Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-09-2014 Charter Committee Minutes Volunteer Citizen Based Charter Committee Meeting 1 —Wednesday, April 9, 2014 Approved Minutes' The meeting came to order at 6:02 p.m. in the EDA board room, with Committee members Casey Dailey, Dennis Baxter, Gary Walbourne,Hillel Cohn, Michael Craft, Hardy Brown, Phil Savage and Gloria Harrison Present. Committee member Tom Pierce was excused for a work conflict. Also in attendance were City Manager Allen Parker, Committee Consultant Dr. Bill Mathis, City Attorney Gary Saenz and City Clerk Gigi Hanna. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Casey Dailey. Dr. Mathis introduced himself as a management psychologist in the public sector and discussed his experience,then introduced the City Manager and City Attorney. Mathis laid out the process issues the committee would need to consider, including election of a chair and vice chair, dates of future meetings and how the committee would handle communications and outreach during the process. He suggested the committee review the City of Anaheim's Charter Review Committee Guiding Principles as a sophisticated set of principles that the San Bernardino Committee might want to consider adopting. Mathis said the committee will be attempting to come to a consensus of what should go on the ballot. And it should be the best for San Bernardino, not for individuals. Committee members provided brief self-introductions. Hardy Brown nominated Gloria Harrison as chair. She declined,but said she would be willing to be vice-chair. Michael Craft nominated Hillel Cohn as chair. Cohn declined and nominated Phil Savage. The nomination was seconded by Brown and Savage was unanimously selected as Committee Chair. l Cohn nominated Harrison for vice-chair, seconded by Savage;the motion carried unanimously. City Attorney Gary Saenz went over the legal requirements of the Brown Act and the Political Reform Act and the committee member's obligations and responsibilities under them. Saenz then read the following statement about the Charter and bankruptcy: "We are now making progress moving through mediation with the goal of reaching settlement with our creditors,which settlement terms will ultimately be submitted to the Bankruptcy Court as part of a plan for which we must have confirmation by the Court, and by which plan we will ultimately move through and out of bankruptcy. 'Approved at the 4/22/14 meeting In seeking plan confirmation by the Bankruptcy Court, we must be able to demonstrate (by submitting evidence)that San Bernardino will be able to provide an acceptable level of service to the people of San Bernardino while also being able to pay all creditors in accordance with our respective settlement agreements and pursuant to our plan to exit bankruptcy. At such time, we must demonstrate to the Court that we have made sufficient increases in revenue, or reductions in costs and/or efficiency increases, or a combination of all three, such that we are able to reach and sustain a certain level of solvency as a City. Thus,presently,the City has an extremely urgent need for addressing its fiscal demands and seeking out changes that will enable us to convince the Bankruptcy Court that we have made sufficient adjustments to move us toward solvency. Therefore, as a pressing requirement to get this City through and out of bankruptcy, I believe that our capability to demonstrate the sufficiency of our plan to the Bankruptcy Court when seeking confirmation requires this Committee to solicit input from various City departments and officials for recommendation regarding Charter change that will most likely result in fiscal solvency." Saenz then read the following comments interpreting Resolution 2014-59,the establishing resolution for the committee: "The Resolution neither creates an ad hoc committee nor a standing committee. It is silent as to timeline of the existence of the Committee. Therefore,the Committee will continue to exist until further action by the Council, and you may continue to meet even after the November, 2014, election. Further,the Resolution provides in Section 1, E,that"The Committee shall report its initial findings to the Mayor and Common Council and provide such recommendations on or before May 19, 2014." The term "initial findings" implies that the Committee will continue to exist, and continue its charge regarding Charter reform after the November election. Section 1, J, provides: "The Committee is directed to review all provisions of the Charter and to consider the ramifications to the City and its residents for deletion and/or modification of any provision." I interpret the section providing that: "The Committee is directed to review all provisions of the Charter"to mean that all Committee members read the entire Charter, but it does not mandate that we,together, discuss every section of the Charter. Such an interpretation is also consistent with the time constraints, due to which I advise that we not go through and discuss the entire Charter section by section. Instead, I suggest that I can provide legal interpretation of the sections or provisions as required and requested. Section 1, J, also provides that the Committee: ..."consider the ramifications to the City and its residents for deletion andlor modification of any provision."I interpret to mean that the Committee's recommendation may be as narrow as the modification of only a portion of one section of the Charter. Section 1, K,provides: "The Committee is directed to consider any and all possibilities for reform, including elimination of provisions." When looked at together with Section 1,J, I interpret it to mean that this Committee has the ability to recommend any reform of the Charter, no matter how small or how extensive, and that the Committee may recommend elimination of any one, or more,provisions of the Charter. Generally,I interpret the Resolution as a whole to be a charge by Council that this Committee ultimately makes a recommendation that will receive voter support in November. Certainly,the Council did not create this Committee to recommend a Charter Reform Plan that would be defeated in November. Therefore, I believe that in order to meet such charge,this Committee should recommend reform that has a very strong likelihood of success if placed on the November ballot. If such is the intention of Council,then such should be the intention and focus of this Committee." Mathis recommended the group use the nine City of Anaheim Charter Review Guiding Principles for a framework in how to move forward and the chairman asked that they be agendized for the next meeting. A motion was made by Brown and seconded by Dennis Baxter to ask the City Manager to direct all city department heads to solicit suggestions for Charter change. The group agreed via consensus. The committee also agreed to: • Use Robert's Rules of Order; • Accept written public comments through the City Clerk's office, via email or regular mail, and those communications would be included in the agendas as well as posted on the City web site; • Provide a 30-minute general public comment period at the beginning of each meeting, with a three-minute-limit per person; and Hear public comment for each action item, limited to three minutes per speaker, for a total of 15 minutes per item. The committee discussed future meetings and decided that the meetings would be on Tuesdays at 5:30 p.m. from August 9 through May 15, 2014. Public Speakers 1. Evelyn Alexander said there are two boards and one commission that should be removed from the Charter: the Parks Commission,which is advisory and is already mentioned in the Municipal Code; and the Library Board and the Water Board because they are administrative boards that set policy,hire and fire department heads that do not report to the City Manager. The Library and Water departments should be treated like the other departments and fall under the general supervision of the city manager,with the boards being advisory. She also suggested that the Police and Fire Chiefs be selected by the City Manager. One board that should remain in the Charter is the Civil Service Board, which serves as an unbiased citizen- controlled appeals board for employees and keeps politics from the hiring practice. And, she said, she hopes that Section 186 can be removed from the Charter. She said that the argument that 186 is needed in order to ensure the best qualified personnel negatively affects the other employees in the City and said all employees should be treated the same. 2. Roxanne Williams said the Anaheim guiding principals were best practices and suggested the committee adopt them and review them at the beginning of every meeting. She asked the committee to be very familiar with the Charter,when it was written, revised and amended. She also suggested that the committee read the Management Partners study because it is groundwork that has already been done on what changes could be made in the Charter. She said by reviewing that report and see what the previous Charter committee did would help save time. 3. Linda Daniels said she wants the committee to change the Charter,to act quickly and get something on the ballot in November. Her first preference for change is Charter Section 186 because she feels it will decrease current expenses and future debt. She asked that the committee keep the Charter simple as possible, but allow for flexibility. She asked that the committee allow nothing in the Charter that restricts future leaders from common sense or good judgment; and keep San Bernardino independent with no set rules that bind the city to patterns or methods used in other cities. 4. Sandra Owen Olivas said when reading through Charter and making decisions,the committee members should call residents in their respective wards to see what residents' interests are for Charter change, because the public speaking time limits will prevent all who want to speak at a meeting the time to do so. 5. Matt Owen submitted a letter into the record with his recommendations for Charter change. He said he had concerns about the propriety of the committee and may be challenged in the future. His suggestions for Charter change lie in the legislative power in Charter Section 30 and he would like to establish a new legislative body, replacing a city council based on wards with a community council based in the neighborhood associations. Under this system, each neighborhood would have meetings and send people to the community council. He also suggested that the city use a public bank so it does not lose control of its funds. He said such a program has worked in North Dakota. 6. Scott Olson said the term Charter reform is being used; he prefers the term Charter review because the group will be reviewing the Charter, but reform makes it sound like the committee will be changing the Charter. He also said that limiting the public comment portion of the meeting limits public input. He said the Management Partners study discussed the relationship between the Council, Mayor and City Manager, a relationship that creates a dichotomy that creates conflict. He said there needs to be a clear chain of command. He also wants to see an update on the mobile home parks and a legal update of the Charter that won't leave the city vulnerable in bankruptcy court. 7. Linda Mohney said the committee's agenda will be about Charter Section 186, although the language in the resolution instructs the committee to review the entire Charter. As this is a big task that cannot be done in a month,the review will be narrowed to Section 186. In its review, the committee should also investigate all that the firefighters do, and the education and training required. 8. Bill Sandefur said changes with the Charter should be short and kept to a few items so it is successful in November. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. The next meeting is set for Tuesday,April 15, 2014 at 5:30 p.m. in the EDA board room.