to Districts 1, 2, 4, and 6 did not rise to the level of creating such a complicated solution.

Member Novak expressed concerns with the proposed solutions, which may overwhelm voters. Echoing the concerns of other Task Force members, Member Novak advocated for no change to the timing of the mayoral election cycle.

Jon Fuhrman, Pasadena resident, expressed opposition to the proposed solutions, stating that it would create voter fatigue and increase partisanship in City elections.

Allen Shay, Pasadena resident, stated that the proposed solutions would create more difficulty for voters to make decisions and advocated for term limits as a better solution.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Novak, seconded by Member Wilson, to recommend to the City Council that no changes be made to the timing of the Mayoral election cycle. (Motion unanimously approved.) (Absent: Member Salinas, Vice Chair Hatcher)

STATUS REPORT ON ASSIGNED CHARTER STUDY TOPICS AND

CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO CONSULTANT
TEAM AND CITY STAFF ON PREPARATION OF FINAL REPORT**
City Clerk Jomsky provided introductory remarks on the item; he provided an overview and status updates on the assigned topics that have been discussed by the Task Force thus far, and noted the remaining pending issues that required clarification and/or further discussion by the Task Force.

The following individuals spoke in support of placing the matter of campaign contribution limits on the ballot for voters to decide and/or provided suggestions for contribution limits and term limits.

Sonia Berndt, Pasadena resident
Ellen Finkelpearl, Pasadena resident
Jonathan Horton, Pasadena residents
Ed Washatka, Pasadena resident
Allen Shay, Pasadena resident
Wes Reutimann, Pasadena resident
On the pending issue related to filling a council vacancy and the timing of an election if the City Council is unable to meet the 75-day appointment deadline, Member Farhat and Member Wilson advocated for the item to be discussed at the next meeting with Member Salinas in attendance to ensure a comprehensive discussion.

Member Novak emphasized caution when analyzing election trends that are compared to the City to Los Angeles, stating the City of Pasadena is drastically different in size and resources. 04/11/2024
ADJOURNMENT:

ATTEST:
04 Member Wilson requested the consultant and City staff provide additional data pertaining to campaign contributions and independent expenditures to facilitate the Task Force's discussion and consideration on the issue.

By order of the Chair, and consensus of the Task Force, the information was received and filed, with staff to return with additional information at the next meeting.

CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES TO THE CHARTER STUDY TASK

FORCE REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE AND/OR REGULAR

MEETING LOCATION
Member Farhat and Member Kennedy announced that they will attend the next Charter Study Task Force meeting remotely, in accordance with Brown Act regulations.

On the order of the Chair, the meeting of the Charter Study Task Force was adjou ned at 8:25 p.m.

IA , irCharter Study Task Force
04/11/2024

OPENING
ROLL CALL:

Staff:

CITY OF PASADENA

CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
APRIL 25, 2024-6:00 P.M.

CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBER, ROOM S249
100 NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE, PASADENA, CA 91101

REGULAR MEETING
Chair Chawkins called the regular meeting of the Charter Study Task Force to order at 6:08 p.m., and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Member Vince Farhat (via teleconference)
Member Lena Kennedy (via teleconference)
Member Margaret McAustin
Member Liberty McCoy
Member Diana Carbajal Mejia
Member Paul Novak (Absent)
Member Raul Salinas
Member Andy Wilson
Vice Chair Marcus Hatcher
Chair Ken Chawkins
Javan Rad, Chief Assistant City Attorney
Mark Jomsky, City Clerk
Alex Souto, Deputy City Manager
Christine Soo, Assistant City Clerk
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - APRIL 11, 2024 REGULAR MEETING
Member Farhat requested the minutes be amended as follows: Page 2, beginning of the 5th Paragraph, change "Member Salinas" to "Member Farhat", to now read, "Member McCoy, Member Farhat, and Member Novak expressed .... "
It was moved by Member McAustin, seconded by Member Wilson, to approve the meeting minutes, as amended.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Members Farhat, Kennedy, McAustin, McCoy, Mejia,
Wilson, Chair Chawkins
None
Members Salinas, Vice Chair Hatcher
Member Novak
PUBLIC COMMENT ON No one appeared for public comment on matters not on the agenda.

MATTERS NOT ON THE
AGENDA.

OLD BUSINESS CONSIDERATION OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS
Shauna Clark, Baker Tilly consultant, reviewed additional information on campaign contribution limits in other cities, including independent 01 04~~2024
02 expenditures, as part of a PowerPoint presentation, and responded to questions.

Member Wilson noted the difficulty of tracing the source of funds donated to Independent Expenditure Committees (IECs) and requested additional information regarding any limitations on contributions to, and expenditures made by, IECs.

Chair Chawkins questioned whether Political Action Committees (PAC) and Independent Expenditure Committees (IEC) should not be treated interchangeably, and requested information/clarification on the two types of entities.

Discussion ensued regarding the differences between PACs and IECs, the transparency in understanding the source of funds contributed to IECs, the potential interactions between a PAC and a candidate, and the purposes behind both types of political entities. Baker Tilly Consultant Clark noted that one difference between a PAC and an IEC is that a PAC is able to directly contribute to a candidate. IECs on the other hand are strictly entities that make independent expenditures in support or opposition to candidates and measures.

City Clerk Jomsky presented campaign contribution and expenditure data from comparable cities (Anaheim, Burbank, Irvine, and Santa Ana) with campaign contribution limits lower than state limits set by AB 571 and covering the 2020 and 2022 election cycles, as well as campaign contribution and expenditure data from Pasadena in 2020, 2022, and 2024, as part of a PowerPoint presentation, and responded to questions.

Member McCoy pointed out that the fluctuation of independent expenditures in the City of Santa Ana during the 2020 and 2022 election cycles was influenced by controversial topics surrounding their community at the time, including rent control measures.

Referencing the data analysis presented by City Clerk Jomsky, Member Wilson presented a regression analysis depicting the correlation between campaign contribution limits and the percentage of spending (independent expenditures) directed to the candidates. He emphasized that the City is an outlier in terms of independent expenditures occurring in Pasadena City elections.

The Charter Study Task Force engaged in discussion regarding the causation and correlation of independent expenditures and the winners of the elections.

City Clerk Jomsky reported that 6 letters, advocating for lower campaign contribution limits and 1 letter in support of maintaining the current state-mandated campaign contribution limits, were received by the City Clerk's Office, distributed to the Charter Study Task Force, posted on line, and made part of the public record for this item. 04/25/2024
03 The following individuals spoke on the correlations between contribution limits and independent expenditures presented in the staff reports, and advocated for lower campaign contribution limits:

Sonia Berndt, Pasadena resident
Ellen Finkelpearl, Pasadena resident
Samantha, Alhambra resident
Jake Obscherning, residence not stated
Joey G., resident not stated
In response to Member Wilson's prior inquiry, City Clerk Jomsky provided information distinguishing small PACs, large PACs, and IECs as stated in the Political Action Handbook, published by the California Chamber of Commerce.

Member Salinas noted inherent issues of campaign contribution limits, such as optics if the City's campaign contribution limit remains at $5,500, the internal structure of enforcing lower contribution limits, and the lack of data from the recent enactment of the Levine Act. He advocated for revisiting the matter once additional data is collected.

Vice Member Hatcher provided a breakdown of the campaign contribution amounts donated to the City's candidates who ran for office in the March 5, 2024 Primary election. He noted that a majority of the largest donations were in the mayoral race. He emphasized that the Task Force should determine if the matter at hand is to develop a solution to an optical problem or an actual problem.

Member Farhat spoke in support of lower campaign contribution limits, but noted and expressed concerns regarding the administrative costs and burdens to enforce limits at the City level (whereas the burden rests with the FPPC to enforce if City defaults to state limits), highlighting the potential for candidates to politicize campaign contribution limits and staff enforcement when violations occur.

Member McAustin advocated for the development of a policy that would prohibit Members of the City Council from voting on a labor union contract if any Member accepts donations from that labor union.

Assistant City Attorney Rad stated that City staff will research to see if this suggestion is covered by the Levine Act.

Referencing the data presented on the City of Burbank, Member McCoy expressed concerns relating to political polarization, party identification, and endorsements that can influence fundraising.

City Clerk Jomsky read a statement submitted by Member Paul Novak advocating for the Task Force to take no action relative to imposing new campaign contribution limits (beyond the default state limits), citing additional administration burden and the potential increase of independent expenditure activity as a way to circumvent lower limits. 04/25/2024
Member Salinas left the
meeting at 8:15 p.m.

RECESS:
04 Following discussion, it was moved by Member Salinas, seconded by Member Mejia, to table further discussion of the item.

Members of the Task Force expressed the need for additional data and information to support a comprehensive discussion and more complete understanding by members of the Task Force prior to voting on a recommendation for City Council consideration.

Member Salinas agreed with need for additional data and withdrew his motion.

The Charter Study Task Force requested additional information regarding the following subsequent matters: 1) the cost of having City staff enforce campaign contribution limits; 2) contextualization of data presented in Table 3 of the Baker Tilly report to determine campaign contributions/expenditures in aggregate to better understand what occurred over the time period; 3) how IECs report contributions received, and the contribution and expenditure limits for IECs and PACs; 4) information from comparably sized cities (in terms of population) that utilize State default campaign contribution limits and the correlation with independent expenditure activity occurring in those jurisdictions; 5) information on any policies that prohibit elected officials from voting on labor contracts if they have accepted campaign contributions from that labor union; and 6) the total amounts contributed and spent by labor unions in Pasadena City elections.

Chief Assistant City Attorney Rad added that City staff will look into the matter of labor contracts being excluded from the City's Tax Payer Amendment Act.

The Charter Study Task Force recessed at 8:13 p.m., and reconvened at 8:23 p.m.

STATUS REPORT ON ASSIGNED CHARTER STUDY TOPICS AND

CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO CONSULTANT

TEAM AND CITY STAFF ON PREPARATION OF FINAL REPORT
City Clerk Jomsky provided introductory remarks on the updated item; he provided an overview and status report on the assigned topics that have been discussed by the Task Force to date, and presented a strikeout version of possible changes to the City Charter based on the Task Force's actions over the course of their meeting schedule.

The Task Force engaged in a brief discussion relating to the number of votes required by the City Council to fill a vacancy by appointment.

In response to Member Kennedy's inquiry regarding the language for the appointment process, City Clerk Jomsky clarified that the changes to the appointment process will occur in two parts - first, by voters approving amendments to the charter language, and second by the City Council adopting by ordinance a process to make appointments that incorporates community engagement and public meetings.
04/25/2024
MOTION:
05 Member Kennedy expressed concerns that despite incorporation of community engagement elements to the City Council's appointment process, the community's input may not have any impact on the Council decisions when making appointments to fill vacancies.

In response to Member Kennedy's concerns, Chief Assistant City Attorney Rad stated that the proposed language for the vacancy appointment process can be refined to impose a duty on the Members of the City Council and specifications for community engagement can be reiterated in the ordinance, much like the process to include community organizations in the establishment of the Community Police Oversight Commission.

Member Farhat expressed support for amending Section 404 of the City Charter to change the number of votes required for a vacancy appointment from five affirmative votes to an affirmative vote by a majority of the City Council.

Member Mejia made a motion to propose a charter amendment that would require the City Council to fill a councilmember vacancy with a majority vote, instead of five affirmative votes.

Member Wilson noted that if such a change to a majority vote was made, then it should also be required that a majority vote be needed for the Council's normal course of operations, emphasizing the need to be consistent with the proposed appointment process and to have a uniform standard of voting.

After hearing Member Wilson's concerns, Chair Chawkins reopened the discussion.

Member Hatcher expressed concerns that stakes are equally as important when appointing a councilmember because voting parties do not live in the district; he advocated for maintaining the 5 affirmative vote requirements.

Member Mejia pointed out that the proposed process for appointing a councilmember is not as rigorous as the process for appointing a Mayor Pro Tern due to the requirements for public input and community engagement.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Mejia, seconded by Member Farhat, to propose a charter amendment that would require the City Council to fill a councilmember vacancy with a majority vote, instead of five affirmative votes.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Members Farhat, Kennedy, McCoy, Mejia, Chair
Chawkins
Members McAustin, Wilson, Vice Member Hatcher
None
Members Novak, Salinas
04/25/2024
ADJOURNMENT:

ATTEST:
06 Member Wilson expressed concerns with the inconsistency between the approved action requiring a majority of affirmative votes of remaining members of the City Council to make an appointment for an unscheduled vacancy in a Council District, and with other normal business operations of the City Council, as well as the appointment of a Mayor Pro Tern by seven members of the City Council in the event of a vacancy in the Mayor's seat.

Chair Chawkins inquired if the Mayor Pro Tern position would receive two of everything since they would be serving as a councilmember and a mayor (i.e., seats on commissions, double compensation, etc.).

Member Mejia added that the language in the amendment to Section 404 stated that the Mayor Pro Tern is not required to relinquish their seat, so they are, in fact, holding both seats.

The Task Force discussed possible vacancy scenarios of the City Council that reduced membership below eight members for a period of time. Member Chawkins and Member Wilson suggested a fully consistent solution should be considered that would change the approval threshold of the City Council to a majority of the City Council from the currently required five affirmative votes of the City Council for all matters. The Task Force agreed by consensus to table further discussion and bring back the matter when more members are present.

City Clerk Jomsky continued his presentation, and reported that the topics of campaign contribution limits, voting majority requirements, and council compensation will be brought back at the next meeting. He also stated that the remaining Task Force meetings will be used to review and approve the Final Report to the City Council.

Following discussion, by order of the Chair, and consensus of the Task Force, the remainder of the information was received and filed, including direction to City staff for additional information, to be presented at the next Task Force meeting.

CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES TO THE CHARTER STUDY TASK

FORCE REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE AND/OR REGULAR

MEETING LOCATION
No changes were made to the Charter Study Task Force regular meeting schedule and meeting locations.

On the order of the Chair, the meeting of the Charter Study Task Force was adjo med at 9:29 p.m.
04/25/2024

OPENING
ROLL CALL:

Staff:

CITY OF PASADENA

CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
MAY 9, 2024-6:00 P.M.

H&H JIVALAGIAN YOUTH CENTER, COMMUNITY ROOM
2242 E FOOTHILL BLVD, PASADENA, CA 91107

REGULAR MEETING
Chair Chawkins called the regular meeting of the Charter Study Task Force to order at 6:07 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Member Vince FarhatMember Lena KennedyMember Margaret McAustin Member Liberty McCoy (absent)Member Diana Carbajal MejiaMember Paul Novak (arrived at 7:14 p.m.)Member Raul SalinasMember Andy Wilson Vice Chair Marcus Hatcher
Chair Ken ChawkinsJavan Rad, Chief Assistant City Attorney Mark Jomsky, City Clerk
Alex Souto, Deputy City Manager
Christine Soo, Assistant City Clerk
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - APRIL 25, 2024 REGULAR MEETING
It was moved by Vice Chair Hatcher, seconded by Member Salinas, to approve the meeting minutes as submitted. (Motion unanimouslyapproved.) (Absent: Members McCoy, Novak)

PUBLIC COMMENT ON
MATTERS NOT ON THEAGENDA.OLD BUSINESS
01 No one appeared for public comment on matters not on the agenda.

CONSIDERATION OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS
City Clerk Jomsky provided introductory remarks, presented additionalinformation as requested by the Task Force at the April 25, 2024meeting, and responded to questions.Chief Assistant City Attorney Rad reported on the legal issues related to adopting regulations to prevent Councilmembers from voting on collective bargaining agreements, including constitutional First Amendment protections related to campaign contributions, and possible legal ramifications that might result. He also reported that the Levine Act and the City's Taxpayer Protection Act both exclude labor contracts, and responded to questions.
05/09/2024
I
Jon Fuhrman, guest presenter, provided a brief presentation on the framework for campaign finance regulations, clarified terminology related to political action committees (PAC) and independent expenditure committees (IEC), and responded to questions.City Clerk Jomsky continued his presentation on the reporting ofactivity, expenditures, and contribution limits by PACs and lECs, the level of IE activity that exists for cities that utilize state default campaign contribution limits, and information on how much labor unions arespending on City Council campaigns.City Clerk Jomsky reported that 5 letters providing various commentsand/or advocating for lower campaign contribution limits in Pasadena were received by the City Clerk's Office, distributed to the Task Force, posted online, and made part of the public record.City Clerk Jomsky read a statement submitted by Member McCoy,expressing support for lower campaign contribution limits and advocating for a $500 limit for City Councilmember races and $1,000 limit for the citywide Mayoral race.

The following individuals expressed support for lower campaigncontribution limits and/or advocated for the matter to be placed on the ballot for voters to decide:

Denise Robb, Pasadena residentEllen Finkelpearl, Pasadena resident Sonia Berndt, Pasadena resident
Alex Rivas, Pasadena resident
David Lianas, Pasadena Police Officers Association, spoke in favor of the state mandated campaign contribution limits.

John Fuhrman, Pasadena resident, expressed concerns that lower campaign contribution limits would not eliminate bribery and that it could give incumbents an advantage.

The Task Force discussed the sentiments expressed by community members, as well as the pros and cons of implementing lower campaign contribution limits.

Members McAustin and Kennedy emphasized that lowering the City's campaign contribution limits would promote democracy and encourage more people to run for office.Member Novak stated that the staff report indicates that most cities in California have not adopted local campaign contribution limits.

Member Novak and Vice Chair Hatcher expressed concerns withlowering campaign contribution limits, stating their skepticism thatlower limits resolves an actual problem or an optical problem. 02 05/09/2024
MOTION:
03 Member Salinas expressed concerns with lowering campaigncontribution limits, noting that if the City were to adopt limits different than the state default limits, City staff would have difficulty providing thesame level of enforcement as the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) and would leave the City vulnerable to an ineffective enforcement mechanism.

In response to comments and questions, Shauna dark, Baker TillyConsultant, clarified that only 27% of cities who have adopted lower campaign contribution limits have reported their limits to the FPPC,(since the reporting was not mandated), and noted that there may beother cities that adopted lower campaign contribution limits that are notaccounted for in the information provided by Baker Tilly.Member Wilson noted his concerns that while implementing lower campaign contribution limits may be optically positive, in actuality, it does not necessarily eliminate money from politics, which could createa sense of false confidence for members of the public regarding politicsin Pasadena.

Discussion ensued regarding the consequences of lower campaign contribution limits, such as optics, incumbent advantages, the difficulty for first-time candidates to raise money, and increased participation in local elections.

Following discussion, Member Farhat spoke in favor of lower campaign contribution limits of $1,000 per person/entity, per election, forcandidates running for Councilmember and $2,500 per person/entity,per election, for candidates running for Mayor.

In response to questions, City Clerk Jomsky clarified that adopting campaign contribution limits different than the state default limits couldbe implemented either through a Charter Amendment or adopted byordinance.

Member Salinas suggested that the Task Force recommend including an enforcement mechanism, to be proposed by the City Attorney'sOffice, that the City Council can consider as part of any motion to adopt local campaign contribution limits.Member Novak advocated for the motion to include limitations on the frequency of permitting changes to campaign contribution limits in orderto prevent arbitrary changes by future seated City Councils.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Member Wilson, to recommend to the City Council to set campaigncontribution limits at $1,000 per person/entity, per election, forcandidates running for Councilmember, and $2,500 per person/entity,per election, for candidates running for Mayor; that the limits be adopted by ordinance; and subject to the City Attorney's Officeproviding a framework to the City Council for enforcement equivalent to, or exceeding, FPPC enforcement, if possible.
05/09/2024
MOTION:

AYES: Members Farhat, Kennedy, McAustin, Mejia, Salinas, Wilson, Chair Chawkins
NOES: Member Novak, Vice Chair Hatcher
ABSENT: Member McCoy
ABSTAIN: None
Member Novak spoke in favor of amending the City Charter to includeprovisions that state, to the extent that the City Council adopts an ordinance imposing campaign contribution limits, that those limitscannot be changed for a period of not less than four years or at leasttwo election cycles.

In response to Member Salinas and McAustin's concerns, MemberNovak stated that this restriction would be better suited as a charteramendment (instead of by ordinance) so that it cannot be easily undone by a future City Council.

Vice Member Hatcher pointed out that the campaign contribution limits could be easily increased to $5,500 if no time constraints in place.

Member Salinas requested that additional language be added to prevent the campaign contribution limit from exceeding a certainpercentage.

Discussion ensued regarding the implementation of consumer price index (CPt) adjustments to the campaign contribution limits set by ordinance. City Clerk Jomsky clarified that theoretically, if CPIadjustments are incorporated, then the campaign contribution limitscan potentially exceed state limits.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Novak, seconded byMember Farhat, to recommend that the City Council consider a City Charter amendment, that states, "If the City Council adopts anordinance implementing campaign contribution limits different than state limits, the ordinance may be amended no earlier than following the 2nd election cycle after its enactment or amendment."AYES: Members Farhat, Kennedy, McAustin, Mejia, Novak, Salinas, Wilson, Vice Chair Hatcher, Chair Chawkins
NOES: NoneABSENT: Member McCoy
ABSTAIN: None
Member Farhat made a motion, seconded by Member Wilson, toincorporate annual CPI adjustments to the campaign contribution limitsset by ordinance.City Clerk Jomsky suggested incorporating language specifying that such annual CP1 adjustments occur on January 1st of every year, instead of July 1st, to avoid changes occurring during an election cycle. 04 05/09/2024
MOTION:

RECESS:
1 MOTION:

MOTION:
05 Following discussion, Members Novak, Mejia, and McAustin expressedconcerns with incorporating CPI adjustments to this issue, as it would overcomplicate the matter of lowering campaign contribution limits.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Farhat, seconded byMember Wilson, to incorporate annual CPI adjustments to campaign contribution limits set by ordinance, with the CPI adjustments to occur on January 1st of every year.

AYES: Members Farhat, Salinas, Wilson
NOES: Members McAustin, Mejia, Novak, Vice Chair Hatcher, Chair Chawkins
ABSENT: Member McCoyABSTAIN: Member Kennedy
The Charter Study Task Force recessed at 8:38 p.m., and reconvenedat 8:48 p.m.

STATUS REPORT ON ASSIGNED CHARTER STUDY TOPICS ANDCONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON REMAININGPENDING ISSUES ** James Maddox, Pasadena resident, spoke in support of rankedchoice voting and expressed concerns that the topicsdiscussed by the Charter Study Task Force did not include the election process and voting.

Chair Chawkins announced that a subcommittee would be formed to work with the City Clerk's Office to assist in the preparation of the final report to be presented to the City Council. City Clerk Jomsky provided an update on the assigned topics that have been discussed by the Task Force, noting which remaining topics need additional consideration.

The Task Force engaged in discussion regarding the number of affirmative votes needed when a vacancy occurs on the City Council,and reconsidered the motion passed at the April 25, 2024 meeting.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Mejia, seconded by Member Farhat, to reconsider the motion passed at the April 25,2024meeting related to the number of affirmative votes required for aCouncil action to be deemed approved.

AYES: Members Farhat, Kennedy, McAustin, Mejia, Novak,
Salinas, Wilson, Vice Chair Hatcher, Chair Chawkins
NOES: NoneABSENT: McCoyABSTAIN None
It was moved by Member Farhat, seconded by Member Mejia, to rescind the prior motion to require the City Council fill a Councilmember vacancy with a majority vote, instead of five affirmative votes. 05/09/2024

NEW BUSINESS
I
ADJOURNMENT:ATTEST:

AYES: Members Farhat, Kennedy, McAustin, Mejia, Novak,
Salinas, Wilson, Vice Chair Hatcher, Chair Chawkins
NOES: NoneABSENT: Member McCoy
ABSTAIN None
City Clerk Jomsky clarified that the draft Final Report omitted the Task Force's vote regarding the Council Compensation Committee to be convened at least once every five years by Charter Amendment, which will be corrected. He also noted that the ad hoc committee would meetthe following Tuesday and Thursday to assist in editing the Final Report and that Task Force members may also submit any recommended edits to the City Clerk's Office.

Member Farhat, Member McAustin, Vice Chair Hatcher, and Chair Chawkins volunteered to serve on the ad hoc committee.

PRESENTATION ON CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE DRAFT

FINAL REPORT FOR COMMENT AND DIRECTION TOCONSULTANT AND CITY STAFF Shauna dark, Baker Tilly Consultant, presented the Charter Study Task Force Draft Final Report; she provided an overview of the organization of the document, including the Task Force's adoptedrecommendations and proposed charter amendments, and responded to questions.

Member Wilson suggested that work on ballot questions wait until after the City Council determines which amendments to the City Charter will be submitted to the voters. hie also suggested highlighting vote counts for each recommendation of the Task Force in the Final Report.

Following discussion, by order of the Chair, and consensus of the TaskForce, the information was received and filed.

CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES TO THE CHARTER STUDY TASK

FORCE REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE AND/OR REGULARMEETING LOCATION No changes were made to the Charter Study Task Force regularmeeting schedule and meeting locations.On the order of the Chair, the meeting of the Charter Study Task Force was adjourned at 9:36 p.m.KEN CHAW^INS, Chair
Charter Study Task Force
Mafk^lo^kyCity Clerk
06 05/09/2024

OPENING
ROLL CALL:Staff:

CITY OF PASADENA

CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
MAY 23, 2024 - 6:00 P.M.

CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBER, ROOM S249
100 NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE, PASADENA, CA 91101

REGULAR MEETING
Chair Chawkins called the regular meeting of the Charter Study Task Force to order at 6:08 p.m., and led the Pledge of Allegiance.Member Vince FarhatMember Lena KennedyMember Margaret McAustinMember Liberty McCoy Member Diana Carbajal Mejia (absent)Member Paul NovakMember Raul SalinasMember Andy WilsonVice Chair Marcus HatcherChair Ken Chawkins Michele Bagneris, City Attorney
Mark Jomsky, City Clerk
Alex Souto, Deputy City Manager
Christine Soo, Assistant City Clerk

PUBLIC COMMENT ONMATTERS NOT ON THE
AGENDA.

I
MOTION:

No one appeared for public comment on matters not on the agenda.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MAY 9, 2024 REGULAR MEETING
Member Farhat requested that the minutes be amended as follows: 1) on Page 3, Line 6 of the motion, remove the extra word "race"; 2) on

Page 4 ends

"...recommend that the City Council consider a City Charteramendment..." and 3) on Page 4, Line 6 of the motion, add the words"or amendment", to now read, "...2nd election cycle after its enactmentor amendment." It was moved by Member McAustin, seconded by Member Farhat, to approve the meeting minutes, as amended.

AYES: Members Farhat, Kennedy, McAustin, Salinas, Wilson, Vice Chair Hatcher, Chair Chawkins
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Members McCoy, NovakABSENT: Member Mejia
01 05/23/2024

NEW BUSINESS REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE CHARTER STUDY TASK

FORCE DRAFT FINAL REPORT FOR APPROVAL AND

SUBMITTAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
City Clerk Jomsky reported that 2 letters expressing concerns and/orproviding various comments regarding the discussion details on campaign contribution limits in the Task Force's draft final report were received by the City Clerk's Office, distributed to the Task Force, posted online, and made part of the public record for the item.City Clerk Jomsky presented brief summaries of recommendations foreach assigned Charter Study topic acted on by the Task Force and as listed in the draft Final Report.

In response to Member Wilson's inquiry regarding Term Limits and partial terms of two or more years counting as full terms under theproposed limits, City Clerk Jomsky clarified that the Mayor's seat is filled only by election occurring during the City's regular election cycle.

He stated that in both cases for the Mayor's seat, a partial two-year term or a full four-year term would be the result of an election, andwould be terms of two or more years. Therefore, both would count asfull terms toward the term limit. In contrast, he noted that the Council District seat could be filled by appointment if less than two years remained on the term. He reiterated that it was City staff's understanding that only terms of two or more years (where an election occurs) are proposed as counting toward the term limit. Discussionensued regarding how term limits should apply to partial termscenarios.

Following discussion, the Task Force agreed by consensus to recommend amending the language in the Final Report for Mayor andCity Councilmember Term Limits to read, "No person may serve more than three consecutive terms..." (removing references to "four-year"terms), and adding parentheticals stating that a partial term of two or more years would count toward a full term under term limits.

In response to Member McAustin's inquiry regarding the
recommendation to the Council Compensation Committee to adjustbenefits by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) on an annual basis, CityClerk Jomsky clarified that the suggested adjustments pertain tobenefits such as childcare. City Clerk Jomsky highlighted the fact that Councilmember stipends are already adjusted by CPI [pursuant toPasadena Municipal Code (PMC) Section 2.05.210] and benefits related to health and dental care (e.g., health and welfare benefits) are similarly addressed in the PMC [pursuant to PMC Section 2.05.220].

Chair Chawkins stated that these matters of benefits should be reviewed by the Council Compensation Committee when convened by the City Council.
02 05/23/2024
•
••
)
03 Member Farhat suggested recommending that the Council Compensation Committee discuss non-base compensation, since CityCouncilmembers already receive CPI adjustments to their stipends and health and welfare benefits.

City Clerk Jomsky presented recommended revisions to the Final Report, as follows:

Executive Summary - Page i, last paragraph, 3rd line, change "three" to "several"
Executive Summary - Page ii, Vacancy, Recommendation 1,insert the following at the end of sentence,".. .vacancy, and add death as a cause of vacancy."
Executive Summary - Page ii, Vacancy, Recommendation 2,insert the following at the end of the sentence, "...within 75 days (in lieu of "chosen by lot'")."
Executive Summary - Page ii, Vice Mayor, change heading title to read, "Vice Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore"
Executive Summary - Page iii, Recommendation 8, insert the following sentence, "Recommendation is contingent on CityAttorney's Office providing establishing a framework for enforcement."
Executive Summary - Page iii, Create New Recommendation 9, "The Task Force also recommends amending the Charter, ifan ordinance is adopted, to restrict changes to the ordinance tooccur no more than once every two election cycles, afterenactment or amendment." Executive Summary - Page iii, Recommendation 9, renumberas Recommendation 10Executive Summary- Page iii, Recommendations 10,11,12, and 13, Additional Task Force Recommendations Not
Requiring Charter Amendments, renumber and revise as
follows:

11. Vacancy: Council to establish by ordinance the details and process for Council District vacancy appointments,
including a process for robust public outreach and
engagement.

12. Vice Mayor: Vice Mayor selection process to consider seniority and the benefit of the rotational role of Vice Mayor.

13. Term Limits: Council to adopt a formal onboarding
process for new Councilmembers. and implement a Councildriven public information process to encourage individuals torun for public office.

14. Council Compensation: Council Compensation
Committee to discuss the issue of "family care" as a broadercategory than childcare....

In response to Member Wilson's request to capture additional details of the Task Force's lengthy discussion and considerations given tocosts and timing factors to fill City Council vacancies by election, CityClerk Jomsky presented a brief outline of proposed details to include,such as election cost estimates for consolidated and stand-alone 05/23/2024
I
MOTION:
04 elections for Council District and Mayor seats, as well as timing considerations given to appointments (if less than two years remainedon the term) and special stand-alone elections (if more than two yearsremained on the term) for Council District vacancies.

Following discussion, the Task Force agreed by consensus to add the staff.
additional information on election costs and timing, as proposed by CityMember Farhat suggested moving the Task Force member applications/biographies to the appendix section of the report to improve the report's document flow.

In response to Member Novak's suggestion that the votes for each recommendation be featured more prominently, City Clerk Jomsky noted that some recommendations are the product of multiple motions and votes (with each vote reflecting varying levels of support), and did not necessarily align in such a way as to capture the motions and votes cleanly for each recommendation.

Member Farhat suggested including footnotes in the executivesummary to indicate whether or not the votes were unanimous on theissues of term limits and campaign contribution limits.Member Salinas noted grammatical and clerical edits to be made onPages 20, 22, and 25 of the draft Final Report.

Alejandro Rivas, Pasadena resident, expressed concerns that the discussed benefits of lowered campaign contribution limits were not captured in the draft final report and excludes the support expressed by the women on the Task Force on the matter.

Member Farhat spoke in support of approving the edits to the draft Finalreport as recommended by staff and the Task Force, adding a footnote/parenthetical to capture votes that were not unanimous for the issues of term limits and campaign contributions limits, and to move the applications/biographies of the Task Force members to the back of theappendix. In response to the public comment, Member Salinassuggested including a footnote to the Campaign Contribution Limitsection, citing the minutes as a way to call attention to the detaileddiscussion of the campaign contribution limits issue, as well as thepublic comments made by members of the public.

Following discussion, it was moved by Member Farhat, seconded byMember Salinas, to a) approve the edits and additional details, asrecommended by City staff (and detailed above); b) approve editsnoted by Member Salinas on Pages 20, 22, and 25 of the draft FinalReport, and substituting the word "providing" with the word "establishing" in Recommendation 8 on Page 20; c) approve the editsto Page 1, ending the sentence in the 2nd paragraph with the words"priority order"; d) add footnotes or parentheticats, at the discretion of 05/23/2024
MOTION:

ADJOURNMENT:
!
ATTEST:
the Chair, Vice Chair, and the City Clerk, in the Executive Summary to capture the Task Force's vote on the issues of term limits and campaigncontribution limits; e) move the Task Force member applications to theappendix; and f) include a footnote citing the meeting minutes dates to call attention to the detailed discussion on the campaign contribution limits issue. (Motion unanimously approved) (Absent: Member Mejia)

AUTHORIZATION FOR CHAIR CHAWKINS TO APPROVE THE

FINAL MEETING MINUTES ON BEHALF OF THE TASK FORCE
City Clerk Jomsky briefly discussed the approval process for the final set of minutes of the last Charter Study Task Force meeting,authorizing Chair Chawkins to approve the final set of minutes on behalf of the Task Force.

It was moved by Vice Chair hlatcher, seconded by Member Wilson, to approve the staff recommendation to authorize Chair Chawkins toapprove the final meeting minutes on behalf of the Task Force. (Motion unanimously approved) (Absent: Member Mejia)
In response to Member Wilson's inquiry regarding preparation of the final report presentation, Chair Chawkins stated that the Task Force Ad hloc Committee (including the Chair, Vice Chair, Member Farhat, andMember McAustin) will also review edits and assist with final preparation of the presentation to the City Council.Members of the Task Force thanked one another, City Staff, and Baker Tilly consultants for their efforts that allowed the body to have robustdiscussions and deliberations, and successfully complete the assigned Scope of Work and Charge by the City Council.

On the order of the Chair, the meeting of the Charter Study Task Force was adjourned at 7:44 p.m.
-^^^y
KEN CHAW^INS, Chair
Charter Study Task Force
0 ky
City Clerl
05 05/23/2024
Pasadena Charter Study Task Force Report
Consultant and City Staff Reports to the Task Force City Clerk’s Office 40 Consultant and City Staff Reports to the Task Force

CHARTER STUDY

TASK FORCE
DECEMBER 9, 2023
ITEM 5
Approved Scope of City Governance Topics to be Reviewed • Vacancy Appointment Process for Mayor and City Council - Consider options for allowing Special Elections, and review the Charter requirements pertaining to a vacancy in the office of the Mayor as it relates to the Vice Mayor position (City Charter Section 404)
• Mayor and City Council Term Limits
• Review Timing of Mayoral Election (City Charter Sections 401 and 406) • Review Vice Mayor Appointment Process, Timing, and/or Length of Term (City Charter Sections 401 and 407)
• Consider City Council compensation, broadly, as well as dedicated childcare and eldercare allowances for members of the City Council (City Charter Section 405) • Campaign contribution limits
Any topics the Task Force wishes to add to the list above would require City Council authorization. The Task Force, working with the consultant, will have opportunities to reconnect with the City Council during the process to provide updates and information on the Charter Study process and progress.

Approved Task Force Charge for City Governance Review
• Study and fully examine topics submitted by City Council to Task Force • Provide recommendations on those topics, including whether or not to amend the Charter in each instance, as part of a Final Report submitted to the City Council by May/June 2024
• Provide recommended amendments in a priority topics list, keeping in mind the number of ballot measures that might create voter fatigue issues • Provide recommended ballot question(s) for Charter amendment(s) • Provide recommended changes/amendments/additions to City Charter text Suggested Timeline for Task Force:
• November 2023 - Charter Task Force appointments
• December 2023 through May 2024 - Task Force to Review Issues and Approve Recommendations for City Council Consideration
• May/June 2024 - Final Report on Recommended Charter Amendments Submitted to City Council
• June/July 2024 - City Council to Review/Consider Recommended Charter Amendments
• August 9, 2024 - Deadline to submit Charter Amendment measures to the Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters to include on November 5, 2024 General Election ballot
Item No. 5
December 9, 2023

CHARTER STUDY

TASK FORCE
DECEMBER 9, 2023
ITEM 6
CG bakertilly
,,., ··= '" ,; • .,,,,,,, """"'"'"'
NO. DATE TASK FORCE WORK PLAN

1. December 9 Organizational Meeting
Saturday • Introductions
II Select Chair and Vice Chair
.. City Charter Basics
• Review charge and scope of Task Force
• Review of proposed work plan

2. January 13 Issue 1: Vacancy Process for Elected Officials Saturday II BT reports on Issue 1: Vacancy process for Mayor and Council seats and answers questions
• Task Force discusses and invites public comments
" Task Force makes decision or continues Issue 1 to the next meeting for more research
II If no consensus on continuance or research, TF tables Issue 1 for future consideration

3. January 25 Issue 2: Mayor and Council Term Limits
Thursday • BT follow up (if any) on Issue 1: Vacancy Process " TF invites public comments on Issue 1
II TF takes preliminary vote or tables Issue 1 for future consideration
" BT reports on Issue 2: Term Limits and answers questions • TF discusses and takes public comments on Issue 2
" Task Force votes on Issue 2, continues the item to next meeting for more research, or tables Issue 2 for future consideration

4. February 7 Issue 3: Timing of Mayoral Elections
Wednesday " BT follow-up (if any) on Issue 2: Term Limits " TF discusses and invite public comments on Issue 2
.. TF takes preliminary action or tables Issue 2: Term Limits • BT reports on Issue 3: Timing of Mayoral Elections, and answers questions
" TF discusses and takes public comments
.. TF makes preliminary decision on the timing of mayoral elections, continues Issue 3 to next meeting for more research, or tables the matter for future consideration

5. February 22 Issues 1, 2, and 3: Follow Up
Thursday II BT presents summary of actions to date and what remains on 1, 2, or 3
m TF discusses and takes public comments
• TF votes on outstanding topics
■ TF tables any unresolved issues

6. March 14 Issue 4: Vice Mayor Appointment Process and Term of Office Thursday • BT reports on Vice Mayor Appointment Process and Term ■ TF discusses and takes public comments
• TF takes preliminary or final vote on the Vice Mayor
Aooointment process or asks for additional research
1 BAKER TILLY ROLE
Introduce BT team,
qualifications, and
answer questions
Written report on Issue
1 Internal:

Complete Issue 1
follow-up and Issue 2
report before next mtg
Written report on Issue
1 follow-up
Written report on Issue
2 Internal: Additional
research/follow-up
Written report on Issue
2 follow-up
Written report on Issue
3 Internal: Additional
research/revisions to
issue reports
Prepare oral report on
progress to date
BT reports on progress
to date
Internal: BT follow-up
(if any)
Written report on Issue
4 Internal:

Item No. 6
December 9, 2023
NO. DATE TASK FORCE WORK PLAN BAKER Till V ROLE
• If no consensus, Issue 4 is continued to next meeting or tabled More research and revisions to Issue 4
report.

Write issue 5 report

7. March 28 Issue 5: Council Compensation
Thursday • BT presents any follow-up research on Issue 4; Vice Mayor Issue 4 follow up Appointment Process
• BT reports on Issue 5: Council Compensation and answers Issue 5 report questions
& TF discusses and takes public comments Internal: More research • TF votes on Issue 5, continues to next meeting for additional if requested research or tables for future consideration

8. April 11 Issue 6: Campaign Contribution limits
Thursday • BT presents any follow-up research on Issue 5 Issue 5 follow-up H TF discusses and invites public comments on Issue 5
• TF acts on Issue 5, continues it, or tables it for consideration Written report on issue later 6
• BT reports on Issue 6 - Campaign Contribution Limits
• TF discusses and invites public comments Internal: Complete " TF votes, continues item until next meeting for additional added research and research, or tables for future consideration prepare status report

9. April 25 Status Meeting - Recap, Address Unresolved Issues Thu1·sday • BT reports on unresolved issues and sums up status BT reports on • TF discusses each issue and invites public comments unresolved issues • TF finalizes action on all issues

10. April 10 to April 10 to May 5, 2024 Internal
May 5 Baker Tilly prepares first draft of TF report Complete first draft no • BT Peer Review later than May 5
• BT meet with City Clerk to review first draft if necessary

11. I May 9 First Draft of Task Force Report
Thursday . BT presents first draft of TF Report and answeI·s questions Present first draft • TF discusses and calls for public comments Internal - Revise first .. TF asks for additional research or edits to the draft draft • TF approves draft with requested amendments or continues first draft to following meeting for revisions

12. May 23 TF Review of First Draft (revised)
Thursday • BT presents revisions (if any) to first draft Present revised draft • TF discusses revised draft and invites public comments • TF gives more direction to staff/BT as necessary Internal - Final changes • TF approves draft with requested amendments, continues for to draft more research

13. May 23 to Ma~ 23 - June 5, 2024, Council agenda deadline June 5 BT makes final changes to draft as requested by TF and staff (agenda • BT peer review
deadline) • Review first draft changes with staff
((; bakertilly 2
12/9/23
City of Pasadena

CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
NO. DATE TASK FORCE WORK PLAN BAKER TILLY ROLE
Prepare PowerPoint presentation for the City Council meeting on June 10
.. Preview PPT presentation with staff
" Revise PPT as necessary
" BT Peer Review
" Follow up meeting with staff if needed

14. June 10 City Council Receives Final Draft ofTF Report Internal CCl Monday .. Present final report and PowerPoint presentation, and answer Revise draft, BT peer questions review, staff review
,. Council deliberates, takes public comments, and provides direction to staff and BT

15. June 24 Return to Council with follow up research, as necessary BT presents revised CC2 Monday draft
Additional follow up, as directed by City Council adopts and directs City Attorney to
prepare ballot language
<t bakertilly 3
12/9/23

CHARTER STUDY

TASK FORCE
JANUARY 20, 2024
ITEM 3

STAFF REPORT

AND ATTACHMENT
City of Pasadena
January 20, 2024
Page2
reviewed state codes and compared the charters and municipal codes of nine peer cities that were selected by City staff.

Filling a Vacancy in a General Law City
A general law city council may fill a vacant seat by appointment or election (Government Code §36542). If a council chooses to conduct a special election - or if the council does not make an appointment within 60 days of the vacancy - a special election must be held on the next regularly established election date not less than 114 days from the call of the election.

Alternatives for Filling a Vacancy in a General Law City California Government Code Section 36512 also allows general law cities to adopt an ordinance to govern filling of vacancies. The ordinance is subject to one or a combination of the following:

Special Election: The ordinance could require a council to call a special election each time a council or mayor's seat becomes vacant. The special election would be held on the next regularly established election date not less than 114 days from the call of the special election.

Election triggered by petition: The ordinance enables a council to appoint a successor unless a petition signed by a specified number of qualified electors is filed before the end of a specified period. If the petition qualified, the special election would be held on the next regularly established election date but not less than 114 days from the filing of the petition.

Tenn of appointed official: The ordinance may enable a city council to simultaneously make an appointment and call a special election. The special election would be held on the next regularly established election date or scheduled municipal election occurring in not less than 114 days.

Filling Vacancies in Peer Cities
f the~ppoint:rnen.t. periodi:xpires
lth~1,1tappointment, the successor
iH Ile chosen by lot
Burbank
Less than one year on
erm, Council has
0 days to appoint
If more than one year, the
ouncil calls a special election
If the council does not ppointee holds office until next ppoint within 30 days, egular election
he mayor may appoint
ppointment or prior to opening of
nominations
o appointment or special election
!lowed If a regular election is
cheduled not more than 180 or less
han 60 (80) days from vacancy date
Note: If the vacancy occurs during or
near a filing period, there are special
provisions that can change the tenure
fthe appointee
(f; bakertilly X Manageme~t"'llii. Partners~-
City of Pasadena
January 20, 2024
Long Beach
anta Ana
Santa Barbara
Santa Monica
orrance
Council can appoint
interim only if less than
ne year left on term
ithin 30 days of
ithin 60 days
Observations
If no appointment, council must
hold a special election within
120 days of appointment period
If more than 120 days from
primary, the Council has 60 days
o call a special election; said
lection to be held within
120 days of vacancy.
pedal election mandated if
more than 120 days are left on
he term
Page3
he election may be deferred if a
eneral election is within 180 days
o be appointed or nominated for
lection, the candidate must have
lived within the district for one year
ontinuously
pecial Election mandated unless Special election to be held on next ppointment option triggered. regularly scheduled meeting unless ppointment negates special ouncil chooses to call special election lection requirement. or earlier date
Election called if deadline expires If there is an appointee, he or she ithout appointment holds office until the next general
Election called if deadline expires
ithout appointment
lection
ppointee holds office until next
regular election
• Although triggered by different timing or circumstances, every general law city and the nine peer cities have a mechanism for appointing a qualified voter to a vacant council seat.
• In some cases, the City Council is forced to call a special election because they failed to make an appointment by the deadline.
• State law enables cities to adopt a provision allowing the council to appoint a successor unless a petition signed by a specified number of qualified electors is filed before the end of a specified period.
• No general law or peer city other than Pasadena draws lots to fill a vacant seat.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Charter Section 404
A.cf vantages Disadvantages
Election o Successor
oters choose their representative at the polls
e longer nomination process (including
andidate forums) serves as a method for
vettin candidates
ment o • Successor
method for filling the seat, thus
itin the time the district is unre
ery costly if the city must conduct a stand-alone
s ecial election
ithout a method for installing an interim, seat
ay go unrepresented for as long as six months
istrict voters are excluded from selecting their
e resentative at the ballot box
(G bakertilly X Managemen~
Partners~'
City of Pasadena
January 20, 2024
Page4
Advantages Disadvantages
ore diversity is likely. The appointment
rocess opens opportunities to those who are
ot seasoned oliticians.
egates the cost of holding a stand-alone
pecial election In Pasadena, with a Primary
nd General, it is conceivable that two
lections would be needed to fill a vacanc .
ointment/Election Combination
ore flexibility to address the situation at
and-especially if it is important to fill the
eat right away due to circumstances such as
atural disasters
Optional Motions
eeping the appointment process would not
esolve some of the concerns associated with
ouncil choosin Cit Council members.
ncreases uncertainty. It is likely that some
ommunity members and some
pplicants/candidates may be unhappy with
ivin the council a choice.

In cases where an election is called, the City Clerk must have enough time to open a nomination period and work with the County Registrar of Voters to administer the election. This includes meeting translation, posting and publication deadlines, preparing the voter's pamphlet, printing, and mailing ballots, and performing several other election duties. Moreover, if the Charter requires a special (standalone) election, based on the Pasadena's process for electing members of the City Council (50%+1 majority), the costs could be as high as $100,000 to $200,000 Appointment period followed by special election if no appointment. Move that the Charter Study Task Force recommend a November 5, 2024, ballot measure to amend Section 404. The measure would include an appointment period of 75 days followed by a requirement that if an appointment is not made within that period, the Council is required to call a special election (or leave the seat vacant until the next regular election cycle).

Mandate election if appointment period spans more than one year: Move that the Charter Study Task Force recommend a November 5, 2024, ballot measure to amend Section 404 to enable the Council to make an appointment within 75 days unless the appointment period would last for more than one year. In that case, the Council would have to call a special election.

As noted above, the Task Force would need to consider (as part of its recommendation) whether special stand-alone elections (that do not coincide with a regular election cycle) will include a runoff where no candidate receives 50% + 1 votes, or whether the candidate with the plurality (most votes received) is elected without the requirement of a runoff.

Mandate Special Election. Move that the Charter Study Task Force recommend a November 5, 2024, ballot measure removing the language in Section 404 authorizing an appointment to fill a Council vacancy and replacing it with a requirement that the Council shall call a special standalone election at the first regular meeting following notice of the vacancy. The Task Force recommendation may also include:
(G bakertilly X Manageme~~-
Partners ~·
City of Pasadena
January 20, 2024
Option 1: The special election will be held on the first date authorized by the Elections Code, not less than 88 days from the call.

Option 2: The special election will be held on the first date authorized by the Elections Code, not less than 88 days from the call, unless the special election can be consolidated with a regular election cycle (50%+1 majority), or a scheduled primary or general election (plurality vote) occurring in not more than 120 days.

Page 5 ends

Election triggered by petition: Move that the Charter Study Task Force recommend a November 5, 2024, ballot measure amending Section 404 to enable the Council to appoint a successor within 75 days of the occurrence of the vacancy, unless a petition signed by a specified number of qualified electors in the District is filed with the City Clerk before the end of a specified period. If the petition qualifies, a special election will be held on the next regularly established election date but not less than 114 days from the filing of the petition.

Recommend no changes: Move that the Charter Study Task Force recommend no changes to Charter Section 404.

Refer item back to Baker Tilly: Move to ask Baker Tilly to perform added research as specified by the Task Force for consideration at a future meeting (providing a time from of up to 30 days). ® bakertilly X Managemen~ Partners ~_..-
(G bakertilly X Managemen
Partners
Pasadena Election Terminology- Council Vacancy Report
The following information explains election terminology used in Baker Tilly's reports.

Regular elections
• An election held on a date specified by the Pasadena City Charter o Regular primary (nominating) election - Elections held in March of evennumbered year for Presidential Election cycle; and June of even-numbered year of Gubernatorial Election cycle
o Regular general (runoff) election - Elections held in November of evennumbered years Consolidated election
" An identifier for any election where a regular or special Pasadena election can coincide with a statewide election being conducted by the County of Los Angeles.

For example, the Presidential Primary election and the Pasadena Primary election will be held on March 5, 2024, and conducted by the County Special election
• An election that is "called" by a city council rather than scheduled by a city's charter.

There are two types of special elections.
o Consolidated Special Election
Pasadena may call a special election to coincide with a regular Pasadena election. For example, the District 3 elections were not scheduled by Charter to be held in 2024 so the election to complete the last two years of the term is a special election.
o Standalone Special Election
Cities can call an election that will not be consolidated with another election.

It is called a standalone special election. Pasadena's City Charter Section 1206 empowers the City Council to call a standalone special election, however, due to provisions in City Charter Section 404, a special election cannot be called to fill a vacancy. There are several cities that either have the option or are required to call a special election to fill a vacancy.

BAKER TILLY • 1730 MADISON ROAD • CINCINNATI, OH 45206 • 513 8615400 • FAX 513 8613480

CHARTER STUDY

TASK FORCE
JANUARY 20, 2024
ITEM 4

STAFF REPORT
(t bakertilly X Managemen
Partners
To: Charter Study Task Force
From: Jay Trevino, Director
Shauna Clark, Special Advisor
Subject: Pasadena Charter Study - Vice Mayor appointment process, timing, and length of term
Date: January 20, 2024
Background
The City Council has asked the Pasadena Charter Study Task Force to examine the selection process, timing, and length of term of the Vice Mayor.

Charter Section 407 - Vice Mayor reads as follows:

At its organizational meeting, the City Council shall elect from among the Councilmembers a Vice Mayor who shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Mayor during the latter's absence or disability. (Sec. 407 amended by vote of the people 11-3-1998: Sec. 407 amended by vote of the people 3-9-1993.) Charter Section 404 - Vacancy-Appointment The first paragraph reads in part If a vacancy occurs in the office of Mayor, the Vice Mayor shall assume the duties of the office of Mayor until the office shall be filled at the next general municipal election. The assumption of the duties of the Mayor shall not require that the Vice Mayor relinquish his or her seat as a Councilmember elected or appointed from a district. If a vacancy occurs among any other members of the City Council, the remaining members shall within 75 days after such occurrence appoint a qualified resident voter of the unrepresented district who shall hold office until the office is filled at the next general municipal election. If the City Council cannot agree on one person to fill the vacancy, the replacement shall be chosen by lot. (Sec. 404 amended by vote of the people 11-3-1998: Sec. 404 amended by vote of the people 3-9-1993.)
Vice Mayor Election Process, Timing and Length of Term
Pasadena's Vice Mayor is elected from among the Council by a majority vote of its members.

The City Council has generally followed a tradition of electing the most senior member of the Council who has not previously served as Vice Mayor. Prior to 2018 when City elections occurred in March and April of odd years, the Vice Mayor election was held annually at the Council's organizational meeting held on the first Monday of each May. The Vice Mayor's term was one year in length but with limited exception was renewed by the City Council so that each Councilmember served as Vice Mayor for two years (consecutive one-year terms).

In 2018, when the City shifted the timing of its elections to coincide with even year statewide election dates, the organizational meeting was also modified to occur on the 5th Monday following the statewide general election. This change increased the time between BAKER TILLY • 1730 MADISON ROAD • CINCINNATI, OH 45206 • 513 861 5400 • FAX 513 8613480 January 20, 2024 - Vice Mayor Page2
organizational meetings from annually to every two years. It also changed the Vice Mayor term from consecutive one-year terms to a single election for the two years between organizational meetings. While the Charter does not specify the length of the term for the Vice Mayor, it would stand to reason that the term would be two years to mirror the timing of the organizational meeting. However, that was not the case in 2022 when the Council appointed Councilmember Felicia illiams as Vice Mayor for 2023 and Councilmember Steve Madison as Vice Mayor for 2024.

Pasadena's Vice Mayor presides over meetings and serves as mayor pro tempore 1 in the absence of the Mayor. Because there are seven council members and only one opportunity every two years to select a Vice Mayor, many council members must serve multiple terms on the Council before becoming Vice Mayor under this approach.

In addition, there is nothing in the Charter about what happens if there is a vacancy in the Vice Mayor position during that member's term. This is an opportunity to amend the Charter to specify that if a Vice Mayor does not serve a full term the Council has the authority to elect a new Vice Mayor with the five affirmative votes needed.

There are examples among the nine peer cities Baker Tilly s_tudied that enable a council to replace a vice mayor/mayor pro tempore on a majority vote. Pasadena's Charter does not provide that flexibility.

Based on current City Charter provisions, Pasadena's Vice Mayor can become Mayor without appointment, election, deliberation, public input, or possibility of replacement.

Charter Section 404 says in part that, in case of a mayoral vacancy, the vice mayor shall " .. . assume the duties of the office of the Mayor until the office shall be filled at the next regular general election ... " The next general election could be two years later.

Fact Finding
Baker Tilly researched the Government Code for General Law cities, as well as the nine peer cities with charters, to learn how the vice mayor is chosen, the term of office, and the typical powers and duties of the office.

General Law Cities
We found no government code provision relating to vice mayors or vice presidents of the city council that applies to General Law cities. However, Government Code Section 36802 enables cities to appoint or elect a mayor pro tern pore:

The mayor shall preside at the meetings of the council. If the mayor is absent or unable to act, the mayor pro tempore shall serve until the mayor returns or is able to act. The mayor pro tempore has all the powers and duties of the mayor. 1 The term pro tempore or pro tern is used by municipalities to mean "for the time being." TI1e mayor pro tempore serves on an ad hoc basis.
<G bakertilly X Managemen.~t
Partners~
January 20, 2024 - Vice Mayor
Peer City Comparisons
naheim
Berkeley
Burbank
Glendale
long Beach
anta Ana
anta Barbara
anta Monica
orrance
ouncil selects member to
preside over meetings in the
bsence of the mayor
VP is P of council becomes MPT as
MPT needed
VM is he VM chosen at an
MPT rganizational meeting
MPT MPT selected monthly by
lphabetical rotation
VM is Elected by council at each
MPT rganizational meeting. No veto
power
MPT Elected by council at each
rganizational meeting
MPT Elected by Council as needed
MPT Elected by Council at
rganizational meeting
MPT ouncil elects MPT upon the
bsence of mayor
he term depends on action taken at
ach organizational meeting. Note:
in the event of a mayoral vacancy,
he vice mayor becomes mayor until
he next regular election

Page 3 ends

MPT serves at pleasure of the council '.::harter: Articie V. 504
P serves at pleasure of council. If
acancy, VP becomes mayor. The ,Jle May9J:, §22
ouncil then has 60 days to appoint
another mayor or to order a special
lection to fill the mayor's seat
MPT: Until the mayor's return
VM: Can be replaced at the next
rganizational meeting, or sooner by
council majority
For the month
If vacancy, VM can become mayor,
but the council must immediately
call a special election
Can be replaced by council at any
ime
Until the mayor's return
Charter: Article IV,
§9
he vice mayor is elected to a two- r - A irie VI
ear term but can be replaced by the Presi
Council
Until the mayor's return
1 MPT (mayor pro tempore), VM (vice mayor), VP {vice-president of the council) Observations
II
•
■
■
■
While most cities do not have a vice mayor position; there is a similar position called a mayor pro tempore. The mayor pro tempore, like Pasadena's Vice Mayor, presides at council meetings and performs other duties in the temporary absence of the mayor.

Long Beach and Burbank have vice mayors, and Berkeley has a council vice president.

They have less permanency because unlike Pasadena, those vice mayors can be replaced at any time.

Like Pasadena, five of the ... nine peer cities elect their mayor pro tempore or vice mayor at their organizational meeting.

Anaheim, Berkeley, and Torrance choose their mayor pro tempore on an ad hoc basis.

Glendale has a monthly rotation schedule for the mayor pro tempore. (f; bakertilly X Management"'lil,
Partners .,~ ..

January 20, 2024 - Vice Mayor Page 4
■
■
The Pasadena City Charter does not include a process for replacing the Vice Mayor.

In Long Beach, the vice mayor/mayor pro tempore has no vote or veto power. ■ Like Pasadena, the vice mayors of Long Beach and Berkeley become mayor immediately in the case of a mayoral vacancy. This occurs without public notice or input; however, Long Beach and Berkeley simultaneously call an election to fill the seat. ■ Most cities fill a mayoral vacancy the same way they fill a council vacancy. ■ If a vacancy occurs in Pasadena after the start of the nomination period, or anytime during the election cycle (which happened with District 3), then the vacancy can be for longer than two years. This is especially true during the Presidential election cycle, where there is a significant time between the Primary and General elections.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Pasadena's Current Charter Language Advantages Djsadvantages _-,
Vice Mm;or election
IAll General Law and most peer cities have the !Election by the Council could mean that the position ~ame process where the council elects the MPT or goes to the person with the most political influence IVM rather than the best leadership skills
Timing
!Transparency. The election occurs at a high-profile Organizational meetings are two years apart which meeting that garners a lot of public interest imits opportunities to be elected Vice Mayor Term
Longer terms reduce uncertainty and add to There is no Charter provision for the Council to replace organizational stability an ineffective Vice Mayor during their term as Vice Mayor
Automatic Ascendence to Mayor in Case of a Vacancy
The Mayoral vacancy is filled at once, without cost Removes the public from the selection process for as ong as two years
Removes uncertainty over who can vie for a vacant Deprives the Council of the ability to select the most mayoral seat !Capable person to fill a mayoral vacancy
Long term interim leadership can be more stable rThe Vice Mayor must split time between the Mayor's and predictable than leadership subject to !duties and District duties replacement
Optional Motions:

There are many options for electing a Vice Mayor, the length of the term, and the powers and duties. We have offered a motion to reduce the Vice Mayor's term to one year and a motion to empower the Council to elect a Mayor from among their members in case of a mayoral vacancy. This might also be an opportunity to consider a method for filling a vacancy in the Vice Mayor's seat. Here are a few optional motions:

One-year term for the Vice Mayor: Move to recommend to the City Council amending Charter Section 407 to establish a one-year term for the Vice Mayor. ((, bakertilly X Manageme.nnt""lll,t Partners _ . ....,,,,,,..,.

January 20, 2024 - Vice Mayor Pages
Mayoral Vacancy filled by Council: Move to recommend to the City Cotmcil amending Charter Section 407 to provide that if a vacancy occurs in the office of Mayor, the City Council shall elect a Mayor from among the Councilmembers who shall assume the powers and duties of the office of Mayor until the office shall be filled at the next regular election.

The assumption of the duties of Mayor shall not require the Councilmember to relinquish his or her seat as a Councilmember elected from a district.

No changes: Make no recommendation to the City Council about the Vice Mayor.

Refer this matter back to Baker Tilly: Refer this topic back to Baker Tilly for added research on the subject of ______ and to return to the Task Force on ______ (date) (no later than 30 days).
<G bakertilly X Managemen.~.t·
Partners~

MEETING SCHEDULE FOR CHARTER STUDY TASK FORCE
to occur at Pasadena City Hall, Council Chamber, Room S249 Saturday, December 9, 2023 Saturday, January 13, 2024 at Saturday, January 20, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. 10:00 a.m. (Cancelled) at 10:00 a.m. (Special) Thursday, January 25, 2024 Wednesday, February 7, 2024 Thursday, February 22, at 6:00 p.m. at 6:00 p.m. 2024 at 6:00 p.m.

Thursday, March 14, 2024 Thursday, March 28, 2024 Thursday, April 11, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. at 6:00 p.m. at 6:00 p.m.

Thursday, April 25, 2024 Thursday, May 9, 2024 Thursday, May 23, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. at 6:00 p.m. at 6:00 p.m.

CHARTER STUDY

TASK FORCE
FEBRUARY 7, 2024
ITEM 2

INFORMATIONAL

MEMO AND

CORRESPONDENCE

OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK

MEMORANDUM
TO:

FROM:

Chair, Vice Chair, and Task Force Members
Mark Jomsky, City Clerk Jri--
Shauna Clark, Baker Tilly~
DATE:

RE:

February 7, 2024
Supplemental Information - Vacancy Appointment Process and Options for Calling a Special Election to Fill a Vacancy (January 20, 2024) On January 20, 2024, the Charter Study Task Force discussed the following agenda item:

CONSIDERATION OF VACANCY APPOINTMENT PROCESS FOR MEMBERS

OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND OPTIONS FOR AMENDING THE CITY

CHARTER TO ALLOW FOR THE CALLING OF A SPECIAL ELECTION TO

FILL A VACANCY
At the conclusion of the presentation, public comment, and Task Force deliberations, it was determined by the Task Force to direct the consultant and City staff to provide additional information prior to proceeding with consideration of potential recommended changes to the City Charter provisions related to this topic. Following is a list of topics that the Task Force directed the consultant and/or staff to address with supplemental information:
• Any limitations to dates for special stand-alone elections • Estimated costs for stand-alone elections
• Rank Choice Voting Information
• Options for Petition Process for Voters to Require Special Election to Fill Vacancy
Election Dates and Timing of Special Stand-Alone Elections While there are established election dates in the California Elections Code, according to the County's Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk's Office (County RRCC), cities are not limited in dates to call a special stand-alone election to fill a vacancy. Thus, such a special stand-alone election could be held on any day and not limited to the established election dates in the Elections Code and used by Los Angeles County which are detailed below.

JOO North Garfield Avenue, S228 • P.O. Box 77 75 • Pasadena, CA 91109-7215 (626) 744-4124 • Fax (626) 744-392 I
Even Year Dates:
• The first Tuesday following a Monday in March (Presidential Primary Election) • The first Tuesday following a Monday in June (Gubernatorial Primary Election) • The first Tuesday following a Monday in November (General Election) Odd Year Dates:
• The first Tuesday following a Monday in March
• The first Tuesday following a Monday in November
Cost and Voter Turnout Considerations
On regular even year election dates, the City shares election costs with other government agencies whose elections occur at the same time as Pasadena's regular elections. Further cost sharing occurs among agencies who share geographic jurisdictions during these same election dates (City, PCC, PUSD). Beyond the cost perspective, in terms of regular election dates, there is a benefit to the voters in consolidating elections on regular election dates. Limiting the number of active elections in the City, reduces issues related to voter fatigue, and result in higher turnout rates for elections. Voter turnout rates are consistently higher when comparing Presidential ( or Gubernatorial) Primary and General Elections with special stand-alone elections.

City of Los Angeles Special Election to Fill District 6 Vacancy Using an example from an election held in 2023, the City of Los Angeles called a special stand-alone Primary Election to fill a vacancy in LA Council District 6 (LACD6), which was held on April 4, 2023 and administered by the County RRCC. Then the City held a special stand-alone run-off Election that occurred 12 weeks later on June 27, 2023, also administered by the County RRCC.

The total voter registration at the time of the 2023 April Primary election for LACD6 was 118,473 registered voters. The total ballots cast in the Primary was 13,510 ballots (11 .40% turnout). In June, the reported voter registration at the time was 117,799, with total ballot casts in the run-off being 15,375 (13.05% turnout). The reported cost for the April Primary election (only) was $7.6 million, or approximately $64.15 per registered voter.

City of Pasadena Special Election to Fill District 3 for Remaining Two-year Term The estimated cost for County RRCC services to administer the upcoming District 3 special election on March 5, 2024 is approximately $59,000 (based on the County RRCC's online estimator) for 11,147 voters. The cost for District 3 special election occurring on the City's regular Municipal Primary Election date of March 5, 2024 is estimated to be $5.29 per registered voter (less than one-tenth the cost of the compared special stand-alone election).
2 In terms of voter turnout rates for Pasadena Council District 3 for the most recent regular election held in June 2022, the number of ballots cast was 2,988 (27% voter turnout). If you were to look back to prior City elections held in odd years, the turnout for Pasadena Council District 3 was 7.5% in 2009, 13.8% in 2013, and 13.3% in 2017.

City staff has requested from the County an election cost estimate for a special Council District 3 stand-alone election to be held in March 2025 Uust to provide an apples-toapples comparison). Staff will distribute this estimate as soon as it is received from the County. Some issues to keep in mind in terms of election administration and cost: state law requires that all voters receive a vote-by-mail ballot for each election. This has a significant impact on costs associated with administering an election. State law also requires that an in-person vote center be established within a voting area. When the County provides their estimate for a special stand-alone election, these are a couple of significant variables that the Task Force should be aware of in their consideration of the issue.

Rank Choice Voting Inquiry
At the January 20, 2024 Task Force meeting, additional information was requested regarding Rank Choice Voting (RCV) as an option for Pasadena. Some of the stated benefits by proponents of RCV include: eliminates run-off elections, increases the civility of elections ( opponents less likely to attack one-another if attempting to garner 2nd and 3rd ranked votes from voters), reduces election costs, and eliminates lame-duck period between declaration of election results and start of new term.

In speaking with the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk's Office, RCV is not an option at this time. An RCV system to serve LA County cities has not been developed (or acquired), and is not currently on the RRCC's future work plan.

Since the County administers elections on behalf of the City of Pasadena, it appears that this option is more for future City consideration.

Despite this, City staff contacted the City of Berkeley, which conducts RCV elections for members of the Berkeley City Council. A few details to share regarding Berkeley's use of RCV. First, the County of Alameda that administers elections on behalf of Berkeley has an acquired and certified RCV system that it makes available to cities within its jurisdiction, including the City of Berkeley. Berkeley City Council regular elections occur and are consolidated with statewide general elections in November of even years. The RCV elections held for Berkeley City Council are actually separate ballot elections from the County's statewide ballot. This means that Berkeley voters receive two ballot types for the November election: the RCV ballot for City Council races and the regular statewide ballot for federal, state, and county races and measures (as well as any Berkeley City measures).

In speaking with City staff for Berkeley, there is limited election cost savings for the RCV voting system. The City is responsible for paying two bills for each election, the costs associated with the RCV ballot, and the costs associated with the statewide ballot.

Included in the RCV costs are software costs, upgrades, and maintenance for the RCV voting system. There is also voter education and outreach efforts conducted by the City 3 for Berkeley voters to ensure they are familiar with the RCV voting process. Berkeley City staff did note that there appears to be benefits related to civility in City Council elections.

Finally, staff would point out that the topic of RCV as a voting system is currently not part of the scope of topics assigned to the Charter Study Task Force. While certainly related to the issue of calling special elections for vacancies on the City Council, RCV would be a new system and methodology for Pasadena voters, and would need additional research and information as its own charter study topic. If the Task Force wanted to continue to pursue RCV as part of this process, at a minimum, the Task Force would need to request such authority from the City Council.

Options for Petition Process for Voters to Require City to Call a Special Election As part of the January 20th discussion on filling unscheduled vacancies on the City Council, there was some interest expressed regarding the possibility of establishing a petition process for members of the public that could be used to compel the City to call a special stand-alone election instead of having to accept an appointment.

Staff was unable to locate a city in California that utilizes such an approach, so the Task Force would need to consider a number of details in recommending this as an option to the City Council. This includes (but is not limited to) the following list:
• Design and production of the petitions by the Clerk's office • Process for issuing petition by the City Clerk
• Required publication and noticing for the petition period • Length of the signature gathering period
• Final date for filing the petition with the City Clerk (before appointment is made, or 30 days after appointment is made)
• Number of qualified signatures necessary to qualify the petition as a successful challenge and for calling an election
• Effect of petition process on appointment period (appointment immediately ended, or appointment continues to serve until the start of term for the successfully elected replacement)
• Timing of special election
Another aspect related to petitions that is present in the City's current appointment process is that the City Council requires applicants seeking appointment for City Council vacancies to gather at least 25 signatures of registered voters from the Council District where the vacancy exists. The Task Force might consider recommending to the City Council that the minimum signatures required for those seeking appointment be increased to demonstrate a stronger connection/support from those in the community.

This would need to also consider, among other factors, the vacancy deadline to complete the appointment process, though some may consider an increased number of signatures required as a way to discourage those who otherwise may have been interested in seeking the appointed office.
4 Vacancies -· Regular and Special Election Timing
March 5, 2024 Presidential Primary
Description October November December January February March April May Adopt Election Resos (Calling, County Servs, Cand 5) Resos adopted OCt for Council City Council action took place on October 23, 2023
Resos for measures due before 88th day - Dec 8th
Noticing - Election to Be Held, Seats, Measures 11.2.24 Additional Notices Posted as Measures Added
Nomination Period 114 to 88 days
Nov 13 through Dec 8th, extended to Dec 13th (not incumbents) Printing and Prep of Election Materials ~, ~r-.:.1£~-:.-· ~ .. -- 1 Cand Stmts, Ballots, Translations
Ballots/Pamphlets Mailed to Voters Feb thru Ete<ltton ·hv 29-Day Deadline Before Election
Vote Center Sites Open 10 and 4 0ays
10-day and 4-Day Sites
-.. Election Day - March 5, 2024 .VOTE.
~
Tally Complete - 5 Weeks Mar to Aprtl
1% Manually Tally of Precincts Occurs Prior to Certification Election Results Declared - April 8, 2024 lill.24
Total Days from Start to Declaration of Results 168 Days November 5, 2024 Presidential General
June July August September October November December
Adopt Election Resos (PUSD Calling, County, CS) - · .• ,~.. -~ 'J :- _'•"J...... ..... .:s. • •r-· .. J~ .. -~ ··- ....... 1' \
Cand Stmt O 120 Day Deadline - July 8th
City runoff (if any); Resos for measures due before 88th day - Aug 9th Noticing - Election to Be Held, Seats, Measures 1..w;... :...:, _ . ; Additional Notices Posted as Measures Added
PUSD Nomination Period 114 to 88 days
July 15 through Aug 9th, extended to Aug 14th (not incumbent s) Printing and Prep of Election Materia ls Mid Aug to Oct Cand Stmts, Ballots, Ballot Measure Text, Translations
Ballots/Pamphlets Mailed to Voters Oct thFU Elealon f>8¥ 29-Day Deadline Before Election
Vote Center Sites Open 10 and 4.Df.ys
10-day and 4-Day Sites
Election Day - November 5, 2024 VOTE - ;
-- Tally Complete - 5 Weeks ~ov to easrly Dec
1% Manually Tally of Precincts Occurs Prior to Certification Election Results Declared - December 9, 2024 U.~~2 1
City Council Organizational Meeting
Total Days from Start to Declaration of Results 168 Days Total Days for Presidential Primary and General 413 Days June 2, 2026 Gubernatorial Primary _l
Description January February March April May June July
Adopt Election Resos (Calling, County Servs, Cand S)
City Council action to Call Election in January 12, 2026 Resos for measures due before 88th day - March 6, 2026
Noticing - Election to Be Held, Seats, Measures
Additional Notices Posted as Measures Added
Nomination Period " ' . -~ .. . :iS I •
"'•L .• I~ • ~t •- ""
Feb 9 through Mar 6th, extended to Mar 11th (not incumbents) Printing and Prep of Election Materials
Cand Stmts, Ballots, Translations
Ballots/Pamphlets Mailed to Voters May tbrwSJectkrm ay
29-Day Deadline Before Election
Vote Center Sites Open
10-day and 4-Day Sites
Election Day - June 2, 2026
Tally Complete 5 Weeks
1% Manually Tally of Precincts Occurs Prior to Certification Election Results Declared - July 13, 2026
Total Days from Start to Declaration of Results
January 12, 2026 to July 13, 2026 182 Days
Noven1ber 3, 2026 Gubernatorial General -
June July August September October November December
·1
Adopt Election Resos (PUSD Calling, County, CS) Resos adopted in June for PUSD PUSD Board to Call Election in June
City runoff (if any); Resos for measures due before 88th day - Aug 9th Noticing - Election to Be Held, Seats, Measures 06.29.26 Additional Notices Posted as Measures Added
PUSD Nomination Period 114 to 88 days
July 13 through Aug 7th, extended to Aug 12th (not incumbents) Printing and Prep of Election Materials Mid Aug to Oct
Cand Stmts, Ballots, Ballot Measure Text, Translations
Ballots/Pamphlets Mailed to Voters Oct thru EtecttoAe lhy 29-Day Deadline Before Election
Vote Center Sites Open 10 and-4 Days
10-day and 4-Day Sites
--- Election Day - November 3, 2026 VOTE:
....._...

Tally Complete - 5 Weeks Nov ,to early Dec
1% Manually Tally of Precincts Occurs Prior to Certification Election Results Declared - December 7, 2026 Ul,07.26
City Council Organizational Meeting
Total Days from Start to Declaration of Results 182 Days Total Days for Gubernatorial Primary and General 329 Days April 8, 2025 Special City Election
Description November December January February March April Based on City of LA D6 Special Election and Runoff
HYPOTHETICAL- SEAT VACANT ON OCTOBER 12, 2024
Adopt Election Resos (Calling, County Servs, Cand S)
City Council action to Call Special Election - Nov 2024 Special Primary on April 8, 2025; Runoff on July 8, 2025 Noticing - Election to Be Held, Seats, Measures
Nomination Period
Dec 16 through Jan 10th, extended to Jan 15th (not incumbents) Printing and Prep of Election Materials
Cand Stmts, Ballots, Translations
Ballots/Pamphlets Mailed to Voters
29-Day Deadline Before Election - March 10, 2025
Vote Center Sites Open
4-Day Sites
Election Day - April 8, 2025
Tally Complete - 10 Days Later April 18, 2025 A ril
Election Results Declared - April 21, 2025 64.21.2
Total Days from Vacancy 191 Days
July 8, 2025 Special Run-Off Election
Based on City of LA D6 Special Election and Runoff April May June July Printing and Prep of Election Materials - . , ..... ,. .,, ~-!.~\~;_1:'~~~ Cand Stmts, Ballots, Translations
Ballots/Pamphlets Mailed to Voters
29-Day Deadline Before Election - June 9, 2025
- 1 .....
~
" ~- Ji... ■ ...;, --
~
- ,c-. .Jo..:,,
~
Vote Center Sites Open 4Days
4-Day Sites
....-...

Election Day - July 8, 2025 VOTE;
.........

Tally Complete - 10 Days Later July 18, 2025 July
Election Results Declared - July 21, 2025 07.21.25
Total Days from Vacancy 282 Days

CORRESPONDENCE
Jomsky, Mark
·om:
sent:

To:

Subject:

Attachments:

Tim Wendler
Saturday, January 27, 2024 7:09 AM
Jomsky, Mark
Ranked Choice Voting
ranked choice rhode.pdf
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important [LG.l CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Hi Mark -
As a follow-up to the last Charter Reform Task Force meeting, here's some information on ranked-choice voting that I would request you share with the task force members.

Please see the attached study and the link below:
https ://www. ncsl .o rg/ elections-and-campaigns/ran ked-cho ice-voti ng-i n-p ractice-i m pie me ntatio n-co nsid eratio ns-fo r10 Ii cym a kers Both cite an average $0.42 or $0.43 per voter which doesn't seem a lot to me to spend on Democracy. Furthermore, if you avoided a runoff election by doing it all in one round, I would think you would come out ahead.

It has the additional advantages of:
a) It determines the candidate with the strongest overall support, and avoids fringe candidates b) It encourages more positive, civil campaigns (because each candidate wants the others 2nd place votes) c) It allows voters to vote first for their favorite candidate and not to be worried about wasting a vote on a candidate that may not be viable
d) it eliminates the need for multiple elections - saving time and money Tim Wendler
I
1 )
The Cost of Ranked Choice Voting
Christopher Rhode
Northern Arizona University; The Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center; Fair Vote
Rhode 1
Table of Contents
Table of Contents 1
Abstract 2
I ntrod ucti on 3
Methods 5
Variables 5
Selection of Cities 6
Location (L) 7
Population (P) 7
Size of Municipal Annual Budget (B) 8
Election Cycle (C) 8
Election Jurisdiction (J) 8
Political Makeup (PVI) 8
Constants 9
Data and Analysis 10
Hypotheses 10
Hypothesis 1 10
Hypothesis 2 11
Hypothesis 3 11
Findings 12
Discussion 14
Challenges and Limitations 14
Conclusion 15
References 17
Appendix A 18
Appendix B 21
Rhode 2
Abstract
While some academic focus has been given to the theoretical merits of alternative voting methods, many tangible aspects have gone overlooked. This has left elections administrators without essential knowledge necessary to effectively implement these types of election reforms. This study was designed to determine whether the implementation of ranked choice voting (RCV) methods at the local level is responsible for increases or decreases to the cost of elections within the municipality that implements it. Elections costs were obtained from seven local governments which switched to RCV and seven matched control governments for ten years before and after RCV was implemented. These costs were then aggregated into standard election cycles and converted into percapita cost. A difference-in-difference regression was used to determine how switching to RCV affected election costs both during and after the initial implementation phase. Although the RCV jurisdictions are found to spend significantly more on elections overall, any differences in election cost during or following the implementation of RCV are not found to be statistically significant. This study is unable to show that implementing ranked choice voting has been responsible for any financial savings or liabilities in the cities that have chosen to use it.

Rhode 3
Introduction
In the United States and other modern democracies, elections are one of the most fundamental components of the maintenance of government. By extension, problems in elections and electoral processes are threats to democracies themselves ... and there are a lot of problems.

Noncompetitive and gerrymandered districts, winner-take-all contests, unnecessary runoffs, and plurality winners detract from the ideals of a democratic society. It is imperative for electoral problems to be properly remediated in order to preserve the role of the citizen as central to the governing process.

The endeavor of reforming elections is as complex as it is important. Perhaps the most difficult challenge is determining where supposed democratic processes fall short. In what ways are elections failing to produce fair outcomes through democratic processes? Collectively, the perceived problems are numerous. Different people and group have pointed to a plethora of different phenomena as the cause of democratic shortcomings. In some jurisdictions, elections are notorious for low voter turnout, brutally negative campaigns, and winners who do not fully represent the diversity of their constituents (Anest, 2009). Under most electoral systems, voting paradoxes are present. This has been proven in the cases of the 2016 United States Presidential Primaries and in Danish Parliamentary elections (Kurrild-Klitgaard, 2017). Winning candidates have consistently and significantly benefited from undemocratic byproducts of their electoral processes. I all forms they take, electoral problems are present and impactful.

Scholars, policymakers, and citizens alike have long decried the existence of democratic problems. Still, their grievances commonly fail to be substantiated because evidence of problems in elections is often subjective, anecdotal, or unquantifiable. This makes tools and metrics that objectively describe democratic conditions indispensable. The progress made by academics in political science generally and election science specifically has produced new tools with which to measure both the problems that exist and the solutions proposed to fix them. Still, the measures created are not all-encompassing. There are many problems that remain without the tools necessary to describe and address them.

While democratic issues are surely multi-faceted, many can be attributed to the methods employed to elect policymakers. The most common electoral method in the United States is the plurality where each voter is allowed a single vote, regardless of the number of candidates running.

The votes are then counted and the candidate with the most votes is declared the winner. Some variants require that the winning candidate receive a majority of the vote and will trigger a runoff between the top candidates if this threshold is not reached, but this is not universally required. These systems are problematic because in races where a large number of candidates seek election, either the winner could be selected with less than a majority of the vote, or multiple elections must be held to narrow the field down until someone reaches majority support. These elections are also prone to spoiler effects, are infamous for ferocious and trenchant campaign tactics, and fall short of ensuring that voters are fully able to express their preferences for all of the candidates.

Rhode 4
The systematic problems related to voting methods are difficult to fix, but that does not mean that no solutions have been proposed. Of particular interest as a reform to current election processes is a transition to ranked choice voting methods (RCV). Two of such methods, instant runoff voting (IRV) and single transferable voting (STV) are the election models endorsed by many academics in the fields of political science and statistics. By allowing voters to rank the candidates instead of selecting just a single one, RCV has been hailed for its ability to allow voters to better express their full preferences towards all of the candidates. RCV has been supported as a reform that produces better outcomes by ensuring majority support for winners, increasing turnout, discouraging negative campaign tactics, and electing candidates that better represent the diversity of their communities (Anest, 2009).

Some of these claims have been challenged by RCV critics. Specifically, the claims that RCV brings about higher voter turnout has been disputed (Endersby and Towley 2014). It has also been alleged that the exhaustion of ballots in instant runoff tabulations dilutes the vote count so much that the winner may not actually have majority support (Burnett 2015). While candidates do have to attain a majority of non-exhausted ballots cast, this can be a lower number than the total number of valid ballots cast in the election. Still, even when the winning candidate does not receive a majority of all votes cast, they will receive more support than they would have in a simple plurality election.

Both theoretically and empirically, RCV offers a more democratic electoral process than the widely-used methods currently in place in the United States. Still, RCV is not without its practical shortfalls. A voting system is only as effective as it is implemented and RCV is often implemented improperly or inefficiently. RCV may be confusing to some voters. In some instances, this has led to concerningly high numbers of ballots that are spoiled or do not properly follow RCV directions (Neely, Blash and Cook, 2005). Spoiled and otherwise improperly completed ballots often reduce the pool of valid ballots and can concentrate influence in the hands of certain factions of voters.

This demonstrates an often-overlooked aspect of election reform: implementation. Few studies have been conducted to determine how the implementation of voting reform efforts influences their effectiveness. This leaves administrators in the dark on the best practices for seeing reform efforts like RCV through. It also disincentives policymakers from supporting reform efforts.

In the last century, RCV has been repealed shortly after being passed in cities and states in nearly two-thirds of the jurisdictions in which it originally passed (Santucci, 2016). This includes in municipalities like Boulder, CO; Cincinnati, OH; and Ann Arbor, ML Each of these cities repealed RCV in favor of plurality winners or runoff elections. In many aspects, there is absolutely no empirical or objective precedent to inform the proper implementation of RCV. This is a problem.

One particular shortcoming in the understanding of RCV implementation surrounds its financial effects. Proponents of RCV have long made the claim that it can be undertaken for cheaper than traditional plurality. They claim that by eliminating the need for primary and runoff elections, RCV will be responsible for a decline in the cost of elections to the jurisdictions that oversee them.

These claims have never been sufficiently substantiated. The actual cost increases or savings brought about by RCV has not been the subject of any published study. Any claims regarding the effect that RCV has on election budgets is little more than speculation. This leaves a significant void in an important area of election administration. Without an understanding of the financial impact of Rhode 5
undertaking electoral reforms like RCV, election administrators will be flying blind when trying to effectively implement them. Does implementing RCV at the local level change the cost of elections to the municipality? This paper will seek an answer to this question. By analyzing election cost data of municipalities that have implemented RCV in the last 20 years, the monetary costs and benefits of RCV can be revealed.

Methods
In the United States, the use of ranked choice voting has largely been limited to local jurisdictions. As of early 2018, ten different municipalities are actively utilizing some form of RCV to elect local officials. The majority of these cities first implemented RCV in the years between 2007 and 2011. The use ofRCV is expanding, however. Two more municipalities and the state of Maine will also implement RCV later this year. The last decade has ushered in a new era of support for RCV not seen in more than fifty years. In the middle of the twentieth century, RCV saw a similar level of support as it was adopted in dozens of cities across the country.

Both historically and currently, RCV has taken numerous different forms when used. In some jurisdictions, like Telluride, CO and Portland, ME the use of RCV is limited to only one local race, such as mayor. In other cities, however, RCV is used more extensively to elect every official at the local level. This includes the mayor, city council, sheriff, and other municipal positions.

Additionally, the exact type of RCV can vary as well. In jurisdictions that use districts and each race has only one winner, RCV usually takes the form of "instant runoff voting" (IRV). When it is used in multi-winner races - usually at-large council races - it takes the form of the "single transferable vote" (STY). Going even further, both IRV and STY can utilize different methods to eliminate candidates and redistribute votes. However, no matter the form of RCV, any city that uses it should be subject to the financial effects caused by it. For this reason, each of these disparities will be negated and any municipality that uses RCV to elect local officials in any capacity will be considered an "RCV city."
Because a significant number of the cities that currently utilize RCV have implemented it fairly recently, many records from the years surrounding its implementation remain intact and accessible. Here, each of the cities which have implemented RCV in the last twenty years and had it in place for at least three election cycles are subjects of examination. By looking at documented election costs for each city in the years surrounding RCV implementation, an aggregate spending pattern is discerned. This model is then compared with a similar model created from the election costs of control cities that do not utilize RCV over the same time period.

Variables
In this study, the type of election used by a given city is the explanatory variable. Ranked choice voting methods will be contrasted with standard voting methods. These include both majority-rule voting and plurality voting. Both methods are similar. They both usually entail a primary and a general election in which each voter is awarded one vote for each seat to be filled.

Rhode 6
Their use is both common and widespread throughout the United States. Under the plurality system, the candidate(s) with the most votes are certified as the winner(s). Under the majority system, the winning candidates must surpass a certain percentage of votes. This is usually 50 percent plus one but can be different for contests with more than one winner. A particularity associated with majorityrule voting is that when no candidate reaches the number of votes required to be elected, another runoff election is forced between the top contenders for the seat. This means that majority-rule votes can require three different elections in order to choose a winner for a single seat. Each of these elections will run a cost to the jurisdiction that oversees them.

The alternative under examination - RCV - inherently encompasses a broad range of different voting methods such as instant-runoff voting, single transferable voting, Borda counts, and Condorcet criterion. Only two of these methods - IRV and STY - have actually been used in elections in the United States. The cost of running RCV elections in these two forms has been the subject of much rhetoric. Proponents of RCV claim that it will save jurisdictions money by eliminating the need for unnecessary runoff and primary elections. Opponents argue that RCV drives up costs as it is inherently confusing to voters and can warrant public campaigns to educate the public on its use. Additionally, it requires special voting equipment in order to implement, which is often expensive to purchase. It can also require election workers work longer hours, potentially further driving up the costs.

These two classifications of voting systems are compared on the basis their financial cost.

Because the interest is in the regular and ongoing aggregate cost of elections, there is a need to account for numerous relative discrepancies between cities. Different jurisdictions hold municipal elections during different times of the year and on different years themselves. In order to remediate these differences, the cost used is not the cost of particular elections or even the annual cost of elections. Instead, the aggregate biannual cost of elections is used. This is the total amount spent on all elections held in a two-year period. Additionally, in order to account for size differences in cities, the costs considered are marginal to the population of those cities. The dependent variable is thus the biannual marginal cost of elections for each city examined. This provides a fair metric with which all cities election costs can be compared equally.

Selection of Cities
Cities that conduct elections using RCV are the focus of this study. Because only eleven cities implemented RCV in the United States during the time period of focus, a random sample of these municipalities is not appropriate. Instead, efforts were made to include every municipality that utilizes RCV for election cost data with the intention of establishing a full census. Requests were sent to Berkeley, CA; Burlington, VT; Hendersonville, NC; Minneapolis, MN; Oakland, CA; Portland, ME; San Francisco, CA; San Leandro, CA; St. Paul, MN; Takoma Park, MD; and Telluride, CO. Even though Cambridge, MA still uses RCV for its local elections, it was excluded because it first implemented RCV in the 1940s, making its data antiquated and excessively difficult to obtain. From these cities, four (Minneapolis, MN; San Francisco, CA; Hendersonville, NC; and Portland, ME) were unable to produce sufficient records of election costs for the years requested and had to be excluded.

Rhode 7
Data from the eleven experimental RCV cities was then compared with data from control cities. Because the cities that have enacted RCV are not themselves a random sample of all municipalities throughout the country or even within their respective states, a random sample was not deemed appropriate to select the control cities. Instead, control cities were intentionally selected through a matching criterea. Six different variables were considered with the intention of identifying control cities that were as similar to the experimental cities as possible. The variables considered are outlined as follows.

Location (L)
Because state laws, regional economies, governmental structures, culture, and other similar factors could alter the cost of elections to municipalities, control cities were evaluated based on their location. Cities within the same state as their corresponding experimental city were considered to best fulfill this consideration. When no other cities within the same state closely mirrored the experimental city, cities in the same region of the country were given precedence. The regions used are shown in Image 1.

Figure 1 - Map of The United States by region
HI
Population (P)
■ South
■ Southwe;t
■ Midwesl
■ New Fng!onU
■ Mid-Atlantic
,........ Rocky Mountains
■ WestComt
A city's population is one of its most defining traits. Bigger cities have larger and greater encompassing governments than small cities towns, and villages. More importantly, bigger cities Rhode 8
generally have more expensive governments than smaller governments. For this reason, control cities were only considered if they had a population within 25% of the experimental city as of the 2010 census. Within this margin, cities with closer populations to the experimental cities were favored .

Size of Municipal Annual Budget (B)
In order to account for possible financial factors, control cities were evaluated on the amount of their annual expenditures. Both the total and marginal budget appropriations for the closest available year to RCV implementation was considered. Because municipal budgets varied significantly, total and marginal municipal appropriations for control cities had to fall within 50% of the appropriation of the respective experimental city. Cities with closer marginal and aggregate annual appropriations to the experimental city were favored.

Election Cycle (C)
Federal election cycles are four years, with elections in even-numbered years. These elections usually correspond with increased interest, higher voter turnout and increased election costs. Some states and municipalities hold their elections separately in odd-numbered years. In these cases, the aggregate and ongoing costs associated with elections can be higher than for jurisdictions that consolidate their elections on the federal cycle. Whether or not cities hold their own elections in odd-numbered years can be a factor in the total cost of elections to that city. For this reason, precedence was given to possible control cities that held elections on the same cycle as the corresponding experimental city.

Election Jurisdiction (J)
Many municipalities do not run their own elections. Instead, they contract election services to counties and less commonly, private organizations. Counties and private companies are often able to achieve economies of scale that cities cannot by coordinating elections for numerous jurisdictions simultaneously. This is especially true in the cases of smaller municipalities. With this consideration in mind, municipalities whose elections are run by the same respective entity as the RCV municipality were favored as control cities.

Political Makeup (PVI)
Ranked choice voting is a progressive reform. Denying its connection to politics would be both misleading and academically irresponsible. While RCV itself is not inherently partisan, there are discernable political patterns in the cities in which it has been implemented. In order to account for the political culture and ideology of the municipalities, control cities were evaluated for their political makeup. The Partisan Voting Index (PVI) in the last two presidential elections was used to determine the political makeup of each city. Cities which more closely corresponded to the experimental city were favored.

No control city perfectly matched the experimental city that it was matched to. In the case of each RCV city, numerous potential control cities fit the general criteria outlined. A simple Rhode 9
mathematical process categorized the candidate control cities numerically. Each city started with five points. Cities lost one point each for being from a different state, being from a different region, conducting elections on a different cycle, and having a different entity responsible for conducting elections than the corresponding RCV city. Cities also lost points equivalent to the percentage it differed from the RCV city in aggregate budget size, marginal budget size, and political makeup.

Finally, each city lost points equivalent to four times the percentage it differed from the experimental city in population.

Similarity= 5 - (t.l • 2) - t.B - (t.P • 4) - t.B - t.j - t.PVI For each RCV city, the candidate city with the highest score was used in the study as its matched control. The cities with the second and third highest score were retained as secondary and tertiary alternates. Only in cases where the selected control city was unable to produce sufficient election cost data, was the second candidate city utilized instead. This option was never utilized as each election cost data for every control city was obtained. The criteria and calculations used to evaluate the similarity of control cities to their experimental cities can be found in its entirety in Appendix A.

Constants
The data collected for this study represents a large range of time. The elections examined were conducted over two decades between 1996 and 2016. This presents the possibility that cost data could be affected by ongoing economic factors. In order to account for this and ensure that data from each year is comparable, all election costs were adjusted for inflation according to the annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) to their 2017 equivalent.

The data also represents a diverse set of cities. The cities range from San Jose, Ca - which at 945,000 residents is the tenth most populous in the nation, to Telluride, CO with just over 2000 inhabitants. This represents a relative difference of over 40,000%. In order to ensure that data could be compared between cities of vastly different sizes, the actual cost was first divided by the city's total population. This reduced election costs to the marginal or per-capita cost instead of the total cost.

The cities examined held elections in cycles. Typically, municipal elections are held only every other year. The same is true for state and federal elections. Whether municipalities hold their elections on the same cycle as states and the federal government or not, this causes a natural pattern where election costs typically oscillate between relatively higher and lower expenditures in one-year increments. In order to account for this, election costs were aggregated into two-year summations beginning on January 1 of odd-numbered years and ending on December 31 of even-numbered years.

The cities examined implemented RCV during different election cycles. This makes comparing budgets before and after implementation difficult when the costs are plotted on the same timeline. Instead of using an actual time line, the costs were considered relative to the year that RCV Rhode 10
was implemented in the experimental city. This enabled direct comparisons between cities that implemented RCV in different election cycles.

Data and Analysis
Hypotheses
The action of interest for this study is a tangible change in elections to RCV. Logistically, this change comes after the policy is conceived, introduced, debated, and passed by policymakers. In some cases, the time lapse between these steps and RCV implementation is close to a decade or more. The actual changes that take place in the switch to RCV include things like purchasing new equipment and software, training ( or retraining) elections administrators and staff, educating the public about the new voting methods, and conducting elections in accordance with RCV practices.

These changes are not all sustained activities despite the fact that RCV becomes the permanent model for conducting elections. This means that any cost changes that stem from differences in the ways elections are conducted should be permanent so long as RCV is utilized in the municipality. The other activities, however, are not expected to be ongoing. They are one-time actions. As such, any cost differences that they cause should also be acute to the election cycle that they occur in. This distinction breaks the timeline of RCV implementation into three phases.

First, there is the "before implementation" (TO) period which represents all elections prior to the first short-term expenditures. Next is the "during implementation" (Tl) phase. This consists of the expenses associated with actually switching to RCV in the first election cycle that utilizes it. This is similar to an adjustment period for the elections officials and the voting citizens. Finally, there is the "after implementation" (72) phase. This consists of the elections that take place after RCV is fully in use. By this time, administrators and citizens should be acquainted with RCV and fully prepared to conduct elections using it. This understanding ofRCV implementation informs hypotheses of how RCV will or will not influence the cost of elections.

Hypothesis 1
H0,1 : The average cost of election cycles before implementation is the same in RCV cities and control cities.

HA, 1 : The average cost of election cycles before implementation is not the same in RCV cities and control cities
Because no tangible actions have been taken to begin implementing RCV at this stage, there is no discernable reason that election costs should be different in experimental cities than in control cities. All cities utilize plurality or majority-rule elections and no cities have undertaken any significant actions that should cause significantly higher or lower election costs than the other.

Additionally, control cities were chosen because of their similarity to corresponding RCV cities on Rhode 11
things like size, budget, and location. This is sufficient to satisfy the parallel trend assumption.

While it is possible that an unknown variable that is inherently present or absent in RCV cities influences how much the city spends on elections in the years before RCV is implemented, such a variable should continue after RCV is implemented and can therefore be accounted for in calculated regressions.

Hypothesis 2
H0 ,
2 : The average change to the cost of election cycles during implementation is the same in RCV cities and control cities.

HA 2 : The average change to the cost of election cycles during implementation is not the same in RCV cities and control cities.

The initial implementation phase may be the busiest for RCV cities. Municipalities are on the hook for updated or new voting machines and tabulation software. The election officials must learn about the inner workings of RCV in order to run the elections. Some cities also undertake voter education efforts. All of these constitute costs that are likely to increase total spending on elections; some of them could be quite substantial. While any additional costs borne during the initial implementation should vary by municipality, it seems at least possible that they will constitute a significant aggregate cost. Based on this observation, it is reasonable to predict that the cost of elections will be different in the election cycles surrounding the initial implementation of RCV.

Hypothesis 3
H0 ,
3 : The average change to the cost of election cycles after implementation is the same in RCV cities and control cities.

HA,
3 : The average change to the cost of election cycles after implementation is not the same in RCV cities and control cities.

In the election cycles succeeding the implementation of RCV, there are not any additional foreseen short-term or infrastructural costs that would not also be borne by the maintenance of plurality or majority-rule voting methods. RCV is touted for its ability to eliminate unnecessary elections entirely. With RCV, runoff elections are rendered unnecessary as the ballots can be tabulated to determine a definite majority winner every time. In the same capacity, RCV would allow primaries to be skipped as a majority winning candidate can be determined even when there are many candidates in the same race. Not all jurisdictions that implement RCV do so without Rhode 12
primaries, but the option does allow municipalities to forgo them. By allowing municipalities to hold fewer elections, RCV may offer a means to similarly reduce the aggregate cost of elections. With this premise, it can be predicted that election costs will be different for RCV municipalities in the years following RCV implementation.

Findings
Data were collected from 14 different municipalities on the cost of municipal elections. In total, election costs from 239 elections were aggregated into 111 election cycle totals. Each of these election cycles was then given two different quantifiers to identify its status as a control or experimental election cycle, and its status relative to RCV implementation. Election cycles that occurred in control jurisdictions were quantified as 0, while RCV (treatment) jurisdictions were quantified as 1. Similarly, election cycles that took place before RCV was initially implemented were quantified as TO. Election cycles where RCV was initially implemented were quantified Tl, and cycles succeeding initial implementation were quantified n . These quantifiers created six different categories which election cycles could fall under. For each category, the mean and standard deviation were calculated. This is shown numerically in table 2 and graphically in figure 2. A full table of all election cycle costs is available in Appendix B.

Table 2: Election cycle costs
Before (TO) During (Tl) After (TI)
Control (0) µ $1.24 $1.46 $1.54
Cf 0.356 0.819 0.485
RCV (1) µ $3.39 $4.04 $3.49
Cf 0.485 1.162 0.721
Figure 2: Average marginal election cost
$5.00
$4.00 •
$3.00 •
$2.00
$1.00 • • •
$0.00

BEFORE DURING AFTER
~ CONTROL PREDICTED RCV ~ RCV
This categorization allowed a difference-in-difference regression to be run on the election costs in two different capacities. First, election cycles where RCV was initially implemented could be compared to the cycles prior to its implementation. This allowed any election cost increases or Rhode 13
decreases caused by RCV at its implementation point to be identified. This calculation is shown as follows.

Table 3 - During implementation difference in difference regression Cost Coef. SE Z-Score P-Score [95% Conf. Int.]
T 0.227 0.819 0.28 0.784 -1. 409 1.860
RCV 2.151 0.513 4.20 0.000 1.128 3.175
T & RCV 0.424 1.162 0.37 0.716 -1.895 2.744
cons 1. 236 0.356 3.47 0.001 0.525 1.947
Before examining the effects of introducing RCV into experimental municipalities, one observation is prevalent about the control and RCV groups. In the years before RCV was implemented, the cities that would implement it spent more per election cycle than control cities.

While control municipalities spent just $1.24 per person per cycle, RCV cities spent $3.39. This is an initial difference in expenditures of $2.15. Put another way, RCV cities initially spent nearly three times more on elections than the control cities. Given that the standard deviation of this difference was just 0.485, this difference is statistically significant. The average cost of elections in control cities initially falls 4.43 standard deviations from that of control cities. This equates to a p-score of less than 0.001. The first null hypothesis - that the average cost of election cycles before implementation in RCV cities will be the same as control cities can be rejected.

This regression also shows that RCV election cycles were on average more expensive during the implementation phase than before it and that RCV cities election expenses increased by a larger magnitude on average than control cities during the implementation election cycles. Control cities saw average election cycle cost increases of $0.23 per person while RCV cities saw marginal expenditures rise by an average of $0.65. This revealed that RCV cities saw an average election cycle cost increase of $0.42 per person more than would be otherwise expected when they first implemented RCV. Not only is this cost difference quite small, it also carries a standard error of

1.162. This places the observed difference at less than 0.4 standard deviations from the observed difference of the control sample. This gives the regression a p-score of 0.784. This $0.42 difference observed in RCV cities is not statistically significant. For this reason, the null hypothesis that the average change to the cost of election cycles during the implementation of RCV is the same as control cities cannot be rejected.

The second calculation examined the ongoing costs of RCV elections after implementation.

All election cycles quantified as T2 were compared with the elections quantified as TO. By comparing these election cycles directly and omitting cycles quantified as Tl, it was possible to determine how much it has cost to facilitate RCV elections on an ongoing basis after its initial implementation. This calculation is shown below.

Table 4 - After implementation difference in difference regression Cost Coef. SE Z-Score P-Score [95% Conf. Int.]
T 0.306 0.541 0.57 0.574 -0.769 1. 381
RCV 2.151 0.485 4.43 0.000 1.188 3.115
T & RCV -0.204 0.721 -0.26 0.792 -1. 7 35 1. 327
cons 1. 236 0.337 3.67 0.000 0.566 1. 905
Rhode 14
Like the first regression for Tl, this regression for n shows that election cycles cost significantly more in RCV cities than in control cities. While control cities saw an average marginal increase in expenditures on elections of $0.30, RCV cities averaged a $0.10 marginal increase in spending on elections per cycle. This equates to a difference of $0.20 in favor of RCV jurisdictions.

This difference is smaller than the one observed during the RCV implementation (Tl). It also has a smaller standard error of 0. 721. This places the observed decrease in cost of elections after RCV implantation one-quarter of a standard deviation from where it was predicted to be. It carries a pscore of 0.792. Just as with the first regression, this difference is not statistically significant.

Consequently, the second hypothesis - that the average change to the cost of election cycles after implementation in RCV cities is not the same as control cities also cannot be rejected.

Figure 3: Difference in difference of RCV election cycle costs $3.00
$2.00 ~·,·················· .. ·• . ...
$1.00
$0.00
-$1.00
-$2.00
-$3.00
. . . .... ,·
• ...
•
·•.
................

BEFORE DURING
~ DIFF IN DIFF • • • +95% CONFIDENCE
Discussion
Challenges and Limitations
. ..
. .
•
. ... ...

AFTER
-95% CONFIDENCE
There are a few considerations that should be made in order to place this study in the proper context. First, it is possible that the data examined were affected by nonresponse bias. This study sought to collect election cost information from eleven RCV municipalities and eleven matched control municipalities. Of these jurisdictions, four were unable to produce records that were reliable and comprehensive enough to be included in the analysis. This amounted to a response rate of 64% percent. Of the cities that could not produce sufficient records, all four were RCV cities. This was particularly unfortunate as it required the exclusion of the data from the city's matched control as well. It also puts forth the possibility that each of the RCV cities that could not produce election cost data share some unknown but important characteristic that would go underrepresented by their exclusion.

Second, the data used in this study was less extensive than would have been optimal. It was obtained from no more than fourteen different municipalities. It encompassed no more than 111 Rhode 15
election cycles, which were broken down into six different classifications. This sample size is less than optimal. Unfortunately, the nature of RCV elections limits the quantity of data available. The number of jurisdictions that have undertaken electoral reform to utilize RCV is relatively small. This will continue to be a limiting factor in data collection until RCV becomes a more prevalent voting method. Additionally, time itself made some election cost data difficult, if not impossible to obtain.

Both legal document retention schedules and technological advancements presented barriers to older and antiquated information. Unfortunately, these will likely continue into the foreseeable future and will consequently remain obstacles to future knowledge.

Third, the type of RCV implemented in each examined city varied both in the exact processes used and the extent to which it was used. In different jurisdictions, RCV was used in single-winner and multi-winner races. In most single-winner races, the "instant runoff' method was used. In multiwinner races, however, multiple different tabulation rules were utilized to select winners. In some cities, RCV was only used in some of its electoral races. In Telluride, CO, for example, RCV was only used in the mayoral race. This varying use ofRCV could have influenced the extent to which its implementation affected election costs.

Finally, the findings from this study are not meant to be representative of all cities throughout the United States. While the cities examined come from ten different states in all regions of the country, they are not a representative sample of American Cities. Cities that have chosen to implement RCV are not random. They have many traits that make them a unique group of municipalities. By even choosing to implement RCV, they could be considered outliers in the context of American cities. Because the cities that make up this study are not a random or representative sample of the entire country, neither are the findings derived. This limits any conclusions to being descriptive of what has happened thus far in jurisdictions that RCV has been implemented. It would be improper to expect the conclusions of this study to perfectly predict what would happen in other cities that chose to implement RCV in the future.

Conclusion
Overall, election cycle cost data of cities that have implemented RCV shows that any change to the cost of elections either during or after the switch to RCV is not statistically significant. The observed cost change during RCV implementation was a small $0.42 increase that equated to less than one-half of a standard deviation of what would be expected. A similar observation was made for elections following RCV implementation where the $0.20 savings were approximately onequarter of a standard deviation from what was expected. Neither monetary savings nor additional expenses can be directly attributed to the use of RCV at the municipal level.

One interesting finding was that cities that utilized RCV spent inordinately more on elections than cities that did not. This was substantiated by an observed cost that was more than five standard deviations greater than predicted. This finding was true before, during, and after RCV was implemented. It can be presumed from this finding that the cities that have implemented RCV thus far truly are unique in some regard. Despite attempts to control for variables that could inflate election spending, there are one or more unknown factors existent in the cities that have chosen to utilize RCV that have consistently increased their election expenditures. This was the case long Rhode 16
before RCV became a viable reform and endured relatively uniformly in the years after it became codified.

As the United States continues to search for meaningful and effective improvements to its democratic institutions, continued study of the costs of ranked choice voting and other reform efforts will only become more important. Many barriers that confined this study should be lifted in the future decades. As more and more jurisdictions become familiar with and experiment with voting reform efforts, more data will become available. At the time of this publication, governments across the country are on the verge of enacting their own reforms utilizing RCV. In 2018 alone, Santa Fe, NM, Benton County, OR, and the entire State of Maine are set to use RCV in their elections for the first time. This bodes well for future research.

The continued study of the costs and other implementation concerns of these reforms will continue to be of the utmost importance. Objective and unbiased research will serve as a foundation for elections administrators as they undertake the endeavor of implementing drastic reforms to our electoral process. Without a thorough understanding of the methods that are chosen for implementation and the effects they will have, otherwise effective and worthwhile reforms may be mismanaged by unnecessarily inept public administrators. The continued academic scrutiny of the implementation of alternative voting methods, such as ranked choice voting, will help to foster a culture of election administration that is adequately informed and empowered to undertake profound and integral changes to our democratic process.

Rhode 17
References
Anest, Jim "Ranked Choice Voting: A Path Toward a More Integral Politics." Journal oflntegral Theory and Practice, vol. 4, no. 3, 2009, pp. 23 -40.

Burnett, Craig. "Ballot (and voter) 'exhaustion' under Instant Runoff Voting: An examination of four ranked-choice elections" Electoral Studies, vol. 37, March 2015, pp. 31-49. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2014.11.006
Endersby, James W., and Towle, Michael J. "Making wasted votes count: Turnout, transfers, and preferential voting in practice" Electoral Studies, vol. 33, 2014, pp. 144-152., https://doi.org/10.1016/j .electstud.2013 .07.001
Kurrild-Klitgaard, Peter. "Trump, Condorcet, and Borda: Voting paradoxes in the 2016 Republican presidential primaries" European Journal of Economy vol. 50 2017. doi: 10.10 l 6/j.ejpoleco.2017.10.003
--. "Voting Paradoxes under Proportional Representation: Evidence from Eight Danish Elections" Scandinavian Political Studies vol. 31 (3) 2008. pp. 242- 267 doi: 10.111 l/j.1467- 94 77 .2008.00205 .x
Neely, Francis; Blash, Lisel; and Cook, Corey. "An Assessment of Ranked-Choice Voting in the San Francisco 2004 Election." Public Research Institute, 2005.

Santucci, Jack. "Party Splits, Not Progressives: The Origins of Proportional Representation in American Local Government." American Politics Research, Vol. 45(3), 2016. doi:

10.1177/1532673X16674774
Rhode 18
Appendix A
Table Al - Information on experimental RCV cities
City State Region Populatio City Budget Size Budget per Election Cycle Election Political n (2010) Capita Jurisdiction Lean
Berkeley CA West Coast 112,580 $ 298,578,455 $2,652.14 Even County 84.5% Oakland CA West Coast 390,724 $ 839,900,000 $ 2,149.60 Even County 83.2% San Francisco CA West Coast 805,193 $ 1,506,655,000 $1,871.17 Even County 84.0% San Leandro CA West Coast 84,950 $91,254,815 $1,074.22 Even County 78.3% Telluride co Rocky Mtns. 2,325 $ 16,549,896 $7,118.23 Odd County 69.5% Portland ME New England 66,194 $257,592,919 $3,891.48 3- years City 56.9% Takoma Park MD Mid-Atlantic 16,715 $14,704,393 $ 879.71 Odd City 73.4% Minneapolis MN Midwest 382,578 $ l, I 07 ,800,000 $2,895.62 Odd City 63.2% St. Paul MN Midwest 285 ,068 $503,343,270 $ 1764.70 Odd County 66.2% Hendersonville NC South 13,137 $27,951,390 $2,127.68 Odd County 35.1% Burlington VT New England 42,417 $ 160,444,280 $ 3,782.55 3-years City 70.3% Table A2 - Information on primary control cities
City State Region Population City Budget Budget Election Election Political (2010) Size per Capita Cycle Jurisdiction Lean
Santa Clara CA West Coast 11 6,468 $ 500,943,000 $ 4,301 Even County 71.6% SAME SAME 3.45% 46.17% 41.29% SAME SAME 12.9%
Anaheim CA West Coast 336,265 $ 926,903,219 $ 2,756 Even County 47.9% SAME SAME 13.94% 10.36% 28.23% SAME SAME 35.3%
San Jose CA West Coast 945,942 $ 1,309,599,726 $ 1,384 Even County 71.6% SAME SAME 17.48% 13.08% 26.01% SAME SAME 12.4%
Chico CA West Coast 86,187 $ 99,899,024 $ l, 159 Even County 44.6% SAME SAME 1.46% 2.42% 0.95% SAME SAME 33.7%
Snowmass co Rocky Mtns. 2,826 $ 25,236,944 $8,930 Odd County 68.8% Village SAME SAME 21.55% 23 .03% 1.22% SAME SAME 0.6%
Pawtucket RI New England 71,148 $ 277,034,399 $3,894 Even City 71.4% DIFFERENT SAME 7.48% 6.30% 12.83% DIFFERENT SAME 14.5%
Hyattsville MD Mid-Atlantic 17,557 $ 14,410,443 $ 821 Odd City 89.7% SAME SAME 5.04% 8.31% 12.71% SAME SAME 16.3%
Cleveland OH Midwest 396,815 $1,067,303,443 $2,690 Odd County 67.3% DIFFERENT SAME 3.72% 6.76% 10.10% SAME DIFFERENT 4.2%
Toledo OH Midwest 287,208 $ 610,895,792 $2,127 Odd County 60.2% DIFFERENT SAME 0.75% 5.99% 6.69% SAME SAME 6.0%
Newton NC South 12,968 $39,564,461 $3,051 Odd County 32.2% SAME SAME 1.29% 14.20% 15.69% SAME SAME 3.0%
Norwich CT New England 40,318 $165,455,785 $4,104 Odd City 54.5% DIFFERENT SAME 4.95% 3.12% 8.49% DIFFERENT SAME 15.9%
Rhode 19
Table A3 - Information on first alternate control cities City State Region Population City Budget Budget Election Election Political (2010) Size per Capita Cycle Jurisdiction Lean
Roseville CA West Coast 118,788 $483,261,192 $4,068 Even County 40.1% SAME SAME 5.51% 46.22% 38.58% SAME SAME 44.40%
Sacramento CA West Coast 466,488 $ 707,000,000 $ 1,516 Even County 57.8% SAME SAME 19.39% 15.82% 29.49% SAME SAME 25.4%
Austin TX Southwest 790,390 $ 2,656,801,000 $ 3,361 Even County 63.3% DIFFERENT DIFFERENT 1.84% 19.56% 21.80% SAME SAME 20.7% Redwood City CA West Coast 76,815 $ 95,229,518 $ 1,240 Even County 73.9% SAME SAME 9.58% 4.36% 15.41% SAME SAME 4.5%
Frisco co Rocky Mtns. 2,683 $14,166,384 $5,280 Odd County 59.8% SAME SAME 15.40% 36.45% 44.93% SAME SAME 9.7%
Greenwich CT New England 62,610 $ 287,226,070 $4,588 Odd City 56.5% DIFFERENT SAME 5.41% 11.50% 17.89% DIFFERENT SAME 0.4%
Greenbelt MD Mid-Atlantic 23,068 $ 25,848,394 $ 1,121 Odd City 89.7% SAME SAME 38.01% 47.49% 6.87% SAME SAME 16.3%
Cincinnati OH Midwest 296,943 $ 1,170,400,000 $3,941 Odd County 52.2% DIFFERENT SAME 22.38% 18.16% 5.44% SAME DIFFERENT 11.0% St Louis MO Midwest 319,294 $ 503,343,270 $ 1,576 Odd City 81.2% DIFFERENT SAME 12.01 % 16.10% 25.09% SAME DIFFERENT 15.1% Henderson NC South 15,368 $28,159,986 $1,832.38 Odd County 62.80% SAME SAME 16.98% 5.74% 19.43% SAME SAME 27.70%
Arlington MA New England 42,844 $126,306,310 $2,948.05 Odd City 64.45% DIFFERENT SAME 1.01% 21.28% 22.06% DIFFERENT SAME 5.85% Rhode 20
Table A4 - Information on second alternate control cities City State Region Population City Budget Budget Election Election Political (2010) Size per Person Cycle Jurisdiction Lean
Lansing Ml Midwest 114,344 $ 192,448,297 $ 1,683 Odd City 62.2% DIFFERENT DIFFERENT 1.57% 43.85% 44.71% DIFFERENT DIFFERENT 22.30% Santa Ana CA West Coast 324,528 $ 482,090,685 $ 1,486 Even City 47.9% SAME SAME 16.94% 48.15% 37.57% SAME DIFFERENT 35.3%
Detroit MI Midwest 713,777 $1,983,454,000 $2,779 Odd County 70.0% DIFFERENT DIFFERENT 11.35% 14.69% 29.38% DIFFERENT SAME 14.0% Redding CA West Coast 89,861 $ 98,294,340 $1,094 Even City 30.9% SAME SAME 5.78% 7.71% 1.83% SAME DIFFERENT 47.4%
Leadville co Rocky Mtns. 2,602 $5,577,136 $2,143 Odd County 59.8% SAME SAME 11.91% 70.64% 73.77% SAME SAME 9.7%
Fairfield CT New England 61,337 $ 278,465,591 $4,540 Odd City 71.4% DIFFERENT SAME 7.34% 23.23% 17.15% DIFFERENT SAME 14.5% New Carrollton MD Mid-Atlantic 12,135 $5,332,485 $ 439 Even City 89.7% SAME SAME 27.40% 68.41% 56.48% DIFFERENT SAME 16.3%
New Orleans LA South 343,829 $ 644,309,358 $ 1,874 Odd City 80.6% DIFFERENT DIFFERENT 10.13% 53.08% 47.79% SAME SAME 17.4% Madison WI Midwest 233,209 $ 323,724,474 $ 1,388 Odd City 71.4% DIFFERENT SAME 18.19% 35.69% 21.38% SAME DIFFERENT 5.2% Eden NC South 15,527 $33,253,800 $2,141.68 Odd County 36.5% SAME SAME 18.19% 23.17% 35.00% SAME SAME 1.4%
Everett MA New England 41,667 $182,960,373 $4,391.01 Odd City 64.5% DIFFERENT SAME 1.77% 30.03% 28.77% DIFFERENT SAME 5.8%
Table AS - Similarity of control cities to corresponding experimental RCV cities RCV City Primary Control City Secondary Control City Tertiary Control City City State City State Similarity City State Similarity City State Similarity Berkeley CA Santa Clara CA 3.86 Roseville CA 3.49 Lansing MI -0.17 Oakland CA Anaheim CA 3.70 Sacramento CA 3.52 Santa Ana CA 2.11 San Francisco CA San Jose CA 3.79 Austin TX 2.31 Detroit MI 0.97 San Leandro CA Chico CA 4.57 Redwood City CA 4.37 Redding CA 3.20 Telluride co Snowmass Village co 3.89 Frisco co 3.47 Leadville co 2.98 Portland ME Pawtucket RI 2.36 Greenwich CT 2.49 Fairfield CT 2.16 Takoma Park MD Hyattsville MD 4.43 Greenbelt MD 2.77 New Carrollton MD 1.49 Minneapolis MN Cleveland OH 2.64 Cincinnati OH l.76 New Orleans LA l.41 St. Paul MN Toledo OH 3.78 St. Louis MO l.96 Madison WI l.65 Hendersonville NC Newton NC 4.62 Henderson NC 3.79 Eden NC 3.68 Burlington VT Norwich CT 2.53 Arlington MA 2.47 Everett MA 2.28 Rhode21
Appendix B
Table Bl - RCV Election Cycles Marginal Costs 1
RCV City -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 +2 +4 +6 +8
Berkeley, CA $0.39 $2.74 $2.94 $2.27 $6. 12 $4.44 $5.34 $8.05 NIA Burlington, VT $2.61 $1.43 $3 .07 $2.80 $2.12 $2.31 $2.03 $3.37 NIA NIA Oakland, CA $1.70 $2.81 $1.98 $3.16 $2.38 $6.01 $2.86 $2.44 $3.98 NIA San Leandro, CA $0.54 $2.06 $0.63 $2.35 $0.62 $2.17 $2.84 NIA St. Paul , MN $2.95 $5.41 $5.30 $4.69 $5.05 $6.20 NIA NIA Takoma Park, MD $1.49 $0.81 $0.73 $0.22 $0.64 $0.67 $2.02 $0.74 Telluride, CO $9.76 $8.33 $9.00 $8.66 $6.77 $6.56 $5.02 $6.12 NIA NIA Image Bl - Marginal Cost of Election Cycles in RCV Jurisdictions $10.0 0
•
• I • • $8.00 •
• •
$6.00 • •
• • • • • • $4.00 •
I •
• I • • • I • • $2.00 • • • • • I •
• • • • • • •
$0.00 •
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Relative Election Cycle
1 Some jurisdictions included in this study have implemented RCV less than 10 years from its completion. Cycles that have yet to occur are denoted as NIA.
+10
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
Rhode 22
Table B2 - Control Election Cycles Marginal Costs
Control City -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 +2 +4 +6 +8 +10
Santa Clara, CA $0.73 $0.27 $1.53 $1.26 $2.92 $3.39 $2.30 $1 .21 $3.24 NIA NIA Norwich, CT $2.07 $2.16 $3.38 $2.00 $2.15 $2.43 $3 .10 NIA NIA NIA Anaheim, CA $0.36 $0.33 $0.41 $0.50 $0.57 $0.50 $0.38 $1.06 $0.69 NIA NIA Chico, CA $1.86 $0.38 $1.06 $1.07 $0.96 $0.67 $0.98 $0.78 $1.10 NIA NIA Toledo, OH $1.02 $1.59 $0.87 $1.58 $1.03 $1.36 $0.98 NIA NIA NIA Hyattsville, MD $0.98 $1 .52 $1.71 $1.25 $1.52 $1.12 $2.41 NIA Snowmass Village, CO $0.87 $1.08 $1.74 $0.55 $2.45 $0.78 $0.91 $2.48 NIA NIA NIA Image B2- Marginal Cost of Election Cycles in Control Jurisdictions $10.00
$8.00
$6.00
$4.00
• • • • •
• • • • $2.00 • • • • • I • • •
• • I • • • I • • • I • • • • • • • $0.00
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Relative Election Cycle
Rhode 23
Table Bl - All RCV Cost Data
City State Year Relative Cycle Time Control Active
Implemented Cycle Cost Quantifier Quantifier RCV
Berkeley California 2010 6 $8.05
Berkeley California 2010 4 $5.34
Berkeley California 2010 2 $4.44
Berkeley California 2010 0 $6.12 0 0
Berkeley California 2010 -2 $2.27 -1 0
Berkeley California 2010 -4 $2.94 -1 0
Berkeley California 2010 -6 $2.74 -1 0
Berkeley California 2010 -8 $0.39 -1 0
Burlington Vermont 2006 4 $3.27
Burlington Vermont 2006 2 $2.03
Burlington Vermont 2006 0 $2.31 0 0
Burlington Vermont 2006 -2 $2.12 -1 0
Burlington Vermont 2006 -4 $2.80 -1 0
Burlington Vermont 2006 -6 $3.07 -1 0
Burlington Vermont 2006 -8 $1.43 -1 0
Burlington Vermont 2006 -10 $2.61 -1 0
Oakland California 2010 6 $3.98
Oakland California 2010 4 $4.24
Oakland California 2010 2 $2.86 1
Oakland California 2010 0 $6.01 0 1 0
Oakland California 2010 -2 $2.38 -1 0
Oakland California 2010 -4 $3.16 -1 0
Oakland California 2010 -6 $1.98 -1 0
Oakland California 2010 -8 $2.81 -1 0
Oakland California 2010 -10 $1.70 -1 0
San Francisco California 2004 10 $15.67
San Francisco California 2004 8 $10.25
San Francisco California 2004 6 $9.15
San Francisco California 2004 4 $12.34
San Francisco California 2004 2 $13.65
San Francisco California 2004 0 $15.50 0 0
San Francisco California 2004 -2 $10.99 -1 0
San Leandro California 2010 6 $2.84
San Leandro California 2010 4 $2.17 l
San Leandro California 2010 2 $0.62
Rhode 24
City State Year Relative Cycle Time Control Active
Implemented Cycle Cost Quantifier Quantifier RCV
San Leandro California 2010 0 $2.35 0 1 0
San Leandro California 2010 -2 $0.63 -1 0
San Leandro California 2010 -4 $2.06 -1 0
San Leandro California 2010 -6 $0.54 -1 0
St. Paul Minnesota 2011 4 $6.20
St. Paul Minnesota 2011 2 $5.05 1 1 1
St. Paul Minnesota 2011 0 $4.69 0 1 0
St. Paul Minnesota 2011 -2 $5.30 -1 0
St. Paul Minnesota 2011 -4 $5.41 -1 1 0
St. Paul Minnesota 2011 -6 $2.95 -1 0
Takoma Park Maryland 2007 8 $0.74
Takoma Park Maryland 2007 6 $2.02 1
Takoma Park Maryland 2007 4 $0.67 1 1 1
Takoma Park Maryland 2007 2 $0.64 1 1 1
Takoma Park Maryland 2007 0 $0.22 0 1 0
Takoma Park Maryland 2007 -2 $0.73 -1 1 0
Takoma Park Maryland 2007 -8 $0.81 -1 0
Takoma Park Maryland 2007 -10 $1.49 -1 0
Telluride Colorado 2011 4 $6.12
Telluride Colorado 2011 2 $5.02
Telluride Colorado 2011 0 $6.56 0 1 0
Telluride Colorado 2011 -2 $6.77 -1 1 0
Telluride Colorado 2011 -4 $8.66 -1 1 0
Telluride Colorado 2011 -6 $9.00 -1 0
Telluride Colorado 2011 -8 $8.33 -1 0
Telluride Colorado 2011 -10 $9.76 -1 0
Berkeley California 2010 6 $8.05
Berkeley California 2010 4 $5.34 1 1
Berkeley California 2010 2 $4.44
Berkeley California 2010 0 $6.12 0 1 0
Berkeley California 2010 -2 $2.27 -1 1 0
Berkeley California 2010 -4 $2.94 -1 0
Berkeley California 2010 -6 $2.74 -1 0
Berkeley California 2010 -8 $0.39 -1 0
Burlington Vermont 2006 4 $3.27 1
Burlington Vermont 2006 2 $2.03 1
Rhode 25
City State Year Relative Cycle Time Control Active
Implemented Cycle Cost Quantifier Quantifier RCV
Burlington Vermont 2006 0 $2.31 0 0
Burlington Vermont 2006 -2 $2.12 -1 0
Rhode 26
Table B2 - All Control Cost Data
City State Year Relative Cycle Time Control Active
Implemented Cycle Cost Quantifier Quantifier RCV
Santa Clara California 2010 6 $3.24 0 0
Santa Clara California 2010 4 $1.21 1 0 0
Santa Clara California 2010 2 $2.30 0 0
Santa Clara California 2010 0 $3.39 0 0 0
Santa Clara California 2010 -2 $2.92 -1 0 0
Santa Clara California 2010 -4 $1.26 -1 0 0
Santa Clara California 2010 -6 $1.53 -1 0 0
Santa Clara California 2010 -8 $0.27 -1 0 0
Santa Clara California 2010 -10 $0.73 -1 0 0
Norwich Connecticut 2006 4 $3.10 0 0
Norwich Connecticut 2006 2 $2.43 0 0
Norwich Connecticut 2006 0 $2.15 0 0 0
Norwich Connecticut 2006 -2 $2.00 -1 0 0
Norwich Connecticut 2006 -4 $2.38 -1 0 0
Norwich Connecticut 2006 -6 $2.16 -1 0 0
Norwich Connecticut 2006 -8 $2.07 -1 0 0
Newton North Carolina 2007 4 $1.00 0 0
Newton North Carolina 2007 2 $0.89 0 0
Newton North Carolina 2007 0 $1.07 0 0 0
Newton North Carolina 2007 -2 $0.67 -1 0 0
Newton North Carolina 2007 -4 $0.64 -1 0 0
Newton North Carolina 2007 -6 $0.63 -1 0 0
Newton North Carolina 2007 -8 $0.58 -1 0 0
Newton North Carolina 2007 -10 $0.56 -1 0 0
Anaheim California 2010 6 $0.69 0 0
Anaheim California 2010 4 $1.06 1 0 0
Anaheim California 2010 2 $0.38 0 0
Anaheim California 2010 0 $0.50 0 0 0
Anaheim California 2010 -2 $0.57 -1 0 0
Anaheim California 2010 -4 $0.50 -1 0 0
Anaheim California 2010 -6 $0.41 -I 0 0
Anaheim California 2010 -8 $0.33 -1 0 0
Anaheim California 2010 -10 $0.36 -1 0 0
San Jose California 2004 10 $2.22 0 0
San Jose California 2004 8 $2.30 0 0
Rhode 27
City State Year Relative Cycle Time Control Active
Implemented Cycle Cost Quantifier Quantifier RCV
San Jose California 2004 6 $2.90 0 0
San Jose California 2004 4 $3.63 0 0
San Jose California 2004 2 $2.29 0 0
San Jose California 2004 0 $3.57 0 0 0
San Jose California 2004 -2 $0.63 -1 0 0
San Jose California 2004 -4 $0.23 -1 0 0
San Jose California 2004 -6 $0.47 -1 0 0
San Jose California 2004 -8 $0.53 -1 0 0
Chico California 2010 6 $1.10 0 0
Chico California 2010 4 $0.78 0 0
Chico California 2010 2 $0.98 0 0
Chico California 2010 0 $0.67 0 0 0
Chico California 2010 -2 $0.96 -1 0 0
Chico California 2010 -4 $1.07 -1 0 0
Chico California 2010 -6 $1.06 -1 0 0
Chico California 2010 -8 $0.38 -1 0 0
Chico California 2010 -10 $1.86 -1 0 0
Chico California 2010 -12 $0.25 -1 0 0
Toledo Ohio 2011 4 $0.98 0 0
Toledo Ohio 2011 2 $1.36 0 0
Toledo Ohio 2011 0 $1.03 0 0 0
Toledo Ohio 2011 -2 $1.58 -1 0 0
Toledo Ohio 2011 -4 $0.87 -1 0 0
Toledo Ohio 2011 -6 $1.59 -1 0 0
Toledo Ohio 2011 -8 $1.02 -1 0 0
Hyattsville Maryland 2007 8 $2.41 0 0
Hyattsville Maryland 2007 6 $1.12 0 0
Hyattsville Maryland 2007 4 $1.52 0 0
Hyattsville Maryland 2007 2 $1.25 0 0
Hyattsville Maryland 2007 0 $1.71 0 0 0
Hyattsville Maryland 2007 -2 $1.52 -1 0 0
Hyattsville Maryland 2007 -4 $0.98 -1 0 0
Snowmass Village Colorado 2011 4 $2.48 0 0
Snowmass Village Colorado 2011 2 $0.91 0 0
Snowmass Village Colorado 2011 0 $0.78 0 0 0
Snowmass Village Colorado 2011 -2 $2.45 -1 0 0
Rhode 28
City State Year Relative Cycle Time Control Active
Implemented Cycle Cost Quantifier Quantifier RCV
Snowmass Village Colorado 2011 -4 $0.55 -1 0 0
Snowmass Village Colorado 2011 -6 $1.74 -1 0 0
Snowmass Village Colorado 2011 -8 $1.08 -1 0 0
Snowmass Village Colorado 2011 -10 $0.87 -1 0 0

CHARTER STUDY

TASK FORCE
FEBRUARY 7, 2024
ITEM 3

STAFF REPORT
<I bakertilly
To:

From:

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force
Jay Trevino, Project Director
Al Zelinka, Director
Shauna Clark, Special Advisor
Subject: Discussion Regarding Term Limits for Members of the City Council
Date: February 7, 2024
Background
As part of the City Council's scope of study, the Pasadena Charter Study Task Force has been asked to examine term limits for elected officials on the City Council. This topic has been raised periodically by members of the public whenever the issue of Charter Study has been considered.

Section 401 of the Charter establishes four-year terms for the Mayor and City Council, and Section 406 sets the term of office for the Mayor at four years. The Charter language pertaining to term limits reads as follows:

Section 401. - Number and Term
(A). There shall be a City Council consisting of a Mayor and seven Councilmembers. The seven Councilmembers shall be nominated and elected by district as provided in this Charter. Except as provided in subsection B, the term of office of the Mayor and Councilmembers shall be four years.

Section 406. - The Mayor
(A) The Mayor shall be nominated and elected by the voters of the City at large for a term of four years, except as provided in Section 401.

Fact Finding
The Pasadena City Charter does not limit the number of terms or years the Mayor and Council can hold elective office on the Pasadena City Council. The California Elections Code does require that candidates seeking local elected office have their name on the ballot once, and so a candidate cannot seek both the Mayor's seat and a District seat on the same ballot.

The most common argument in favor of term limits is that they create more opportunities for non-incumbent candidates to be elected. The most common counterargument is that term limits can artificially remove a community's most experienced and (often-times) highly regarded legislator. Irrespective of the pros and cons, term limit discussions and ballot measures are gaining popularity in California.

Baker Tilly, LLP 18500 Von Karman Ave., 10th Floor, Irvine, CA 92612 bakertilly.com CG bakertilly Page2
California Government Code Section 36502(b) Term Limits reads:

Table 1.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the city council of a general law or charter city may adopt, or the residents of the city may propose by initiative, a proposal to limit or repeal a limit on the number of terms a member of the city council may serve on the city council, or the number of terms an elected mayor may serve. Any proposal to limit the number of terms a member of the city council may serve on the city council, or the number of terms an elected mayor may serve, shall apply prospectively only, and shall not become operative unless it is submitted to the electors of the city at a regularly scheduled election and a majority of the votes cast on the question favor the adoption of the proposal.

Research on Term Limits in Peer Cities
Peer City Research
This table presents Baker Tilly's research of the nine peer cities. The second two columns of this table show the structure-rotational or directly-elected mayor, and districts or no districts.

City Directly Districts Terms and Limits Authority/ Comments Elected
Mayor
Pasadena Yes Yes Mayor: Four-year term, no limits Charter Sections 401 and Council: Four-year terms, no limits 406
Anaheim rtes Yes Mayor and Council : Two four-year City Charter: Article V. City terms; of no more than eight Council Section 50~.5.
consecutive years even if those eight Mavor and Citv Council were as both, mayor, and council. [Term Limitations
Clock re-sets after two years of being
termed out
Note: Elected by plurality
Berkeley Yes rtes Mayor and Council: Four-year terms City Charter: Article 5, with no limit Section 14. Mavor's term
of office & Section 15.

Note: Elected by plurality Council members term of
office
Burbank No No Four years terms with no limits Municioal Code : Chaoter 3 Elections 2-3-110: Terms
of Office
Glendale No No Rotational mayor Code or Ordinances:

Chaoter 2.04.020 Selection
Council: No more than three four-year of the Mavor
terms.

Citv Charter: Article V
Elections. Section 6 Terms
Pasadena Charter Study Task Force -Term Limits (9 bakertilly <G bakertilly Page3
City Directly Districts Terms and Limits Authority/ Comments Elected
Mayor
Partial term of more than two years of elective officers· term counts as full term. limits of councilmembers
Long Beach Yes Yes Lifetime ban after three four-year terms § 214. MAYOR AND CITY as mayor and three-four-year terms as COUNCIL-THREE TERM councilmember. LIMIT., Article II. CITY
COUNCIL, City Charter,
Long Beach (elaws.us)
Santa Ana Yes Yes Mayor: No more than four two-year Citv Charter: Article IV . - terms Citv Council Division 1
~ec. 404 - Presidin2 officer
Council: No more than three two-year ~
terms.

Article IV. - Citv Council
Partial terms do not count toward term Division 1 Sec. 401.01 - limits rerm limits
Santa Yes Yes No more than two consecutive four-year Citv Charter Article V.

Barbara terms as mayor plus two consecutive Mavor and Citv Council four-year terms as councilmember. :.ection 500.1 Citv CouncilLimitation on Terms Santa No No No more than three four-year terms as City Charter, Article VI The Monica mayor and three four-year terms as Citv Council Section 600 - councilmember Number Term and Term
Limits
Torrance Yes Mayor and Council : No more than two City Charter: Article 6 - consecutive four-year terms Elective Officers Section
602 Terms (allbHcl
A four-year absence resets the clock
Observations
• Six of the nine peer cities have term limits and those six, except Santa Ana, have fouryear terms for mayor. • Santa Ana has a two-year term for Mayor
• Glendale, Long Beach, and Santa Monica have a three-term limit. • Anaheim, Santa Barbara, and Torrance have a two-term limit. • Torrance and Anaheim allow councilmembers who have exhausted their two fouryear terms to run again after an absence. • In Santa Ana, a partial term does not count as a full term. In Glendale, a partial term of more than two years counts as a full term.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force - Term Limits <ri bakertilly <G bakertilly Page4
Advantages and Disadvantages of Term Limits
Create more opportunities for non-
• ncumbents to be elected
erm limits have broad public appeal
New legislators bring in new points of view
urnover is believed to increase
accountability
dopting term limits now does not prohibit
the community or City Council from
amending or eliminating term limits in the
future
terproductive by some who
s usurps power away from voters
ns
shorten the tenure of the
ommunit 's most ex erienced le islators
Unlike seasoned elected officials, new legislators
ay rely on special interests to fill in their
nowled e a s
xperience gained from time on the job makes it
asier to navigate the myriad of California rules
and regulations applying to cities, as well as the
om lexities of the annual bud et
erm limits make public office less appealing
Discussion points for Considering Term Limits
If the Task Force were to recommend term limits, how would they be structured?

1. Should term limits be based on:
a. the number of terms (e.g., three consecutive four-year terms)? b. the number of years? (See Anaheim)
c. a combination of the above (See Santa Barbara and Santa Monica)

2. Should mayor and council term limits be the same? (All peer cities except Santa Ana have four-year terms for the mayor and council).

3. Does time away from elected office reset the clock? If so, how many years of absence are needed? (See Anaheim and Torrance which requires a four-year gap versus Long Beach which has a lifetime ban)

4. Do partial terms count? (See Santa Ana and Glendale)

5. When do term limits commence? (proscriptive only)
a. When each current elected official steps down
b. For those elected in 2026 (for Districts 3, 5, and 7) and 2028 for Districts 1, 2, 4, 6 and the Mayor).
c. After election year __ .

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force - Term Limits 'I bakertilly <t bakertilly PageS
Example of motion creating term limits
Recommend that the City Council propose a Charter Amendment to change Charter Sections 401 and 406 to limit the Mayor and the Council to three (or four) consecutive fouryear terms as Mayor and three (or four) consecutive four-year terms as Councilmember, with a partial term of more than two years counting as a term. After a four-year hiatus, or after four years in another office (Mayor to Council or Council to Mayor), the official would be eligible to hold office for another three four-year terms. This provision goes into effect in 2026 for Council Districts 3, 5, and 7, and 2028 for the Mayor and Council Districts 1, 2, 4, and 6.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force - Term Limits <I bakertilly

CHARTER STUDY

TASK FORCE
FEBRUARY 7, 2024
ITEM 3

CORRESPONDENCE
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
nt:
cityclerk
Sunday, February 4, 2024 4:24 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
Subject: FW: [Public Comment - Charter Study Task Force] FW: Charter Study Task Force: Term Limits
From: Rivas, Jessica <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2024 4:23:58 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Cc:'
Subject: [Public Comment - Charter Study Task Force] FW: Charter Study Task Force: Term Limits Hi thank you so much for
Charter Task Force, which is
your thoughts! By way of this message, I am forwa
Wed. Feb. 7th to discuss term limits. -Jess
Jessica C. Rivas
Councilmember, District 5
City of Pasadena
From: Liz Burnam-Supple
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2024 3:03 PM
To: Rivas, Jessica <[email protected]>
Subject: Charter Study Task Force: Term Limits
You don't often get email frorr Learn why this is important to the City Clerk for the
] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is . Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Dear Councilmember Rivas,
I am writing to note my strong opposition to term limits as a party of the Pasadena City Charter. Free and fair public elections already serve to limit councilmembers and hold them accountable to their constituents. If the electorate feels that their councilmember is effectively representing their will in City Council, why should they be denied the opportunity to have said councilmember continue to represent them and instead be forced to select a less popular candidate? Term limits are undemocratic and I strongly oppose them, and would encourage the task force to also oppose them.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
Elizabeth Burnam-Supple
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From: cityclerk
nt:
,,J:

Sunday, February 4, 2024 4:54 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
Subject: FW: Charter Commission Letter re Term Limits
From: Denise
Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2024 4:54:00 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Cc: Jess Rivas <[email protected]>
Subject: Charter Commission Letter re Term Limits
Learn why this is important
UTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

February 4, 2024
Attn: Pasadena City Charter Commission
"'-=: Term Limits for Pasadena City Council
Gentlepersons:

I am writing to you to strongly suggest that we limit the terms of Pasadena City Councilmembers. I know from personal experience that having the same city councilmembers serve for fifteen, twenty, thirty or more years is detrimental for politics. There's a need for new people and/or young people to get involved. It reinvigorates democracy with fresh thoughts, fresh approaches and an excitement that leads to change.

Los Angeles used to have no term limits. I remember the days of the city councilperson sleeping during the meetings. I was a tenant's rights activist in the 198Os and 9Os and I clearly remember my city councilmember telling me that "renter's don't count" because they "rarely vote." I remember his assistants having to wake him up during the meeting. He served until his death at age 76.

I believe, like Los Angeles, the councilmembers should be limited to three four-year terms.

Thank you for your consideration.
ncerely,
Denise Robb, Ph.D.

Political Science, Professor
1 McMillan, Acq
uanette (Netta)
From:
'lt:

Subject:
cityclerk
Monday, February 5, 2024 12:00 AM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
FW: Charter Task Force input term limits
From: Carl Selkin
Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2024 11:59:42 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Charter Task Force input: term limits
Learn why this is important
delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

I am writing in support of term limits for city council members and the mayor of Pasadena.

While I generally oppose term limits on the grounds that voters ;1ould be able to retain representation of which they approve, in the case of our city council and mayor, I see the greater virtue in restricting service to three terms on the council and two terms as mayor.

First: incumbency is an advantage that makes change difficult, even as the demographics or other characteristics of a district may change.

Recent residents may not have the incentive or knowledge to vote against the status quo, trusting in the wisdom of neighbors who put the incumbent in their seat.

Incumbents should be challenged every election in order to test whether or not they are the best candidate. But that test requires money, and incumbents generally have better access to donors than new candidates. With a three term limit, there is an ensured more ..:vel playing field every twelve years as new candidates with different ideas are required to speak to issues important to the constituents 1 and voters are obliged to educate themselves about these fresh voices .
. was glad that the idea of unlimited donations was defeated, despite the specious argument that limits are a disadvantage for new contenders. I don't know if candidates can bank or donate unexpended donations, I hope not, because retaining unexpended money gives incumbents another unfair advantage and contributes to council members receiving the largess of another member, an incumbent with a large accumulation to dole out. Indeed, the ability to amass funds and help a colleague, adds to alliances and codependency that militates against openness and democracy.

Carl Selkin
2 McMillan, Acquanette {Netta)
From: cityclerk
'nt:
,o:

Tuesday, February 6, 2024 3:46 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
Subject: FW: City Charter Meeting Wednesday topic: Term Limits From: Dr. Andrea Davis< >
Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 3:45:47 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected] > Subject: City Charter Meeting Wednesday topic: Term Limits You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important [&,] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Attn: Pasadena City Charter Commission
Re: Term Limits for Pasadena City Council Members
\s a business owner and employer of highly skilled employees in Pasadena, I have a strong interest in City of Pasadena governance regulations in the City Charter.

I am writing to you to strongly suggest that we limit the terms of Pasadena City Council members. Data suggests that long-term public office is very detrimental for the democratic process. There's a need for new people and/or young people to get involved. It reinvigorates democracy with fresh thoughts, fresh approaches, and an excitement that leads to change.

New candidates represent new micro constituencies. They also invigorate the discussion around ideas and initiatives during their campaigns. Los Angeles used to have no term limits and revised the error of this approach.

I believe, like Los Angeles, the Pasadena council members should be limited :> three four-year terms.

I appreciate your thoughtful debate on this matter.
1 Sincerely,
Ur. Andrea Davis
Pasadena, CA
A11drc:z D,wis, PhD., Director
GreenhouseTheraQyCenter.com
Youtube Channel: What is a Greenhouse for growing people? Facebook.com/ GreenhouseThera1 vCenter
c:hair-~E! Cl1nica! and Professional Practice Division
d
-~nd i c,ra'1 A1~,;n,~a--\/ N1,:::d·,-,nr!.' ('rv-1·)n-7it+ep R,

0... ,r .. )1~P.SP ... nta1._·i,ve, ._..11 -..,w ••...,. !.Jvv,._ ... l....-y , "-~,i_\'VVi ,,,_ ............ ,,f .,1 ,\..1,_,_.._,, ,,... .._ __ (~af~fc)rnia Psycho!o~Jical Assctclation
President 1
DIR/Floortirne Coaiit:ior1 of California
ioortime Strate';;ties to Promote Development in Children and Teens: A User's Guide to the DIR Model
Isc1/:1c·sc)rtl ar1d l~ilc~f-,elfe f-larvve/1
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission including all attached files may contain confidential and legally privileged medical information
which is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed.

IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, you are hereby notified that any reading, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.

If you received this email in error, please delete the message and notify our office manager immediately at (626) 795-7910 and by return e-mail. *Email is not a secure delivery method. Highly confidential information is best delivered in person. 2 McMillan, Acquanette {Netta)
From:
nt:

Subject:

From: Melissa M
cityclerk
Tuesday, February 6, 2024 5:56 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
FW: Public Comment for Charter Reform Task Force: Feb. 7, 2024 - Term limits and campain limits NOW!
Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 5:55:31 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Public Comment for Charter Reform Task Force: Feb. 7, 2024 - Term limits and campain limits NOW! You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 1 ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is fe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Public Comment for Charter Reform Task Force: Feb. 7, 2024 Term limits and campain limits NOW!
Hello
vork in Pasadena at the college, and spend a lot of time there shopping, eating, socializing. I heard the City is in the t-'rocess of government reform and that is very exciting.

Democratic principles demand term limits and campaing finance limits. The City of Alhambra has put in $250/donation limits and that was widely supported, with over 70% of the electorate voting yes.

It was a grassroots-led-initiative (Measure V) to put it on the ballot as a charter reform effort because the City Council at the time would not consider it. Needless to say, three at a time got voted out.

Those that supported it replaced them, and to this day continue to remind the public that they supported such a popular measure.
$250 may seem too little, but with by-district voting now, it works just fine. Absolutely no one is complaining - neither candidates, nor the populace. The state mandated limit is way too high, and still only serves the monied class. Lots of other cities in the area have campaign finance limits. Now Alhambra needs to post Form 460s, too: https://www.cityofalhambra.org/DocumentCenter/lndex/29 Pasadena is usually so good on being a leader in many areas, but on this, Pasadena is BEHIND THE TIMES. Please bring Pasadena up to speed with better campaign finance laws and set term limits.

Thank you.

Melissa Michelson
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
•nt:

I \l:

Subject:

From: Sonja Berndt
cityclerk
Tuesday, February 6, 2024 7:45 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Sao, Christine; Haskett, John
FW: Charter Study Task Force Mtg. 2.7.2024: Agenda #3: Consideration of Term Limits Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 7:45:07 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Charter Study Task Force Mtg. 2.7.2024: Agenda #3: Consideration of Term Limits You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important J CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is . Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Dear Member of the Pasadena Charter Study Task Force:

I am a longtime resident of Pasadena. I am strongly in favor of instituting term limits for our City Council: 3 terms/12 years for council members; 2 terms/8 years for mayor. Term limits create more opportunities for non-incumbent candidates to be elected. Term limits would also bring sorely-needed new ideas and points of view to our Council and counteract the strong inertia of incumbency. Too often, 1ected officials who have been in their positions for a long time, including some of our Council members, have an "it-can't-be-done" attitude and change moves at a snail's pace. They get comfortable with the status quo even if change is needed.

Turning over council member positions could also increase voter enthusiasm and voter turnout. Voters would have someone new to discuss issues with and could resist the urge to stay home on election day because "so-and-so" will just get elected again.

Finally, term limits would limit the influence oflobbyists and reduce the power of special interests. Special interests lobby many of their efforts toward keeping certain people in power and their influence on elected officials is a detriment to democracy. The interests of these influencers are often contrary to/different from the interests of the majority of persons the elected official represents.

For all of these reasons, please recommend the term limits for our council members and mayor as set forth above. Thank you.

Sonja Berndt
Pasadena
1 McMillan, Acq
uanette (Netta)
From:
,nt:

Subject:
cityclerk
Tuesday, February 6, 2024 8:12 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
FW: Letter to the Charter Study Task Force regarding term limits From: Anthony Manousos
Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 8:11:37 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Letter to the Charter Study Task Force regarding term limits You don't often get email from 'n whv this is important AUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Dear Charter Study Task Force
I am a 12-year resident of District 1 and have been actively involved in the civic life of this communy. My wife Jill Shook and I are co-founders of a nonprofit called Making Housing and Community Happen that advocates for affordable housing for our unhoused and low income neighbors. le have organized two Pasadena City Council Candidates Forum in the past four years focusing on now to end homelessness and address our city's housing crisis.

I am writing to express my support for term limits for City Council members, similar to the ones at the state level.

This is what I see as the problem with unlimited terms. Two members of the Pasadena City Council have been in office for more than 20 years. While their institutional memory and experience are valuable, and they have served the city well in many ways, I don't believe it's in the best interests of the city to have incumbents so entrenched it is hard for challengers to compete. In California, incumbents win 90% of the time at the state level and 80% at the local level. It costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to launch a serious campaign, which is a huge advantage to incumbents.

Our city is changing, with renters finally having a voice and institutional power thanks to Measure H, which was decisively passed by voters. Yet entrenched incumbents opposed rent control, even though a majority in their district supported it.

My argument is not that these entrenched incumbents are doing a bad job or are corrupt. What I am arguing is that having term limits would open up the Council to new people with fresh perspectives and innovative ideas. I was very impressed by the challengers who showed up for the candidates forum that Making Housing and Community Happen organized on Jan 31. I would like to have heard from the incumbents, but they chose not to take part. This to me is worrisome since four years ago when we rganized a candidates forum, 13 out of 15 candidates showed up and all submitted written responses lo our questions. None bothered to do so this cycle. Are they not showing up because they feel they are going to win anyway? Will this be the new normal in Pasadena? How will this affect our democratic process?
1 We need elected officials in our city willing to meet with concerned citizens who want to know where they stand and why.

The state of California adopted term limits of 12 years in 1992 and it has worked fairly well. This limit ves elected officials time to learn their job and acquire expertise in law-making, but it also encourages cnange. It gives challengers with new ideas a chance to compete for office.

What is the sweet spot for term limits in Pasadena? Should it be 12 years or 16 years? I would lean towards 12 but am okay with 16. What I see as a problem is allowing elected officials to stay in office 20 or more years. That's just too long!
Sincerely,
Anthony Manousos
Co-founder of Making Housing and Community Happen
makinghousinghappen.org
2 McMillan, Acq
uanette (Netta)
From:
-�nt:
.;.):

Subject:

From: Raul Ibanez
cityclerk
Wednesday, February 7, 2024 9:56 AM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
FW: Charter Study Task Force- term limits, public comment Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 9:56:06 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Charter Study Task Force- term limits, public comment N: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is port phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Hello, to whom it may concern,
I am writing as an 18-year District 5 resident of Pasadena, an alum of PUSD K-12 schools, and a longtime employee of Pasadena City College to strongly advocate for term limits in our city council.

Specifically, 3 terms/12 years for council members and 2 terms/8 years for Mayor of the City. This is undoubtedly an effective way to ensure that we have fresh and diverse perspectives and experiences represented on the Council and also to help counteract the strong inertia of incumbency. This will also ensure that all residents are represented as accurately & consistently as possible.

Thank you & please let me know if you have any questions Raul Ibanez
Student Services I Community Overcoming Recidivism through Education (CORE) Pasadena City College 1Pasadena CA 91106
Pronouns: El/He/Him
1 McMillan, Acq
uanette (Netta)
From: cityclerk
�nt:
.J:

Wednesday, February 7, 2024 9:59 AM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Sao, Christine; Haskett, John
Subject: FW: Thoughts on Term Limits
From: Tim Wendler
Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 9:57:54 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Cc: Tim Wendler
Subject: Thoughts on Term Limits
You don't often get email from .earn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is fe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

MarkPlease share these thoughts on term limits. Thanks! -Tim Wendler
Term Limits have advantages and disadvantages. They can encourage elected officials to be more responsive to constituents rather than institutional interests, allow for more fresh voices/new ideas on the Council, and encourages voter interest. But it can also curtail the voters' authority to re-elect someone who is doing a good job for them, and it potentially removes experienced, effective council members in their prime. My recommendation, if you are going to recommend some sort of term limits, is that you follow what I would call a forced vacation approach. After a certain number of terms, the Councilmember could not run for re-election, but it would not be a lifetime ban. They could run 4 or 8 years later, but would now be facing a new incumbent and would have to prove that they are the best candidate, not just one who was reelected due to the power of incumbency.
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
- 'nt:

Subject:

From: cindy clark-schnuelle
cityclerk
Wednesday, February 7, 2024 1 :39 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
FW: Charter Task Force: Term Limits for City Councilmembers Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 1:39:04 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Cc: cindy Clark-Schnuelle
Subject: Re: Charter Task Force: Term Limits for City Councilmembers You don't often get email from Learn why this is important UTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is hish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Dear City Clerk,
As long as councilmembers represent the interests of their constitutes I do not feel there is a need for term limits. We have elections.
"'othing is stopping newer or younger residents from running against and challenging an incumbent. I always welcome the ~bates because it makes the incumbents fire up their message to residents. If new candidates don't have the incentive or knowledge it's on them to gain it and step in front of voters. If they don't have the knowledge, should they be running for office?
All of the above being said, I strong support limiting campaign donations to even the playing field. ALL candidates should receive the exact same amount of funds for their campaigns.

I would add that if the public or other members of the council notices that an incumbent is less than attentive during council meetings. Not aware of where a debate or discussion is flowing and or attending to their personal business during council meetings that they would be called out on the spot.

Respectfully submitted,
Cindy Clark-Schnuelle
Pasadena resident
1 McMillan, Acq
uanette {Netta)
From:
·nt:

Subject:
cityclerk
Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:15 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
FW: Charter Study Task Force Mtg. 2.7.2024: Agenda #3: Consideration of Term Limits From: Kris Ockershauser <
Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:15:17 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Charter Study Task Force Mtg. 2.7.2024: Agenda #3: Consideration of Term Limits You don't often get email from earn vvhv this is imogrtant [&,] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button . .Lf'arn more ....

Dear Members of the Pasadena Charter Study Task Force:

I have lived in Pasadena for 21 years and have been active in civic affairs for most of that time. Term limits for our City Council would be a benefit as it would encourage more participation by the citizenry in civic affairs.

Jr the Council: 3 terms/12 years for council members; 2 terms/8 years for mayor.

The Council could more fairly reflect the interests of the people they are elected to represent than the special interests who work full time and contribute money to influence Councilmembers to support their interests.

Please recommend the term limits for our council members and mayor shown above.

Thank you,
Kris Ockershauser
Pasadena 91105
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
,nt:
,o:

Subject:

From: Victor Suarez
cityclerk
Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:19 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Sao, Christine; Haskett, John
FW: In Support of Term Limits - Charter Study Task Force Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:19:05 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: In Support of Term Limits - Charter Study Task Force You don't often get email from • ~arn why this is important ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is . Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Charter Study Task Force -
My name is Victor Suarez, I'm a resident of District 7 and I'm writing to voice my support for term limits in relation to item 3 in tonight's charter task force agenda. As our city continues to change it's important that the voices in city hall represent the diversity of experiences and perspectives in Pasadena.
,ecifically, I would urge the task force to strongly consider the recommendation of 3 terms/12 years for city council . nembers and 2 terms/8 years for the Mayor. I believe these term limits offer a balance of fresh perspectives while maintaining institutional knowledge in our council.

Victor Suarez
1 CHARTER STUDY

TASK FORCE
FEBRUARY 7, 2024

ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA

CORRESPONDENCE
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
,nt:
.o:

Subject:

From: Denise
cityclerk
Sunday, February 4, 2024 4:54 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
FW: Charter Commission Letter re Campaign Finance Reform Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2024 4:53:14 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Cc: Jess Rivas <[email protected]>
Subject: Charter Commission Letter re Campaign Finance Reform You don't often get email from . .,arn why this is important ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is . Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

February 4, 2024
Attn: Pasadena City Charter Commission
Re: Campaign Contribution Limits for the City of Pasadena Gentlepersons:

I am writing to you to strongly suggest you create campaign contribution limits of $1,000 for municipal elections in the City of Pasadena.

Expert Jonathan Mehta Stein, the Executive Director of Common Cause spoke to the council three years ago. He gave an exhaustive account of why we have contribution limits, what other cities have done and the three reasons why contribution limits are essential. 1) Quid pro quo: you don't want to give someone a $50,000 check and have the councilmember be beholden to them; 2) legalized corruption: even if it's not officially bribery, there's a "subtle tilt toward the person who donated." Donors are heard more, get more meetings, have more contact with the person to whom they donated; and lastly, 3) Perceived corruption: 77% of all Americans support contribution limits to create more trust in our democracy and credibility among the candidates.

Mr. Mehta Stein mentioned that the average donation for cities the size of Pasadena is $1,000. Many have limits of $250. He thought $4900 was too high. He discussed the dangers of having too little money (hard to compete) as well as too much. Common Cause provided a plethora ~ data and the consensus of campaign experts is that very high and/or unlimited contributions are harmful to democracy as well as creating a perception of corruption. 1 For this reason, I would like to request that the Charter require a $1,000 limit on campaign contributions to municipal candidates.
-::incerely,
Denise Robb, Ph.D.

Political Science, Professor
2 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
cityclerk
Tuesday, February 6, 2024 3:47 PM
From:
,nt:
,o: Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
Subject: FW: City Charter Meeting topic: Campaign Finance Transparency and Limits From: Dr. Andrea Davis
Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 3:45:45 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected] > Subject: City Charter Meeting topic: Campaign Finance Transparency and Limits Learn why this is important
. This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is . Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Attention: Pasadena City Charter Commission
Re: Term Limits for Pasadena City Council Members
-he rules around campaign finance transparency and campaign finance limits are very important to me as a business owner and an employer in Pasadena.

I am writing to you to strongly suggest you create campaign contribution limits of $1,000 for municipal elections in the City of Pasadena.

I remember so clearly when Jonathan Mehta Stein, ED at Common Cause spoke to this Council three years ago. He blew everyone out of the water with his clear-headed rational grasp of facts and figures. The arguments that followed from certain council members against donation limits did not respond to his logic or his data at all. He gave an exhaustive account of the data on the positive impact of contribution limits based on outcomes in other cities.

He also cited the logic:
1 1) Democracy is undermined by implicit quid pro quo: it is unwise to allow a person to give a candidate a $50,000 check and have the councilmember lie emotionally or fiscally beholden to them; this psychological pressure has impacted the leadership of our City too much already;
2) Large campaign donations legalize corruption because large donors are heard more, get more meetings, have more contact with the person to whom they donated, thus purchase greatly more power; and lastly, 3) Perceived corruption disincentivizes many from voting or getting involved; 77% of all Americans support contribution limits to create more trust in our democracy and credibility among the candidates.

The Common Cause ED reported that the average donation for cities the size of Pasadena is $1,000. Many have limits of $250. His analysis was that $4900 was too high for our size.

He discussed the dangers of having too little money (hard to compete) as well as too much.

For this reason, I would like to request that the Charter require a $1,000 limit on campaign contributions to municipal candidates.

In addition, the Charter should specify the following:
a) Independent Expenditures {IE's) should be clearly and conspicuously posted for a 11 voters to see
b) Regular donations should be posted clearly and conspicuously for all voters to easily reference when making an informed choice c) Conflicts of interest should be posted clearly and conspicuously for all voters to easily reference when making an informed choice 2 Sincerely,
I.Jr. Andrea Davis
Pasadena, CA
Andrea Dads, Ph.D., Directo1·
D:·n·:, ('cntCCu.,J:11
GreenhouseTherapyCenter.com
Youtube Channel: What is a Greenhouse for growing people? Facebook.com 1GreenhouseThera Center
Chair--E!ect, Clinical and Professionai Practice Division arid Locai A.dvocacy Netv1otk Comrnlttee Representative, f-~ ... 1;+:(.)t""r""; -. De:;' •rho!r-......-1 ir":' l As,~o~•,a.4,..ir, .,_ ·,___. (.i i ; 1 _ , , 1 ; a , ~- y ..__, , · ! u ::-J ,._ en , ::, 1_., ., L, v ! 1 President 1
·--·1JF{/FlcJortirne Cc)alitior1 of c:a!ifornia
Floortime Strateoies to Promote Develooment in Children and Teens: A User's Guide to the DIR Model
bJl .i·4r;,clrea L)c1\1ls1 La!tf::la Js·a;3c:s(Jn1 c1t1ci f\--Jlc'l1e/le f-fari,vt:ll CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission including all attached files may contain confidential and legally privileged medical information
which is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed.

IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, you are hereby notified that any reading, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.

TASK FORCE
FEBRUARY 22, 2024
ITEM 2

INFORMATIONAL

MEMO, AND AGENDA

MATERIALS FROM
FEBRUARY 7, 2024 AND
JANUARY 20, 2024

OFFICE OF TI-IE CITY CLERK

MEMORANDUM
TO: Chair, Vice Chair, and Task Force Members
FROM: Mark Jomsky, City Cler#
DATE: February 22, 2024
RE: Supplemental Information - Vacancy Appointment Process and Options for Calling a Special Election to Fill a Vacancy (carryover from January 20, 2024 and February 7, 2024 discussions)
On January 20, 2024 and February 7, 2024, the Charter Study Task Force discussed the following agenda item:

CONSIDERATION OF VACANCY APPOINTMENT PROCESS FOR MEMBERS

OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND OPTIONS FOR AMENDING THE CITY

CHARTER TO ALLOW FOR THE CALLING OF A SPECIAL ELECTION TO

FILL A VACANCY
At the conclusion of the February 7, 2024 discussion, the Task Force agreed by consensus to:
• Focus on Optional Motion No. 2 from Slide No. 14 of the PowerPoint presentation: "Length of Term Determines Method: Allow a 75-day appointment if term will last less than a year (or two years) or call special election if term will be more than one year (or two years)"; and
• Incorporate a recommendation that the City Council adopt an ordinance to codify the appointment process for transparency and efficiency purposes, and with the appointment process to include a mandatory public engagement and notice requirement to ensure public participation and awareness.

Pending Issues to Resolve
Following is a summary of the issues that have been raised by the Task Force and are as yet unresolved:
• Determination on recommending an appointment if: a) one year or less remain, b) 18 months or less remain, or c) two years or less remain, on the unexpired term
/00 North Garji:eld Auenue, S228 • PO. Box 7115 • Pasadena, CA 91109-7215 (626) 744-4124 • Fax (626) 744-3921
• Determination on whether the 75-day timeframe to make an appointment is overly long and should be shortened
• Consideration of adding a residency requirement for appointed positions to fill vacancies on the Council, and if so, how long should residency be established; and whether the same residency requirements should be applied to the elected positions on the Council
2 CITY OF PASADENA
2024 March Primary ElectionCIT<r OF PASADENA 3RD COUNCIL Voter Count
Registered Voters (RV)
Election Operations fraie " RV)
Vote By Mail Processing (raw ' RV)
Sample Ballot Processing and Printing
Office(s)/Seat(s) (rate • No. of Offices * RV)
Measures(s) fraie *fVo. of Measures 'RIOMeasure Text (rate' No. of Text Pages for all measures • RV) ; Voting Information (raw "RV)
Rare Breakdown
]E115
I $3.0295* 11115I $0.9539* 11115
$0.0188*1*11115
I $0.0188* 0*11115
|$0.0564*0^^11115J
I $0.5271 * 11115
Estimated Cost
j 533,672-891
$10,602-601
$20896
$0.00!$0.00;
$5,858-721
"I"
i..,
Candidate Filing and Campaign Finance (raw * Ho. of Camfisiates) I $957.1867*0 $0.00! Election Preparation Cost (Flat ram per jurisdiction) $8,585.63 CITf OF PASADENA TOTAL ESTIMATE $58,928.80
DISCLAIMER: Please note at calcuiating an estimate using the Election Cost Estimate Calculator is not consent or agreement to hold,consoiidaie or provide support services for an election. Requesis from jurisdictions for any election scenario must be received in he form of an adopted resoiution or other ofRcial (tocument and considered by the Board of Superii'isors and Registrar-Recorder'County Clerk atthe appropriaie time. For more Information pfease contact the Election Information and Preparation Dwlsion at [email protected]. g.cOROt»Cc
![^a^ ^1 -^ »• 's LOS ANGELES COUNTY REGISTRAR-RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK D--^
^
0 !U!^ ^ :::' •d
un
»
A1gr-: '"SflNG&ESDEAN C. LOGAN
Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk
February 22, 2024Mark Jomsky, City Clerk
City of Pasadena
100 North Garfield Avenue, Room S-228
Pasadena, CA 91101
ESTIMATED COST FOR A MARCH 4, 2025 SPECIAL STANDALONE ELECTION Dear Mr. Jomsky:

As requested, the estimated cost for the City of Pasadena Council District 3 to hold aMarch 4, 2025 Special Standalone Election with one office is $892,000.The estimate includes one 11-Day Vote Center, eight Vote-By-Mail drop boxes, and 11,121registered voters receiving VBM ballots. Changes in these, or any election factors such as the number of sample ballot booklet languages, and unanticipated increases in labor and/oroperational costs may result in a significant variance from this estimate.

As a reminder, elections conducted during a consolidated election cycle (the Presidential/Gubernatorial primary or general elections) are more cost-effective to local jurisdictions since many overall costs are shared with the Federal, State and County Districts.

Standalone or concurrent elections outside of the consolidated elections cost more as each jurisdiction basically sustains the full cost of their own election.

If you have any questions regarding this estimate, please contact the Election Billing Team [email protected], DEAN C. LOGAN
Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk
CJ&^^<^ ^t^/Lh^
^NNIFE^STORM, Division Manager
Finance and Management Division
12400 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, NORWALK, CA 90650 LAVOTE.GOV

CHARTER STUDY

TASK FORCE
FEBRUARY 22, 2024
ITEM 3

STAFF REPORT
(t bakertilly
To:

From:

Pasadena Charter Sh1dy Task Force
Jay Trevino, Project Director
Al Zelinka, Director
Shauna Clark, Special Advisor
Subject: Discussion on the Timing of Mayoral Elections
Date: February 22, 2024
Background
As part of the City Council's scope of study, the Pasadena Charter Study Task Force has been asked to examine the timing of Mayoral elections. Changing the terms or timing of the Mayor's races could create opportunities for all Pasadena Councilmembers to seek the Mayor's seat without giving up their own.

Pasadena Charter Section 406 sets the term of office for the Mayor at four years:

Charter Section 406. - The Mayor
(A) The Mayor shall be nominated and elected by the voters of the City at large for a term of four years, except as provided in Section 401.

In 1998, when the voters of Pasadena established the directly elected Mayor, they chose fouryear terms, the same length as Council terms. The election for the first directly elected Mayor coincided with the election for District seats, 1, 2, 4 and 6. Since the Mayor and Districts 1, 2, 4 and 6 appear on the same ballot, and California Elections Code prohibits candidates from having their name appear on the ballot for two different seats at the same election, those Councilmembers are unable to run for the Mayor's seat without having to forego running for their own District seat. Conversely, Councilmembers from Districts 3, 5, and 7 can run for Mayor every four years without risking their District seat.

The following Charter section shows how the District elections are staggered. Section 401 (C) starts with the year 2020 because Pasadena had to reset election dates and terms upon moving elections to even years.

Charter Section 401 (C)
Beginning in the year 2020, the terms of office of the Mayor and Councilmembers elected from Districts 1, 2, 4, and 6 shall commence in the year 2020 and in each fourth anniversary of the year 2020, and the terms of office of the Councilmembers elected from Districts 3, 5, and 7 shall commence in the year 2022 and in each fourth anniversary of the year 2022.

The terms of office of the Mayor and Councilmembers shall commence at the time of the City's organizational meeting held on the fifth Monday following the statewide general election and until their respective successors are elected and have duly qualified.

Baker Tilly, LLP 18500 Von Karman Ave., 10th Floor, Irvine, CA 92612 bakertilly.com (G bakertilly Page2
In discussions with City staff, we have identified three options for changing the Mayoral elections. We have also included information on moving one of the Council seats to a different election cycle for discussion purposes. The options include:
■ Changing the Mayor's term from four to two or six years, ■
■
Moving mayoral elections from even to odd years as standalone elections, or Enacting term limits.

Changing the Mayor's tenn from four to two or six years Upon incorporation, the 361 General law cities in California chose either a two-year or fouryear term for directly elected mayors. The Government Code for General law cities reads:

Government Code Section 34900
At any general municipal election, or at a special election held for that purpose, the city council may submit to the electors the question of whether electors shall thereafter elect a mayor and four city councilmembers, and whether the mayor shall serve a two-year or four-year term. In cities presently having elected mayors, the city council may also submit to the electors the question of whether the mayor shall thereafter serve a two-year or a four-year term.

Per statute, General law cities have four-year terms for council. We believe that all Ch arter cites, except Vernon, also have four-year terms for Council. Uniquely, the City of Vernon has five-year terms and holds one election every year.

There are cities in California that have two-year mayoral terms, bu t we have yet to find a city that has six-year terms. Here are the cities with two-year terms that we have identified to date:

Table 1. Twelve cities with two-year terms for Mayor
City Population Charter/General Mayor: Limits on Council: Limits on fourLaw two-year terms year terms Dublin 48,831 General Law Four consecutive Two consecutive Garden Grove 172,781 General Law Four Two terms
Grover Beach 13,200 General Law Two consecutive Two consecutive Irvine 266,122 Charter Two consecutive Two consecutive
Kerman 14,689 General Law Two consecutive Two consecutive Livermore 80,723 General Law Four consecutive Two consecutive Merced 80,000 Charter Two consecutive Two consecutive
Monrovia 36,000 Genera l Law No limits No limits
Ojai 7,700 General Law No limits No limits
Pacific Grove 15,522 Cha rter Eight yea rs tota I Eight yea rs in succession San Ramon 72,000 Charter Four consecutive No limits
Santa Ana 334,217 Charter Four terms Three consecutive
Tracy 80,000 General Law Two consecutive Two consecutive Pasadena - Timing of Mayoral Elections (G bakertilly
(9 bakertilly Page3
Advantages and Disadvantages
The following chart lists advantages and disadvantages of two-year and six-year terms:

Two-year terms for Mayor
re opportunities for challenging
's seat
ver a period of four years, each
ouncilmember could run for mayor during
their off- ear election c de
urnover is believed to increase
ccountability
Six-year terms for Mayor
educes number of citywide elections and
that reduces costs to the Cit .
creases stability in City leadership
ampaign every two years,
e from cit business
ver may disrupt previously
ojects when a mayor with
orities is elected
ayor' s seat on the ballot every
o years increases the cost of holding
ctions
rtunities to run for Mayor and
turnover
educes opportunities for Councilmembers
o run for Mayor without forfeiting a seat.

For more information, Baker Tilly could query officials in cities with two-year mayoral terms and continue to look for some with six-year terms. For instance, we would ask about turnover and the number of challengers for the mayor's seat. We would ask if the two-year seat dissuaded candidates from running for mayor. We could also talk to officials in Ojai, Colton, and other relevant cities about ballot measures to change the mayor's term from two to four years.

Moving Mayoral elections to odd years
With voter approval, it is possible to stagger Pasadena's Mayor and Council elections by changing the election cycle for the Mayor from even to odd years. This would enable every Councilmember in Pasadena to run for Mayor every four years without risk to their current seat. Counties in the State of California hold various elections in odd years including special elections and runoffs, but a primary and a runoff for Pasadena would be a standalone election. As previously explained, standalone elections are more costly to cities and to candidates who would pay more for the printing of Candidate's Statements.

However, if the Task Force wants to explore this option, Baker Tilly would ask the 58 County Clerks or Registrars of Voters in California if they can identify cities that hold offcycle elections for mayor.

Pasadena - Timing of Mayoral Elections <i bakertilly
<& bakertilly Page4
Effects of Term Limits
As they are still under consideration by the Task Force, it is important to note that term limits may have an impact on opportunities to run for the Mayor's seat. Termed-out Councilmembers do not risk their seats by running for other offices.

Hypothetically, if a limit of three four-year terms for Districts 3, 5, and 7 began in 2026, and term limits for the Mayor and Districts 1, 2, 4, and 6 commenced in 2028, Districts 3, 5 and 7 would have the advantage for the first couple of the Mayor's terms; however, in the course of time, Councilmembers will not be termed out at the same time. For example, one Councilmember might decide not to run for a third term. As a result, the clock for the next person elected to that office would reset to the first term of a twelve-year cycle, while remaining Councilmembers in that election year would be finishing the second term of their twelve-year cycle. The same goes for the Mayor who could leave office before reaching term limits.

Flipping the Term of One District
Finally, there is a provision in state law that allows a General law city to make a one-time shift in one council term. The Government Code reads as follows:

Government Code 34906 (as of January 01, 2023)
Notwithstanding Section 36503, if a city has an elected mayor and the election of the remaining members of the city council for four-year terms is not evenly staggered, the city council may, on a one-time basis only and prior to the first day for circulating nomination papers for the general municipal election, designate one of the city council offices appearing on the general municipal ballot, other than the office of the mayor, to serve a two-year term, or may provide that of the city council offices appearing on the general municipal ballot, other than the office of the mayor, the one which receives the least votes of those elected ( or if there is a tie for such a position, as decided by lot) shall serve a two-year term. At all subsequent general municipal elections, each member of the city council elected at such election, other than the mayor if the mayor has a two-year term, shall be elected to serve a four-year term.

We included this provision as a discussion point about what may be possible.

Lancaster, a Charter city, used this provision in 1997 without a Charter change.

However, Pasadena would have to place the measure on the ballot.

Pasadena - Timing of Mayoral Elections (I bakertilly

CORRESPONDENCE
Jomsky, Mark
,m:
::,ent:

To:

Subject:

You don't often get email from
Tim Wendler
Sunday, February 18, 2024 5:41 PM
Jomsky, Mark
Charter Reform Task Force
Learn why this is important
[&I CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Mark -
My recommendation for the Timing of Mayoral election - a 6 year Mayoral term achieves the goal of alternating which election cycle the Mayor is running on, and gives them an extra level of being above the fray, and looking at the City's long-term interests.

Please share these comments with the task force.
-Tim Wendler
Pasadena, CA 91104
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
~rom:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

From: Blair Miller
cityclerk
Wednesday, February 21, 2024 3:03 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Sao, Christine; Haskett, John FW: Timing of Mayoral Election
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 3:02:59 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Timing of Mayoral Election
You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important L&] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

City Clerk and Chair Chawkins,
I am writing to give input on the issue of the timing of the Mayoral election that will be discussed at the Charter Study Task Force. I have a conflict and will be unable to attend the meeting in person. l support having the Mayoral election be on an off year from the Council members, so that any incumbent Council member can run for Mayor without being forced to give up the opportunity to run for re-election as a Council member.

I think there may be two ways to approach it:

In 2024 we will elect the Councilmembers for districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6. It would not be a stretch to add Districts 5 and 7 to the presidential election cycle, and have the Mayor's race in the other even year (2026, 2030 for example).

Alternately, we could have the Mayoral race on an off (odd) year.

Thank you for consideration of my opinion on this matter.

Blair Miller
1 CORRESPONDENCE

NOT ON THE AGENDA
McMillan, Acq
uanette (Netta)
From:
�0nt:

Subject:
cityclerk
Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:54 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
FW: City Council Mtg Tonight
From: Julie McKune
Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:53:55 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk
Subject: City Council Mtg Tonight
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification]
[&_] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn mo re ... < https:// myd o it.cityofpa sadena. net/ sp ?id= kb_ article_ view&syspa rm_ article= KB0010263>. --�ar Voting members,
We support term limits. Please update our city charter to be inclusive.

Government serves all better when it's representing all our citizens, not just the ruling class.

Regards,
Julie Romero McKune & Randal Romero, Pasadena residents 60 yrs. 1 McMillan, Acq
uanette (Netta}
From:
c�nt:

Subject:
cityclerk
Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:55 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John
FW: term limits proposal
From: mb kalis
Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:54:27 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: term limits proposal
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is . Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more .... i think term limits deny voters their right
1 CHARTER STUDY

TASK FORCE
MARCH 14, 2024
ITEM 2

FOLLOW-UP

INFORMATION
(I bakertilly
To:

From:

Subject:

Date:

Introduction
Pasadena Charter Study Task Force
Jay Trevino, Project Director
Al Zelinka, Director
Shauna Clark, Special Advisor
Pasadena Charter Study- Term Limits Outreach
March 14, 2024
This report is a follow-up to the Pasadena Charter Study Task Force discussion on term limits on February 7. At that time, Baker Tilly was asked to gather information and locate speakers who had experienced the impact of term limits within their communities. This report highlights the outreach that the City Clerk's Office and Baker Tilly conducted on the opinions of local government leaders about term limits. This report is divided into four sections. • Background -Overview of Term Limits in California
• Methodology for Data Collection
• Comments on Advantages and disadvantages of term limits • Interviews
Background
By 2018, 123 of California's 482 cities (26%) and nine out the state's fifty-eight counties (16%) had term limits. Fifty-five of the 123 cities were charter cities. Thirty-two cities with term limits had populations greater than 100,000.1
Between 2018 and 2022, another 27 cities enacted term limits. This rapid uptick in cities with term limits coincided with two changes in elections. All California cities were mandated to hold candidate elections in even years. Second, the threat of lawsuits forced nearly every city that did not have them to convert to district elections. Today, approximately 148 (31 %) of California's 482 cities have term limits.

Methodology
City Clerk Mark Jomsky sent an inquiry through the League of California Cities listserv seeking responses from officials experienced with term limits. The City received ten responses.

Relevant responses are included in the comments section. 1 City of Simi Valley City Manager's report to the City Council dated October 16, 2018.

BAKER TILLY• 1730 MADISON ROAD • CINCINNATI, OH 45206 • 513 8615400 • FAX 513 8613480 Term Limits Follow Up Report 2
Baker Tilly read staff reports on term limits from other cities. For the public's point of view, we read ballot arguments for and against term limits. Baker Tilly developed a questionnaire which was sent to about twenty-one cities in California with populations between 100,000 and 200,000 population that have term limits. The questionnaire asked the following:

1. What benefits resulted after your community enacted term limits?

2. Were there any unforeseen issues or problems that resulted after the enactment of term limits?

3. If you had a "do over" would you enact term limits again? The few who responded said they had no information because term limits were either too new or had been in place too long to be able to talk about their impact.2 Baker Tilly then broadened the research to include a random group of general law and charter cities. We asked city clerks if they could answer the same questions or refer us to someone who could. Many clerks said they had no direct experience with term limits for reasons previously mentioned. Others provided useful information or referred us to current or former officials who could answer the questions. We interviewed five officials who had been referred to us. In total, the City Clerk and Baker Tilly interacted with approximately 30 agencies, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. List of California Cities Contacted Regarding Term Limits Cities
Baldwin Park Beverly Hills Camarillo
Carson Commerce Corona
Glendale USD Costa Mesa Downey
Dublin Garden Grove Glendale
Huntington Beach Laguna Hills Los Alamitos
Menifee Murrieta Newport Beach
San Ramon Santa Barbara Santa Monica
Saratoga Simi Valley Temple City
Sunnyvale Thousand Oaks Torrance
Ventura Irvine Riverside
Comments on the Advantages and Disadvantages of Term Limits The following is a summary of comments received. They are anonymous as many did not want to go on the record. Where we could, we used verbatim comments. Others we summarized for brevity. We left out comments that were repetitive.
2 Term limits go into effect approximately one term after voter approval. Most cities surveyed had three four-year terms. A city adopting term limits more than twenty years ago has reached a point where the replacements for termed-out officials have had only one term in office.

CG bakertilly
Term Limits Follow Up Report
Advantages of Term Limits
• Makes it easier for other community members to replace incumbents, some of whom, have served 20 years or more,
• Limits potential alleged abuses by those in power for too long, • Being termed out makes it easier to advocate for change, • When your term is ending, it is easier to take necessary, but politically unpopular, positions,
• Our city adopted term limits to address the incumbent advantage, • Necessary for getting new (and younger) people involved in local government, • Eliminates the potential to have a council full of career and lifetime politicians, and • Provides voters with a wider array of choices.

Disadvantages
• Limits continuity in councilmembers' ability to serve and contribute, so good prospective candidates do not run,
• A special interest is controlling the council. They have two votes now with another councilmember about to be elected,
• Term limits resulted in the departure of councilmembers with decades of experience who were replaced by those with little or no experience, • Makes city councilmembers more political, partisan, and adversarial, • Because of loss of tenure, we lose representation on county, regional and state boards, and commissions,
• Qualified interested parties do not apply. Knowledge base is lost, • We had the same Council for 20 years, so it has been an adjustment due to more frequent turnover,
3 • They term out just as they start to fully understand and get the hang of the meetings and processes,
• By the time the new councilmembers have gotten up to speed, they are already gearing up for re-election,
• Term limits do not appear to have resulted in greater diversity or more people running for council. A different type of person runs now,
• New councilmembers are not listening to the city attorney, city clerk or staff, and • Elected officials are so new they do not follow Council protocol and cannot run a meeting.

Other Comments
• Some say that the problem with term limits is electing uninformed council members.

That problem is less of a threat where there is a City Manager form of government. • Term limits have not been in effect long enough. No one has been termed out yet, • Term limits have been in effect too long for any remaining staff or elected officials to be able to comment,
• No impact thus far. We still have about the same number of candidates and not a diverse group of candidates,
(G bakertilly
Term Limits Follow Up Report
• Once the voters approved term limits, two of the longest-serving councilmembers resigned before the end of their terms,
4 • It may be true that term limits have resulted in more women and minorities on councils, however, the bigger picture is the negative public comments and social media posts, • Concerns about even-year elections (see interview with Dr. Julian Gold, Mayor of Beverly Hills), and
• There is a need to increase pay for councilmembers and other elected officials, as this could incentivize more middle-class working individuals to run for office (see interview with Michael MacDonald of Ventura).

Interviews
As discussed above, Baker Tilly interviewed referrals from city clerks and others. We also conducted interviews with two experts in public policy who have extensive experience with Southern California cities. Their comments relevant to term limits are summarized below.

Interview with Dr. Ronald 0. Loveridge
Ronald 0. Loveridge, a Stanford PhD., has 33 years of public service as a City of Riverside Councilmember beginning in 1979 and as Mayor from 1994 to 2012. He served as President of the National League of Cities, is a member of the National Academy of Public Policy and is on the Board of the National Civic League which produces the Model City Charter.

Although Riverside does not have term limits, we talked to Dr. Loveridge about the political climate in Southern California and about his experience in national civic leadership. He stated that with or without term limits, it will become difficult to retain qualified leadership, especially minority leadership. He cited a study from the University of San Diego study3 titled: Full Report Detailing Threats Against and Harassment of Local Elected Officials. The study found:

Seventy-five percent of all San Diego County elected officials have experienced threats or harassment because of their elected service, with roughly half experiencing threats and harassment monthly. Threats and harassment of elected officials is a bipartisan issue, but one of the study' s key findings is that this behavior disproportionately affects women.
• 82% of female officials surveyed report receiving threats and harassment vs. 66% of their male counterparts
• Women on the San Diego City Council and County Board of Supervisors receive 15 to 20 times the aggressive interactions on social media that their male peers do • 61 % of women say they have considered leaving public service because of it, compared to 32% of men
3 USD Study https://www.sandiego.edu/news/detail.php? focus=89571 CG bakertilly
Term Limits Follow Up Report
Interview with Dr. Raphael (Raphe) Sonenshein
Dr. Raphael J. Sonenshein, is the executive director of the John Randolph Haynes and Dora Haynes Foundation and previously, was the executive director of the Pat Brown Institute for Public Affairs. A graduate of Princeton and Yale, Dr. Sonenshein is a nationally recognized expert on racial and ethnic politics, on California and Los Angeles, and on charter reform.

We asked Dr. Sonenshein if he felt term limits had an effect in the City of Los Angeles. He pointed out that the changes in Los Angeles politics have resulted more from the number of termed-out state politicians running for local offices than from the adoption of term limits by 5 the voters of Los Angeles. Legislators termed-out in Sacramento, have the name recognition and campaign financing to dominate local races. There is little room for new, non-career politicians.

We also interviewed Dr. Julian Gold, Mayor of Beverly Hills, and Mr. Michael MacDonald, City Clerk of Ventura. Both cities have term limits. Their bios and Baker Tilly's notes from the interviews are provided below.

Dr. Julian Gold, Mayor, Beverly Hills
Mayor Julian A. Gold, M.D., was elected to the Beverly Hills City Council in 2011 and served as Mayor in 2015 and 2018. He is currently serving his third Mayoral term (2023-2024).

Dr. Gold graduated from NYU School of Medicine. A board-certified anesthesiologist for 40 years, he was Co-Chairman of the Department of Anesthesiology at Cedars-Sinai and CoManaging Partner of General Anesthesia Specialists Partnership Medical Group from January 1991 until April 2019 He is a former member of the Board of Directors of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and has served on many hospital committees. Dr. Gold is an active supporter of local youth sports and is a well-known leader in Beverly Hills.

Term Limits
Dr. Gold and another former Beverly Hills mayor sponsored term limits. The Council voted unanimously to put the question to the voters in 2022. Except for a couple of ads in the local newspaper, they relied on word-of-mouth to promote the measure. He indicated that term limits were approved by 82% of the voters.

Interest in term limits came about because of the lengths of tenure. One council member has been there for 15 years and although he voted to put the measure on the ballot, he is challenging one aspect. Dr. Gold said Beverly Hills needs younger people to come onto the council.

Knowing he is termed out made him bolder in advocating for change in the city. He found it easier to do things that are politically unpopular. There have been few comments from the community other than "we will miss you."
Dr. Gold acknowledged that term limits can force good people off the council. He said that new council members require time and attention to come up to speed and learn the operations of the <t bakertilly
Term Limits Follow Up Report
city but that uninformed council members are less of a threat when you have a City Manager form of government.

Even-year elections
When asked what he would change, Mayor Gold said it is nothing related to term limits, he would go back to odd-year elections. He noted that turnout is higher in even years (12,000 voters as opposed to approximately 6,000), but half of those do not even know where city hall is. He would rather forgo higher turnout and be elected by people who understand what a council member does and the value they bring.

When city elections were standalone, it was clear that anyone who came to the polls, came to vote specifically on city issues. They came with some knowledge about the city and those running for office.
6 Today's voters go to the polls to vote for President or Governor; it is extremely hard to convey a message about your city with all the competing races and measures on the ballots. Voters do not connect with us like they used to.

Michael MacDonald, CMC, CPMC, City Clerk, City of Ventura Michael B. MacDonald is the City Clerk for the City of San Buenaventura (Ventura). Prior to joining the City of Ventura, Michael served as an Assistant City Clerk for the City of Berkeley, the City of Port Hueneme, and served as a ROVER in Alameda County for the 2018 general election. Previously, Michael served as the Chair of the Oakland Public Ethics Commission. As Chair of the Ethics Commission, Michael applied his knowledge as a City Clerk to the enforcement side of the California Political Reform Act and local ordinances to achieve greater compliance.

Impacts of Term Limits
Ventura went to term limits in 2016 to address incumbency advantage. At one point, the city had Councilmembers who served for 43, 25, and 17 years respectively. Term limits had few effects until the city changed to district elections in 2018. Some members stepped down, even without being termed out, thus opening up more seats.

Today, the most senior councilmember has been there 3 years. They are just getting up to speed while running for re-election. There is no one on the council capable of mentoring new council members. There is a loss of institutional knowledge. Ventura has rotational mayors with little experience running a meeting. Moreover, the diversity level is about the same.

Term limits have not meant we have more people running for council; we have different people running. Many of those who are best qualified do not bother. Some of the reasons are the negative public discourse and term limits.
((; bakertilly
Term Limits Follow Up Report 7
Would you recommend term limits
I am an advocate of term limits but only with an intensive succession plan and onboarding experience for new council members. They would need to go through training just to familiarize themselves with city government.

In addition, those running for council now need more financial support. Cities might also consider much higher pay. Middle class working people cannot devote as much time to learning city government because they are earning a living. ((; bakertilly

CHARTER STUDY

TASK FORCE
MARCH 14, 2024
ITEM 2

CORRESPONDENCE
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

From: mb kalis
cityclerk
Tuesday, March 12, 2024 6:18 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John FW: chater change re: term limits
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2024 6:17:24 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: chater change re: term limits
You don·t often get email frorr earn why this is important . ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is fe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more .... term limits disenfranchise voters.

People's skills and experience get cut when they can be applying them & their knowledge for the betterment of our city
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
,=rom: cityclerk
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 4:20 PM
To: Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John Subject: FW: Charter Study Task Force - compensation and term limits From: Bin Lee
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 4:19:45 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Charter Study Task Force - compensation and term limits You don't often get email from Learn why this is important J CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is e. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Dear Charter Study Task Force,
First, I want to voice my support to add term limits for council. It's a no-brainer.

More importantly, I want to talk about the low stipend, which is laughably lower than the average monthly rent of $2,279 for a 1-bedroom apartment (source: apartments.com).

This means only a small subset of Pasadenans can afford to run and hold office, primarily homeowners who have the privilege to reduce their work hours or have multiple forms of income.

We know that the majority of residents are renters. In addition, I know plenty of friends and neighbors who are politically engaged and want to serve their community, but who can't afford to leave their full time jobs and continue paying their rent or mortgage.

I want to update the charter to pay the council a livable wage, preferably adjusted based on median income or something similar. I want a future where we encourage a larger pool of quality Pasadenans to run for office, regardless of their socioeconomic status.

Pasadena is a vibrant and diverse city, and I want that diversity reflected on our ballots.

Thanks for your time,
Bin Lee, District 1 homeowner
Pronouns: he I him I his
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta}
rom:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

From: Dan Huynh
cityclerk
Thursday, March 14, 2024 5:54 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Kenebrew, Jerice; Soo, Christine; Haskett, John FW: Charter Amendment Task Force
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2024 5:53:20 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Charter Amendment Task Force
You don't often get email from ·n why this is important ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is e. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more ....

Dear Charter Amendment task force,
I live and work in Pasadena (Steve Madison's district}. I strongly urge the task force to recommend term limits on city council members and a living wage for the council. This would allow greater participation in -:ity government through stable and predictable council seat turnovers and ensure that candidates running for seats must not be independently wealthy to sustain themselves while serving.

Thank you,
Dan Huynh
91101
1 CHARTER STUDY

TASK FORCE
MARCH 14, 2024
ITEM 3

STAFF REPORT
<9 bakertilly
To: Pasadena Charter Study Task Force
From: Jay Trevino, Director
Al Zelinka, Director
Shauna Clark, Special Advisor
Subject: Pasadena Charter Study Task Force - Mayor and Council Compensation Date: March 14, 2024
Background
As part of the City Council's scope of study, the Pasadena Charter Study Task Force was asked to examine compensation for the Mayor and Council, including childcare and eldercare. For this report, compensation as defined in Charter Section 405 and the Municipal Code includes:
• Salaries, (sometimes called wages or stipends)
• Benefits (Health and dental insurance, life insurance) • General Office expenses (telecommunications, internet, childcare) • One time office expenses for the purchase of a computer and mobile phone • Out-of-pocket, reimbursable expenses which might include mileage or travel The report does not cover the per diem or other compensation received by the Mayor and Council for serving on regional boards and commissions.

State Law on Compensation in Charter Cities
Article XI§ 5 (b) of the State of California Constitution empowers charter cities to decide the compensation of elected officials. Although there are no limits on salaries and benefits for charter cities, the general rule is that local officials may be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses. State law known as the Fair Political Practices Act imposes restrictions on gifts, honoraria, travel reimbursement and loans.

Charter Section 405 and Municipal Code Sections 2.05.210 and 2.05.220 The City of Pasadena's method for setting salaries and benefits for the Mayor and Council includes:
• Formation of a compensation committee per Section 405 of the Charter, • Provisions regarding stipends per Municipal Code Section 2.05.210, and • Provisions regarding benefits and reimbursement per Municipal Code Section 2.05.220.

The complete text of these provisions is found later in this report.

Pasadena Charter Study Task Force - Compensation
March 14, 2024
Overview of Compensation Provisions
Page2
Given the length of the sections, and the complexity of the process, Baker Tilly has prepared an outline of Charter Section 405 on the salary process, followed by an outline of the Municipal Code sections. We have also included a table summarizing the value of the stipends and benefits.

Charter Section 405 - Method for Determining Mayor and Council Compensation

1. Selection and formation of a Compensation Committee
a. Member qualifications and limitations
b. Leadership
c. Office space and administrative support

2. Public Meetings - Brown Act

3. Committee submits compensation recommendations to the City Council no later than October 1

4. Council decides on the following options:
a. Take no action
b. Adopt the recommendations of the Compensation Committee by ordinance c. Go to the voters for compensation that exceeds Committee's recommendation Municipal Code Section 2.05.210 on Stipends

1. Monthly stipends (set in 2000 by the last Compensation Committee) a. Council: $1,000
b. Mayor: $1,500

2. Allows compensation by regional boards and other government agencies

3. Automatic July 1 increases based on annual CPI but no higher than 5% per year Municipal Code Section 2.05.220 on Health and Welfare Benefits

1. Health Insurance per Government Code Section 53200( d)

2. Computer equipment purchase ($5,000 one time)

3. Council expenses:
a. Up to $300 per month for general expenses including childcare b. Up to $150 per month for telecommunications and internet expenses c. $300 for one-time purchase of cellular equipment

4. Mayor expenses:

CG bakertilly
Pasadena Charter Study Task Force - Compensation
March 14, 2024
Page3
a. Up to $500 per month for general expenses including childcare b. Up to $300 per month for telecommunications and internet costs c. $300 for one-time purchase of cellular equipment

5. The Mayor and Council can be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses up to the amount established by Council resolution
Table 1 summarizes the current monthly compensation and annual salaries for the Mayor and City Council.

Monthly Annual Health & Welfare GC General Internet Out of One Time Stipend1 Stipend §53200{d)2 Office Phone Pocket
Mayor $2,749 $32,988 Single: $808.58 Up to Up to $300 Limited by $SK computer Two-Party: $1,605.98 $500 per per month resolution3 and $300 cell Family: $2,101.06 month phone
Council $1,830 $21,960 Single: $808.58 Up to Up to $150 Limited by $SK computer Two-Party: $1,605.98 $300 per per month resolution3 and $300 cell Family: $2,101.06 month phone
1The monthly salary amounts are provided in the City of Pasadena Salary Schedule. The Mayor's annual stipend of $32,988 is on

Page 43 ends

Pasadena City CouncilJune 10, 2024

Pasadena City Council
June 10, 2024