Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-27-2015 Charter Committee Agenda & Backup City of San Bernardino Volunteer Citizen-Based Charter Committee Agenda Time: 5:00 p.m. Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Place: EDA Board Room 201 N. E Street, San Bernardino, CA 92418 The City of San Bernardino recognizes its obligation to provide equal access to public services to those individuals with disabilities. Please contact the City Clerk's Office (909) 384-5102)one working day prior to the meeting for any requests for reasonable accommodation,to include interpreters. Anyone who wishes to speak on a numbered agenda item will be required to fill out a speaker slip. Speaker slips should be turned in to the City Clerk before the item is taken up by the Committee. The Clerk will relay them to the Committee Chair person. Public comments for agenda items are limited to three minutes per person, a total of 15 minutes per item, comments to be received from the public before discussion of the item by Committee members. ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CHAIR'S COMMENTS PUBLIC COMMENT(LIMIT 30 MINUTES) ACTION ITEMS(subject to time available with meeting scheduled to end by 7:30pm) 1. Approval of action minutes from October 13, 2015 meeting(to be handed out at the meeting) 2. Special Presentations 3. Procedural Matters a. Review Timeline (attached) b. Discuss plans for Public Forums C. Present& Review Preliminary Governmental Skeleton (attached) 4. Reconsider Skeleton topic IX concerning services, departments, boards, and officers and related issues (Management Partners Paper and PMS Memorandum attached) 5. Consideration of Human Resources-Civil Service language for Charter (Management Partners Memorandum and PMS analysis attached) 6. Consideration of Water and Wastewater Utility Functions and Boards (Management Partners Memorandum and PMS analysis attached) ADJOURN Unless changed at the October 27th meeting, the next meeting of the Volunteer Citizen-Based Charter Committee will be 5:00 p.m., Tuesday, November 10, 2015, in the EDA Board Room, 201 N. E. Street. Attendees are encouraged to park on the top floor of the City Hall parking structure and access the EDA building from there. 1 Charter Committee Working Timeline—October 27, 2015 The purpose of this Timeline is to document the San Bernardino Charter Committee's progress and capture additional tasks and activities that should be considered by the Committee in the future. Meeting Date Task or Activity Comments/Status 5/12/15 Developed Input Questionnaire (Survey) Complete 5/26 Receive Input from Survey Agreed to continue to receive input on survey Request Council approval for Complete; professional assistance provided effective 7/7/15 professional input Discuss plan to develop Timeline Draft was available, but was not discussed Discuss plan to deal with Charter topics Draft was available, but was not discussed 6/9 Discuss approach to Charter Review Agreed upon approach, including focusing on Charter skeleton before specific topic details Received and reviewed information on Discussed professional and public input Approve plan for disseminating survey Complete Review working timeline Complete. Timeline will be updated regularly as changes occur Consider form of Government for Preliminary Recommendation: Council—Manager Form of Charter skeleton Government in Charter Skeleton Discuss skeleton City Council structure Preliminary Recommendation: Maintain a Ward System and powers Council representation for Charter skeleton 6/23 Meeting Cancelled 7/7 Discuss professional advisors and scope Complete of work Introduce new participants to Charter Welcomed Committee Member Vicki Lee Committee Complete discussion of skeleton City Preliminary Recommendation:City Council powers should Council structure and powers 1 be limited to legislative and policy making, not administrative and operational Discuss skeleton Mayor provisions Preliminary Recommendation: Mayor should be elected at- large. Powers,voting privileges and impacts on ward system deferred to next meeting 7/14 Continue discussion of skeleton Mayor Preliminary Recommendation: Retain the current number provisions of wards(7) Preliminary Recommendation: Mayor should have no administrative, appointment or removal powers except as otherwise provided in the Charter Deferred consideration of Mayor's voting rights until input is received from the Mayor and Council members Agreed to provide meeting summaries to Mayor and Council following each Committee meeting. Agreed to periodically provide progress reports to the Mayor and Council at their regularly scheduled meetings 2 Meeting Date Task or Begin discussion of skeleton City Manager Preliminary Recommendation: Majority vote of all provisions members of the Common Council and Mayor required for appointment of City Manager 7/28 Continue discussion of City Manager Discussed. Recommendations deferred until August 11 Charter Skeleton Discussions meeting(to consider results from elected official interviews) Begin discussion of skeleton provisions for Discussion regarding City Attorney begun; City Clerk, City Attorney, City Treasurer recommendations deferred until August 11 8/11 Review common themes from Elected Reviewed Official Interviews Review applicability of Operating Guidelines Discussion continued, but not completed. for Good Governance to Charter Skeleton Preliminary recommendation that the Mayor have the Complete discussion on Mayor, Council, same voting privileges as Common Council members. City Manager interrelationship, roles and Preliminary recommendation that the roles of Mayor authorities as reflected in the Operating Practices for Good Government(OPGG) be incorporated into the Charter skeleton Complete Charter skeleton discussion Presentations by City Treasurer Kennedy and Mayor regarding City Attorney,City Clerk, City Davis Treasurer 8/25 Complete discussion on Mayor, Council, Preliminary recommendations: City Manager interrelationship, roles and • Reduce number of wards from 7 to 6 authorities • Incorporate recommended roles for City Manager,Common Council and Mayor and Common Council (combined)from OPGG into the Charter skeleton Complete Charter skeleton discussion Not discussed regarding City Attorney,City Clerk, City Treasurer Charter Skeleton Discussion on Not discussed Establishment of City Departments, Commissions and Committees; City Officers and Fiscal Management Discuss plans for progress report to Mayor Confirmed scheduling for September 21 M/CC meeting and Council on skeleton 9/8 Meeting Rescheduled to September 15 9/15 Charter skeleton discussion regarding City Preliminary recommendations: Attorney, City Clerk,City Treasurer • Duly qualified City Attorney to be appointed by Mayor and Common Council • Incorporate OPGG language re: City Attorney into the Charter Skeleton • Duly qualified City Clerk to be appointed by Mayor and Common Council • Charter will contain no references to City Treasurer 3 Meeting Date Task or • Discuss Charter skeleton provisions Preliminary recommendation: Charter not specifically related to City departments and their mention departments except as otherwise provided or establishment delineated 9/15 Review and Discuss survey results Discussed Finalize plans for progress report to Discussed Mayor and Council on skeleton 9/21 Present Progress Report at Mayor Presented Common Council Meeting 9/22 Discuss input from Mayor and Council Discussed, no change in skeleton based on input from Mayor from 9/21 Progress Report and Council at this time presentation, modify skeleton as Discussion of whether to reconsider alternatives for ensuring desired odd number of voting members—Deferred to next meeting agenda Discuss specific departments Preliminary recommendations: referenced in the charter to determine . No reference to School Districts in Charter whether language should be included • Include reference to Library Board of Trustees,with in charter specific powers and authority to be determined by the City Council Discuss other department or agency Discussion of whether services to be provided should be language to include in charter included in the Charter— Deferred to next meeting agenda Identify other topics to be covered by Not discussed the Charter skeleton, i.e., elections, fiscal matters, code of ethics, etc. 10/13 Discuss reconsideration of alternatives Discussed, but deferred to obtain input through public to ensure odd number of voting forums members Discuss whether to add language on Discussed. Alternative options to be discussed at 10/27 services to be provided without meeting specifying departments Discuss potential Police and Fire Preliminary recommendation: Department skeleton provisions, if any . No reference to Police or Fire Department in Charter Discuss potential civil Not discussed service/personnel system skeleton provisions, if any Review plans and content for Discussed upcoming public forums 10/27 Discuss potential civil service/ personnel system skeleton provisions Discuss potential Water Department skeleton provisions, if any. Finalize plans for public forums Review potential language (possibly in a Preamble) regarding fundamental services to be provided 11/4 Public Forum,Golden Valley Middle School,6:30 p.m. 4 Meeting Date Task or • 11/5 Public Forum:Arroyo Valley High School, 6:30 p.m. 11/9 Public Forum, Indian Springs High School, 6:30 p.m. 11/10 Reconsider options for ensuring odd number of voting members Discuss skeleton provisions related to elections, referendums and initiatives Discuss skeleton provisions related to fiscal matters, other potential topics Review and discuss how charter issues would be treated under general law 11/24 Begin work on specific language Thanksgiving Week—confirm meeting 12/8 Continue work on specific language 12/22 Continue work on specific language Christmas/Hanukah—confirm meeting 1/12 Complete work on specific language Discuss public input forum and/or Tentatively schedule progress report for Feb 1 progress report to Mayor and Council 2/1 Present progress report at Mayor/Common Council meeting 2/9 Incorporate comments from Mayor and Common Council into charter details Discuss content and format for Committee's report to Mayor and Common Council TBD Hold second round of public forums 2/23 Review and revise Charter proposal 3/8 Review draft report to Mayor and Note: Report contents should contain summaries of each Common Council; discuss presentation Committee recommendation and rationale(for use during format education and outreach); Management Partners studies (white papers)will be attachments to the report 3/22 Finalize draft report to Mayor and Common Council, presentation format 4/4 Present recommendations to Mayor Recommend putting proposed charter to a vote of the and Common Council citizens 4/18 Present recommendations to Mayor and Common Council (alternative date) Additional skeleton topics to consider(in no particular order): Departments, Commissions, Committees,Agencies and Reporting Relationships; Preamble; Municipal Powers/Authority; Elections; Fiscal Administration (i.e.,fiscal year, budget submission,tax limits, public works contracts, claims,audit; Franchises; Code of Ethics; Initiatives, Referendums and Recalls; Severability,Transition and Municipal Code Issues Resulting from Charter Revisions, Charter Amendments; Charter violations 5 Management Partners San Bernardino Charter Committee Public Forum Agenda and Format -DRAFT-Revised 10/16/15 Public Forum Purpose: • Educate the public about the reason for charter reform and how San Bernardino will benefit from having a new charter • Share information about the Charter Committee's preliminary recommendations (skeleton) and how the public can be involved(next steps) • Gather input from the public about mayoral voting rights and preferences for avoiding tie votes • Gather input from the public about other areas of particular interest or concern related to the charter Logistics: • Location/Time: All forums will be held at schools located in different wards. Starting time will be 6:30 p.m. • November 4: Golden Valley Middle School, 3800 N. Waterman Avenue • November 5: Arroyo Valley High School, 1881 W.Baseline • November 9: Indian Springs High School, 605 N. Del Rosa Drive • Duration: 60-90 minutes, depending on turnout • Layout: o Theater style seating in the center (or round tables, depending on size of room and capacity) People with be asked to sit in the center at the start of the forum. 0 3 "stations" located around the perimeter of the room. • Stations will have Fact Sheets for specific areas of interest and be a place for people to gather and discuss the area and provide input • Note: If the turnout is really low, we will facilitate the meeting like a focus group, giving everyone a chance to provide input on several areas • Materials needed: • Name tags • Fact Sheets/Infographics (describing the need for charter reform, some of the major recommendations to date, next steps) in English and Spanish • Index cards • Pens/pencils • 4 Flipchart pads on sturdy easels • Simultaneous interpreter? • Refreshments: water, coffee, cookies/snacks 6 Charter Committee Public Forum Draft Agenda Public Forum Agenda/Format: 1. Welcome (5 minutes) Purpose: Understand the Public Forum's purpose and how it will proceed a. Call Forum to order,thank people for corning—Committee Chair or Member b. Introduce Facilitator(Cathy)to review the agenda/format for the evening a. Brief Presentation on Charters and Why San Bernardino Needs a New One b. Facilitated discussion on one of the issues the Charter Committee has been discussing(Mayoral voting rights and avoiding tie votes) c. Charter Area Breakout Stations to consider one or more additional issues d. Reconvene as a group for final thoughts and input for the Committee 2. The Charter:Building a Better Future for San Bernardino(15 minutes)—Committee Chair or Member Purpose: Develop common understanding of what charters do,why they are important, and why San Bernardino needs a new one a. PowerPoint presentation(roughly based on City Council Progress Report,but shorter) • Overview of what a charter is,how modern charters are different from older ones (like San Bernardino) • Responsibilities of the Charter Committee,the Committee's approach to developing recommendations • Overview of preliminary recommendations on the proposed governance structure i. Council-manager form of government,recommended roles and responsibilities for Mayor, Common Council, City Manager ii. Appointed vs.elected City Attorney, City Clerk, City Treasurer iii. Leave out references that have been superseded by State/Federal Law (i.e., reference to School District) iv. Show before vs. after organizational structure? b. Introduce Facilitator 3. Large Group Discussion: Should the Mayor Have a Vote, and if so, How Should Tie Votes be Avoided? (20 minutes)—Facilitator-Cathy a. Review the issue, distribute infographic (fact sheet/infographic) b. Question#1: Should the Mayor of San Bernardino be able to vote? i. Ask for show of hands ii. Ask for a few comments from participants on why they feel that way c. Question#2: If the Mayor should have a vote,how should tie votes be avoided? Choices: i. Decrease the number of wards from 7 to 6(total of 7 elected officials) ii. Increase the number of wards from 7 to 8(total of 9 elected officials) 7 Charter Committee Public Forum Draft Agenda iii. Eliminate the at-large Mayor and have the Mayor be selected among the 7 Council members iv. Other options? (at-large Council member?) 4. Charter Area Breakout Stations (30 minutes)—Cathy will provide instructions Purpose: Provide an opportunity for participants to visit specific charter areas to ask questions and learn more about the issues and rationale for the Charter skeleton recommendations. a. Invite participants to visit Charter area stations to learn more about the skeleton elements and provide input b. Each station will be staffed by a Committee member or knowledgeable staff person. Fact sheets (English and Spanish) related to the topic will be available at each station to summarize the research,best practices, and rationale for the Committee's preliminary recommendation related to that area. Charter Area Stations: a. Roles and responsibilities for Mayor, Common Council, City Manager, City Attorney b. Elected vs. appointed City Attorney, City Clerk,City Treasurer Index cards and/or flip charts will be provided at each station to capture the following: • What do they like about the preliminary recommendation? • What are their concerns? 5. Reconvene as Large Group, Debrief(10 minutes) (Facilitator—Cathy) Purpose: Give participants a chance to share their observations,based on the stations they visited. • What additional questions do they have? • Based on what you have learned this evening, do you agree that San Bernardino needs a new "constitution?" • What advice or guidance would they give to the Charter Committee as it continues its work? 6. Next Steps,Wrap Up (5 minutes)—Committee Chair or Member Purpose: Give participants a common understanding of how their input will be used, and next steps in the charter reform process. • Review next steps, timeline for the Committee's work(have copies of Timeline available?) • Review how the public can be involved in reforming San Bernardino's charter • Thank them again for their attendance and input! 8 10/22/2015 City of San Bernardino Public Forum on the City's Charter November 4, 2015—Golden Valley Middle School November 5, 2015—Arroyo Valley High School November 9, 2015—Indian Springs High School 5111 fierwui ino Public Charter Agenda Overview of what a charter is Why the charter is important Why San Bernardino needs a new one Provide input on several specific charter issues Review next steps and future opportunities for public input 9 10/22/2015 What Is • Charter? i • Legal document approved by voters Defines the City's organization and powers, essential procedures (such as elections) • Comparable to a State or U.S. Constitution Why Does the City Need a New • The existing charter was identified as a primary contributor to the City's bankruptcy Existing charter language is confusing, sometimes contradictory * Many charter elements are highly unusual or not consistent with best practices for operation of a modern city government Bankruptcy recovery plan requires charter reform or replacement IN 10 10/22/2015 Good Charters Promote Good Governance COIGAM ORWEEED PARTICIPATORY "M AM FOLLOWS THE RULE TRANSPARINT OF LAW I EFFECTIVE RESPONSIVE AND EFFICIENT EQUITABLE AND INCLUSIVE Charter Current • ` • ' Basic Management and Functioning of No city in California operates like San Bernardino Neither a council/manager nor a strong mayor form of government Many ambiguities regarding the authority of City Manager, Mayor and Common Council Elected City Attorney is highly unusual in California cities, and in San Bernardino is vested with right to provide policy recommendations Charter basically says everyone is in charge so NO ONE IS IN CHARGE 11 10/22/2015 Confusing Charter Creates Reporting Relationships Why it's so ,.• _ _ difficult to rrget anything z>.e�.�.. aa�+anwmmr..vaa ++�saaan. e.+ov cane" g Suggestions from the Police and Fire Chiefs i Rta�+IM ( tte FtA } hhYlN1 IAYMff.�M# �_ 4�1tl t# 4`yA.ulll ...4�0•f� OYMMrY I!1fMt MOAI t�^"��GA�iYn.inn� C� AM�� SRiM St 41kMr. CN.Mk1�4�1bv°. m IMIAwM4 111r�A fk TM�M►r 'Lawswmb.YU.t+znMnWUa 4F:CVYJVCAYYIMVe�aRAm wmvat.R �J3G.a-ma K^s t.a "'�"wHV WnurNeu.M,mta�o.OmCSa aaaNee OxMatwroM '^Wi�w�ve*4...anis,a+imawt.3pbaraaawxs.KdP�e'.wwo.+.'aArcevamYmw.s Create a completely new charter that is shorter, simpler, reflects modern-day practices Ensure the charter supports a stronger, more effective governance structure, led by strong city manager Ensure the charter provides maximum flexibility to make organizational and operational changes in response to community needs 12 10/22/2015 Volunteer r r • Consists of 9 members appointed by Mayor and Common Council • Responsible for providing advice and recommendations for a new charter to the Mayor and Common Council • Job is to represent the interests of the City as a whole, not the interests of a particular ward • Members function independently from whoever appointed them • Work supported by City Attorney, City Clerk, city staff and professional consultant Charter Committee., continued Meets twice per month • 2"d and 4th Tuesday from 5:00 — 7:30 p.m. • EDA Board Room, 201 N. E Street Meetings are open to the public More information on Charter Committee webpage: www.SBCity.org/CharterReview 13 10/22/2015 Charter . . Approach L Work from a "best practices" form of government, not the City's present charter 2. Develop the charter "skeleton" —the key elements or topics that should be addressed by the charter 3. Develop recommendations for specific charter language 4. Present recommendations to Mayor and Common Council by April-May 2016 5. Potential ballot measure for November 2016 election Resources • " Our Work • National Civic League Model Charter Charters of other cities with populations between 150,000 and 400,000 San Bernardino's Charter Reform Principles and Objectives • City's Strategic Plan and Operating Practices for Good Government Research on best practices for modern-era charters 14 10/22/2015 Resources Guiding Our Work, • - • • Input from the City's elected officials, department heads, and other interested parties Public input — like yours! Preliminary Committee Recommendations • Council-manager form of government Common Council powers limited to legislative and policy making, not administrative or managerial Mayor no longer has independent administrative, appointment or removal powers City Manager functions as chief executive officer, responsible for daily operations City Manager appointed by majority vote of Mayor and Common Council (combined) A 15 10/22/2015 Committee Preliminary Recommendations City Manager responsible for appointment or removal of all department heads City Attorney to be appointed by the Mayor and Common Council, not elected City Clerk to be appointed by the Mayor and Common Council, not elected Charter will not reference City Treasurer; treasury functions to be delegated to Finance Department Preliminary Committee Recommendations Mayor remains elected at large, but with same voting privileges as Common Council members No longer limited to breaking ties Eliminates need for mayoral veto power Eliminates need for Common Council override power Means Mayor and Common Council function as one governing body, with one voice 16 10/22/2015 What Do You Should the Mayor of San Bernardino be able to vote on matters of City business like the Common Council members? • Yes? • No? Why do you feel that way? What i • You Ai- If the Mayor is given the right to vote, how should we avoid the possibility of tie votes? Tie votes stop the City's business (nothing happens) 7 Council members + Mayor = S elected officials Best practice is for there to be an odd number of elected officials to avoid tie votes 17 10/22/2015 • Decrease the number of wards from 7 to 6 (total of 7 elected officials, including Mayor) * Increase the number of wards from 7 to 8 (total of 9 elected officials, including Mayor) Instead of electing the Mayor directly, have the Mayor be selected from among the 7 Council members Maintain the current practice (Mayor can't vote except to break a tie) Other ideas? Break Visit Charter Areas Learn more and share what you think about other preliminary recommendations Proposed governance structure, division of roles and responsibilities between the Mayor, Common Council and City Manager Elected vs. appointed City Attorney, City Clerk, City Treasurer What do you like about the recommendation? What are your concerns? 18 10/22/2015 Next Steps Incorporate public input into charter "skeleton" Begin to develop specific charter language Prepare report with recommendations to Mayor and Common Council Timeline Jan — Feb: Provide progress report to Mayor and Common Council; complete details for charter document March — April: Provide written report and recommendations, including specific charter language to Mayor and Common Council �a 19 10/22/2015 Timeline, continued June -- July: Mayor and Common Council decide on ballot measure to put before voters County Registrar of Voters must receive ballot measure resolution 88 days before election day Deadline: August 1, 2016 Common Council meeting November 8, 2016: Voters consider ballot measure to reform Charter Informed Stay • , Involved Visit Charter website: sbcity.org/CharterReview Attend Charter Committee City Charter meetings (2nd/4th Tuesdays) REVIEW Ask your friends and neighbors to get involved • Review proposed charter once completed Vote on November 8, 2016! FRI, 20 10/22/20 Thank You • Your i Sll Berlar 110 21 SAN BERNARDINO GOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURE PRELIMINARY SKELETON(10/27/15) I. Council -Manager Form of Govt. II. City Council 2.1 Based on a 6 Ward System 2.2 The role of the Common Council is legislative in character,which includes the power to set policy, approve contracts and agreements and undertake other obligations consistent with the Charter and Code, while deferring to the discretion of management and staff to choose the appropriate means to achieve the Council's goals. 2.3 The Common Council shall perform its duties and exercise its powers in a manner that serves the best interests of the entire City, rather than any particular geographic area or special interest. III. Mayor 3.1 Elected from Citizens at-large 3.2 To have no administrative, appointment or removal powers except as otherwise provided in Charter 3.3 The Mayor should have a full vote with the Council. 3.4 The Mayor will build consensus with the Common Council to create and implement a shared vision and plan of implementation to restore the City's fiscal integrity. 3.5 The Mayor will establish and maintain partnerships and regional leadership roles to advance the City's interest. 3.6 The Mayor will be the key"face" and chief spokesperson for the City. 3.7 The mayor will be the presiding officer at meetings of the Common Council and will fully participate in discussions. 3.8 The Mayor will not interfere with the discretion of the City Manager in the exercise of his powers and performance of his duties. N. Mayor and Council Interactions 4.1 The Mayor and Common Council will jointly develop clear expectations of the City Manager and hold him or her accountable by conducting periodic performance evaluations. 4.2 The Mayor and Common Council will develop and implement norms (Code of Conduct)to guide and direct their interactions and duties, including measures to hold one another accountable for deviations from the goals and principles set forth in the City Charter and City Code. 4.3 Neither the Mayor nor the Common Council will interfere with the judgement and discretion of management staff with respect to the duties that are typically managerial in nature, such as the appointment,removal, and supervision of subordinate staff. 4.4 Neither the Mayor nor the Common Council will direct departmental staff, other than those in their own department. 22 V. City Manager r 5.1 The City Manager will be the sole authority for managing City operations and appointing and directing City staff, except as otherwise provided in the Charter 5.2 The City Manager will make business and policy recommendations based solely on his or her independent professional judgement and best practices in the interests of the City, rather than political considerations, and to this end shall strictly guard against interference with the performance of his or her duties. 5.3 The City Manager will be accountable for the implementation of Council goals and policy and the overall performance of the City. 5.4 The City Manager will be responsible for ensuring that the Common Council and Mayor are fully informed on all aspects of important emerging issues, and as part of that responsibility will fully brief the Common Council at their Council Meetings on business matters before them. VI. City Treasurer 6.1 The Charter should contain no language about a City Treasurer. VII. City Clerk 7.1 A duly qualified person should be appointed as City Clerk by the Mayor and Council. VIII. City Attorney 8.1 A duly qualified person should be appointed as City Attorney by the Mayor and Council. 8.2 The City Attorney will focus his/her attention and resources on the performance of his/her duty as chief legal officer to rovide legal advice to the Mayor, Council and City Manager, and the management of his/her office, and shall leave the formulation of policy and managerial matters exclusively to those officials charged by the Charter with those duties. IX. Departments & Commissions 9.1 Specific City departments and agencies shall not be designated in the Charter, except as otherwise provided in the Charter. 9.2 Library- Charter should require a Library Board of Trustees with it's specific powers and authority to be determined by the Council. 9.3 No specific provisions in Charter about - a. Schools or Education; b. Parks &Recreation;9 C. Fire Dept or services; d. Police Dept or services; 9But it should say that the City's Municipal Code will provide for parks&recreation. 23 i PMS Memorandum #2a Re Services, Departments & Boards October 27, 2015 Cathy's Memo and suggested language is excellent. For purposes of skeleton discussions, I'm concerned about concepts,not specific language nor where the concepts appear in any Charter recommendation this Committee eventually proposes. There appear to me to be four concepts we are discussing: 1. Whether Departments or Boards are to be specifically mentioned in our proposed new charter. This is the basic topic being dealt with in our present Skeleton Article IX. It's heading should be revised to read: Departments,Boards,Etc, and part 9.1 should read as follows: "9.1 Specific City departments, agencies, boards, commissions, committees and officers shall not be designated in the Charter, except as otherwise provided in the Charter." 2. Assurance in the proposed new Charter that fundamental services will be provided notwithstanding removal from the Charter of Specific reference to certain Departments and/or Boards. Any of Cathy's alternatives concerning this are fine for the skeleton insofar as I am concerned. I believe we can deal later with whether this language appears in the Charter's preamble or some different part of the skeleton. 3. Council's authority to establish additional Departments &/or Boards, etc., (like that appearing as the first two sentences of Cathy's suggested section 2.5) should be a part of any proposed new Charter, whether under part II or IX. 4. Transitional language(like that appearing as the last sentence of Cathy's suggested section 2.5) should be a part of any proposed new charter,whether in a separate provision concerning transition or it the portion of the skeleton dealing with departments & services. 24 PMS ANALYSIS of SKELETON CIVIL SERVICES BOARD &/or HR DEPARTMENT -3.d revision Descriptions of Skeleton Issues Related to this Topic: A. Should there be anything in the Charter concerning a Civil Services or HR Department? B. Should it have a Board responsible for its operations separate from the Council &/or Manager? C. If so, should it's Board be - a. appointed by the Mayor and Council? b. appointed by the Manager? C. appointed by the Manager subject to Council approval? 2. National Civic League Model City Charter& Guide- A. Recommends not requiring any Departments or Agencies in the Charter. [4.01] B. Recommends all be selected, supervised, and fired just by Manager [4.03] 3. Other Similarly sized California cities (SB is about 214,000) -As to the charters of the 17 similarly sized California cities 11 have some language concerning personnel/human relations/civil service: Chula Vista contains civil service provisions [700-707], establishes a Civil Service Commission [609-610], appointed by Council [609];Modesto establishes an advisory Human Relations Commission [1111] appointed by Council [1102]; Stockton contains civil service provisions [2500-2520],with a civil service Commission appointed by Council [2502]; Anaheim establishes a Personnel System without details [1000]; Riverside requires Council to establish a merit system for appointive officers and employees [900] and an advisory human resources Board [807] appointed by the Mayor and Council [8021); Bakersfield establishes civil service for its fire dept [183-191],police department [221-228] and miscellaneous departments [208-217(a)] with their Boards appointed by Council [209] and one for police officers appointed by Council [221]; Santa Ana establishes a civil service system [1000-1015] and has a personnel Board appointed by Council [911-912]; Glendale-creates a civil service commission appointed by the Council [XXN] (It appears that their operations are not subject to supervision of the Manager.); Hayward establishes a Personnel Board with powers to hear classified service appeals, otherwise advisory to Council [907], established by Council [902]; Santa Rosa requires Council to adopt rules &regulations for personnel relations, etc. [50]; and Torrance establishes a civil service system which references a civil service commission [1300-1320]. 6. Other Issues Relevant to the Topic- Collective bargaining may have eliminated the need for Civil Service Commissions. San Bernardino has a Human Resources Department(not required by it's Charter) which could be able to take care of any continuing needed civil service functions. 7. San Bernardino's Current Charter (A&C)A Civil Services Commission is provided for appointed by the Mayor with the approval of the Council [246]. The Manager is not responsible for the Civil Service System [100]. 8. Charter vs Code Filter a. It seems not essential or constitutional that Civil Service provisions be in Charter. 9. General Law a. I believe General Law(A)requires no Civil Service provisions, and does not provide for a Civil Service Commission,but would allow Council to establish is if needed. b. More than 2/3 of California's Cities are General Law. 25 10. My Revised Thoughts: a. Reference a Civil Service Commission appointed by Council, b. Undecided as to whether it's powers should be left to Councils or be limited to disciplinary &firing appeals, and C. Undecided as to whether it should be Quasi Judicial or just advisory. 26 Ma nagement Partners To: Volunteer Citizen-Based Charter Committee From: Cathy Standiford,Partner Subject: Language Alternatives for Services,Departments and Boards Date: October 27,2015 The Charter Committee is considering elements that should be included in the Charter "skeleton." At its meeting of October 13, 2015 the Committee discussed whether to include general language about services to be provided by San Bernardino,either in the Charter skeleton or in a preamble to the Charter itself. The Charter Committee has adopted a preliminary recommendation that specific City departments not be referenced in the charter unless there is a compelling reason to do so. This is to provide maximum flexibility to San Bernardino's elected and appointed leaders to make changes in the City's organizational structure and services as community needs change over time. The National Civic League model charter also recommends against specifying departments,boards or specific officers in a charter document. However,the Charter Committee wants to assure the public that the lack of specific reference to departments, services,boards or commissions in the Charter does not mean they will no longer exist or be provided. Various suggestions were made during the October 13 meeting. Management Partners was asked to organize these suggestions into alternatives for the Committee to consider. Language Alternatives for Services, Departments and Boards The type of general language desired by the Committee could be contained in the Charter skeleton,or it could be established as part of the preamble to the charter document itself. The current preamble to the City's Charter currently reads as follows: We, the citizens of the City of San Bernardino, hereby establish this Charter to promote economic, environmental and cultural prosperity throughout our community; to enable our City government to meet the needs of the people effectively and efficiently; to provide for accountability and ethics in public service;and to ensure equality of opportunity for every resident. 27 One set of alternatives is to expand the language in the preamble to include general reference to services. A second set of alternatives involve modifying the Charter skeleton to clarify the powers of the Common Council,Mayor and/or City Manager to establish departments,boards and/or commissions. Alternative 1: Expand Charter Preamble Language • This first alternative has two options, either include a sample list of services, or include a general reference to fundamental or core services to be provided. Suggested language for each option is provided below (added language is presented in bold). Option A: Modify the Preamble to Include a Sample List of Services We, the citizens of the City of San Bernardino, hereby establish this Charter to promote economic, environmental and cultural prosperity throughout our community, to enable our City government to meet the needs of the people effectively and efficiently; to provide for accountability and ethics in public service, and to ensure equality of opportunity for every resident. The City shall ensure fundamental municipal services such as police, fire,infrastructure,utilities,parks,recreation and libraries are provided. Option B: Modify the Preamble to Include Generic Reference to Services We, the citizens of the City of San Bernardino, hereby establish this Charter to promote economic, environmental and cultural prosperity throughout our community, to enable our City government to meet the needs of the people effectively and efficiently; to provide for accountability and ethics in public service;and to ensure equality of opportunity for every resident. The City shall ensure fundamental services to protect the public health,safety and welfare are provided. Language could also be added to either Option A or B regarding existing City services, such as the following. Any services in existence at the time of the adoption of this Charter shall continue unless and until changed by the Common Council. Alternative 2: Modify the Charter Skeleton to Reflect Language Related to Departments, Boards and/or Commissions There are two options for Alternative 2. One is to add language regarding services, departments and/or boards and commissions to the powers of the Common Council. Another is to establish a distinct section of the skeleton to define how departments,boards or commissions will be addressed. Suggested language for each option is provided below (added language is presented in bold). 28 Option C: Add Language to the Existing Skeleton Section for the Common Council Add new skeleton section 2.4 as follows: 2.4 The Common Council shall ensure fundamental municipal services such as police, fire,infrastructure,utilities,parks,recreation and libraries are provided. Or, similar language about generic services could be added to the skeleton, such as the following: 2.4 The Common Council shall ensure the provision of fundamental municipal services to protect the public health, safety and welfare. Additional language could also be added to the Common Council skeleton section regarding the establishment of departments,boards and commissions, such as the following. 2.5 The Common Council may establish departments and assign departmental functions in order to meet the needs of the community in the most effective and efficient manner. The Common Council may also establish advisory or independent boards or commissions to provide guidance regarding the provision of City services.Any services,boards or commissions in existence at the time of the adoption of this Charter shall continue unless and until changed by the Council. Option D: Establish a Separate Charter Skeleton Regarding Departments, Boards or Commissions Option D is to take any combination of the language suggested above and incorporate it into a skeleton section focused on departments,boards and commissions. In fact, this is the direction the Committee had been heading prior to the discussion of October 13. However it may be simpler to contain these provisions either in a broader preamble to the Charter or in the skeleton sections on the powers and authorities of the Common Council. 29 Management Partners To: Volunteer Citizen-Based Charter Committee From: Cathy Standiford, Partner Subject: Civil Service Boards and Systems Date: October 13,2015 The Charter Committee is considering elements that should be included in the Charter "skeleton." On September 15 the Committee approved a preliminary recommendation that, "no departments be specifically mentioned in the Charter except as otherwise provided or delineated." In other words, the preference is to avoid mentioning specific departments (or in some cases commissions) in the Charter unless there is a compelling reason to do so. The Committee will begin reviewing each of the departments currently referenced in the Charter to determine whether such compelling reasons exist. In anticipation of the Committee's discussions,Management Partners has conducted interviews with the potentially affected department directors and the city manager. An interview with the Civil Service chief examiner was conducted on Tuesday, September 15. On September 22 the Civil Service Board received an update on the Charter Committee's progress and discussed recommendations it would like to provide to the Committee. Management Partners also met with the Board chair following the meeting. The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the input received as well as additional information on civil service systems and boards Committee members may wish to consider in developing specific recommendations. Interview Results The following are common themes from input provided by the Civil Service Board,the Board chair and the chief examiner. • There are strong feelings that references to the Civil Service Board should be included in the Charter to preserve independent authority, particularly for personnel matters involving discipline or reductions in force. • The Board is concerned that ordinances may be changed by a majority vote of the Common Council. The Charter provides better protection against tampering with the principles and regulations of the Civil Service system by either the Common Council or the city manager. 30 Civil Service Boards and Systems • The Board considers its role to be serving and representing, "the heart of the community"by protecting against cronyism in hiring and promotion practices. The Board strives to ensure a, "fair and level playing field" for both the City's employees and management/administration. • It is important for the Board to appoint the chief examiner directly and for the chief examiner to continue to report to the Board. This ensures both the examiner and Board are able to carry out their duties independently and without undue influence. The Board expressed particular concerns about the potential for city manager influence. • Over the last six years,the degree of collaboration between the Civil Service staff and the Human Resources(HR)Department has increased. Roles and responsibilities have been clarified to reduce redundancies, although it is acknowledged that further streamlining of the recruitment,testing, and selection process is possible. • The Board's most important role is to hear and decide appeals regarding employee discipline, (e.g., demotions, suspensions,withholding of pay, and termination). Without the Board there would be no fair,neutral party within the City government to ensure a fair and impartial hearing of such appeals. • There is some willingness to transfer recruitment,testing and selection functions related to the Human Resources Department for the sake of improved efficiency and customer service. The Board and chief examiner recognize that many of their functions are often performed by an HR department. However, the authority to serve as a quasi-judicial body over disciplinary-related appeals should remain a function of the Civil Service Board. • There is support for the wholesale replacement of the Charter as long as it contains the establishment of a Civil Service or Personnel Board to hear disciplinary matters and provide guidance on reductions in force (i.e., seniority and bumping rights). • The new Charter should be broader and less specific using the simplest language possible. Comparison with Peer Agencies "Civil service" and"civil service system" are somewhat antiquated terms that pre-date the advent of collective bargaining practices. They reflect the desire to ensure government employees are appointed and promoted based on qualifications and professional merit as proven by a competitive testing process. The goal is to avoid or prevent unfair hiring practices such as cronyism or nepotism. Today,many cities use the term"personnel system" instead of "civil service system." Management Partners reviewed 17 peer agency charters to identify references to either civil service or personnel systems. We also looked for instances of an established civil service or personnel board and identified whether the establishment was handled in the city's charter or municipal code. Finally,we examined the duties and powers of civil service or personnel boards of the nine agencies where they exist. The following tables summarize the results of this research. A table providing the details for each peer agency is provided as an attachment. 31 Civil Service Boards and Systems Table 1 shows that 11 of the 17 agencies make some reference to a civil service or personnel system in the charter. However, in two cases (Anaheim and Riverside) the provision merely states that such a system will be established by the City Council by ordinance. It shows nine agencies have a civil service or personnel board. Of these, eight are established by charter and one is established in the municipal code. Table 1. Summary of Civil Service or Personnel System Charter References Civil Service or Personnel Civil System Service or Referenced Personnel Population in Charter Board Comments B 200,000 to 299,000 3 3 Irvine's personnel system is defined and described in the City's (Chula Vista,Irvine, municipal code. There is no civil service or personnel board;the Modesto,Stockton) Irvine assistant city manager is designated as the"personnel officer."Chula Vista,Stockton and Modesto reference a civil service system and a civil service board in their charters. 300,000 to 399,000 Anaheim and Riverside charter references authorize the City (Anaheim, Council to establish a personnel system by ordinance. However, Bakersfield,Riverside, neither has a civil service/personnel board. Santa Ana and Santa Ana) Bakersfield reference both a civil service system and a civil 4 2* service board in their charters. 150,000 to 199,000 Glendale, Hayward,Torrance and Santa Rosa reference a civil service system in the charter. Glendale, Hayward,and Torrance charters also establish a civil service/personnel board.Santa Rosa's personnel board is established by the municipal code. There is no reference to either a civil service/personnel system or board in the charters for Lancaster, Oceanside, Palmdale, 4 4 Pomona,or Salinas. TOTAL 11 9 Source: Peer agency charters,websites and municipal codes .The Bakersfield charter establishes three civil service boards:one for fire,one for police and one for miscellaneous employees. They have been counted as one board in Table 1 for consistency. Table 2 summarizes the appointment of civil service or personnel boards and any staff members designated to support the board's activities. Table 2. Appointment of Civil Service or Personnel Boards and Staff Appointment by City Appointed Population Council by Board Comments 200,000 to 299,000 3 1 Stockton's Board has independent authority to appoint the Chief Examiner. 300,000 to 399,000 2 0 Neither the Bakersfield nor Santa Ana boards have independent authority to appoint staff. 32 Civil Service Boards and Systems Appointment by City Appointed Board Comments 150,000 to 199,000 4 1 Torrance's Board has authority to appoint its executive officer. The Santa Rosa Personnel Board consists of five members appointed by the City Council. Of these,three are city residents and two are labor representatives selected from names submitted by the city's employee associations. TOTAL 9 2 Source: Peer agency charters,websites and municipal codes Table 2 shows that all nine civil service/personnel boards,whether established by charter or municipal code,are appointed by the City Council as a whole. Only two of these boards have the authority to appoint their own staff. Table 3 summarizes the powers of established civil service/personnel boards. A common function of these boards is to serve as a hearing body for appeals of disciplinary actions. "Advisory powers"means the board makes recommendations to either the city council or the city manager,but cannot make the final decision. "Quasi-judicial" means the board has the independent authority to reach decisions on disciplinary matters such as demotions, suspensions and terminations. Table 3 shows a fairly even split between the number of advisory and quasi-judicial civil service/personnel boards. Three of the boards with advisory powers make recommendations to the city manager,not the City Council. Table 3. Powers of Peer Agency Civil Service or Personnel Boards Ad. Quasi- Advisory judicial Population Powers Powers Comments 200,000 to 299,000 2 1 Chula Vista's Board makes recommendations to the city council.The Modesto Board makes recommendations to the city manager.*Stockton's board has independent powers comparable to the San Bernardino Civil Service Board. 300,000 to 399,000 2 Bakersfield and Santa Ana boards have independent decision authority. 150,000 to 199,000 3 1 Only Glendale's board has independent authority. Hayward's and Santa Rosa's boards are advisory to the city manager. Torrance's board is advisory to the city council. TOTAL 5 4 Source:Peer agency websites,charters and municipal codes *The Modesto Board of Personnel Appeals is primarily responsible for selecting a hearing officer,not conducting hearings itself. Hearing officer findings and recommendations are made to the city manager. 33 Civil Service Boards and Systems Conclusion The following conclusions can be made from the interviews and peer agency research. • San Bernardino's Civil Service Board has a broader role in the recruitment,testing and selection process than those of comparable peer agencies. It is more common for civil service/personnel boards to function as advisory hearing bodies for employee disciplinary appeals. • Most peer agencies make reference to a civil service or personnel system in their charter documents. In some cases the reference merely authorizes the city council to establish such a system. Older charters such as San Bernardino's tend to provide more specific details regarding the civil service requirements and processes than those for younger cities. • Members of most civil service or personnel boards are appointed by the city council as a whole. This is in contrast to San Bernardino's Civil Service Board,which is appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the Common Council. Most boards are comprised of residents who are selected at large. Only Santa Rosa's Personnel Board has a mix of residents and labor representatives. • It is common for civil service or personnel boards to have the power to conduct investigations,issue subpoenas, and function as an appeals hearing body. However,the disciplinary recommendations of five of nine peer agency boards are advisory,to either the city manager or city council. • Most civil service or personnel boards receive staff support from the Human Resources or a Personnel Department. Few have the independent authority to hire or remove their own staff. 34 Civil Service Boards and Systems Attachment— Civil Service Provisions by Peer Agency Table 4 contains more specific information about civil service boards and systems for each of the 17 peer agencies. Table 4. Summary of Peer Agency Civil Service Provisions—Charter and Municipal Code Civil Service or Personnel System Civil Service Described in or Personnel Peer Agency Charter Board Comments Population:200,000 to 299,000 Chula Vista Yes Yes Appointed by City Council with the power to conduct investigations, hear appeals,and recommend adoption, modification or repeal of civil service rules and regulations. (Article VI,Sections 609-610)Additional details regarding Civil Service commission provided in CVMC Chapter 2.43. Irvine No No Personnel system defined and described in city's municipal code. Assistant city manager is designated as the Personnel Officer,with many of the same duties as a Civil Service Board, Modesto Yes Yes Article XII of the Modesto Charter, "Personnel System" contains elements comparable to a civil service system such as appointments and promotions made based on merit and fitness,the establishment of eligibility lists,and the establishment of unclassified and classified service. Board of Personnel Appeals is authorized to select a hearing officer for appeals. Findings of hearing officer are made to city manager,who makes the final determination (Article XII,Section 1205). Charter also includes provisions for impartial arbitration for police and fire employee disputes(Section 1206) Stockton Yes Yes Comprehensive details of Civil Service system and Civil Service Commission found in Article XXV. Similar to San Bernardino,including chief examiner position,appointed by the Commission.Same testing,selection, hearing,and investigation powers as San Bernardino Civil Service Commission. Population:300,000 to 399,000 Anaheim Yes No Article X of the charter authorizes the City Council to establish a personnel system by ordinance to include elements comparable to a civil service system, but there are no details about the system. Section 1050 is a policy statement for impartial arbitration for personnel disputes involving firefighters 3 5 � Civil Service Boards and Systems Civil Service or Personnel System Civil Service Described in or Personnel Peer Agency Charter Board Comments Bakersfield Yes Yes-3 Charter Addendums 1,2 and 3 set forth civil service different Civil provisions for fire, miscellaneous and police employees, Service respectively. There are three Civil Service Boards(one for Commissions each unit),appointed by City Council. All three have ultimate authority to establish regulations governing the selection, promotion and discipline of the member of each defined employee unit(i.e., not the City Council). Also serves as disciplinary appeal body. Riverside Yes No Article IX of the charter states the City Council shall establish a personnel merit system by ordinance. Santa Ana Yes Yes Article IX,Section 900 establishes a Personnel Board with appointment by the City Council.The Board has authority to hear disciplinary appeals,conduct studies and investigations, and conduct hearings on proposed amendments or repeal of civil service rules(Section 912). Article X defines the civil service system,as well as positions excepted from it. Population:150,000 to 199,000 Glendale Yes Yes Article XXIV establishes Civil Service system,including Commission appointed by the City Council. Duties include establishing civil service rules and policies and serving as a quasi-judicial hearing body for employee appeals. Hayward Yes Yes Article IX establishes a Personnel Board with advisory authority on personnel administration, including serving as hearing body for employee appeals and grievances(makes recommendation to city manager on such appeals).Also has authority to recommend approval of job descriptions. Lancaster No No Municipal Code Chapter 2.56 defines personnel system (with same basic characteristics as civil service system)and identifies the city manager as the personnel officer. Personnel rules and regulations are adopted, modified or repealed by City Council. Oceanside No No Personnel System(with same basic characteristics as civil service system)created by ordinance(Oceanside Municipal Code Chapter 23) Palmdale No No Nothing about personnel or civil service system in the municipal code. City manager has authority to appoint, promote,discipline,demote or remove employees. Pomona No No Personnel system(with same basic characteristics as civil service system)created by ordinance(Pomona Municipal Code Division 3). Human Resources/Risk Management director is responsible for the personnel system, its rules and enforcement 36 Civil Service Boards and Systems Civil Service or Personnel System Civil Service Described Peer Agency Charter Board Comments Salinas No No Personnel system(with same characteristics as civil service system)described in Chapter 25 of the Pomona municipal code. Santa Rosa Yes Yes Personnel system to be established by City Council ordinance(Charter Section 50);charter also includes provisions for impartial and binding arbitration for police and fire employee disputes. Municipal Code Chapter 2-28 establishes Personnel Board to act as an advisory body to the city manager and serve as hearing body for employee disputes related to employment. Torrance Yes Yes Civil Service system established by Charter Article 13. Civil Service Commission established by Torrance Municipal Code Chapter 4,Article 10,with authority to conduct hearings and make recommendations to the City Council. Commission also has the authority to appoint an executive officer. Total 11 9 Source: Peer agency websites,charters and municipal codes 37 ".0o> PMS ANALYSIS of SKELETON WATER DEPARTMENT Descriptions of Skeleton Issues Related to this Topic: A. Should there be anything in the Charter concerning a Water Department? B. Should it have a Board responsible for its operations separate from the Council &/or Manager? C. If so, should it's Board be - a. appointed by the Mayor and Council? b. appointed by the Manager? C. appointed by the Manager subject to Council approval? d. publically elected? 1. Input Received from the Public -NA 2. National Civic League Model City Charter& Guide- A. Recommends not requiring any Departments or Agencies in the Charter. [4.01] B. Recommends all be selected, supervised, and fired just by Manager [4.03] 3. Other Similarly sized California cities (SB is about 214,000)- Of the 17 similarly sized California cities 5 have provisions in their charters concerning water services and/or public utilities which include water and/or sewer services, only Santa Rosa's being anything similar to San Bernardino's. They are as follows: a. Anaheim's charter establishes an advisory Public Utilities Board to make recommendations concerning water[9091; appointed by the Council[902]. b. Riverside's charter requires a Public Utilities department under the management and control of the Manager, subject to the powers of its Board, and that it be responsible for water supplied. [1200] Board is appointed by Mayor and Council [802]. C. Bakersfield's charter creates a Water Board appointed by the vice-Mayor subject to confirmation by the Council [2.18.010],which Board is essentially advisory [2.18.012] and also provides that such public utilities as are in the best interest of the people shall be owned & operated by the City [108] and that the provision of water may be franchised out [116]. d. Glendale's charter creates Glendale Water and Power [X.1] which is in charge of construction, maintenance and operation of all public utilities [X.5]; apparently a Water Board or Commission can be created by Council [XIV.I]. e. Santa Rosa's charter establishes a Board of Public Utilities appointed by Council [25(a)] which shall have authority and direction over the City's water and sewer utilities [25(b)]. Council sets water and sewer rates [26(a)]. The Mayor appoints the chairperson of this Board [15(d)]. 6. Other Issues Relevant to the Topic-Water service revenues are restricted by State law to be used for water services, so the Water Department has an independent source of revenue from the City's general fund. San Bernardino's Water Department has been one of the most financially sound department of the City under it's present structure. However, there are issues with coordinating its operations with those of the City generally and its sewer operations. 7. San Bernardino's Current Charter (B)Article IX is titled"Water Department". A Board of Water Commissioners is required [160]. This Board establishes all water rates [163.1]. (C)Appointed by Mayor, subject to council approval, and supervised by Mayor [52]; Manager is not 38 responsible for this Department [100]. 8. Charter vs Code Filter a. It seems not essential or constitutional that the Water Department be required in Charter. 9. General Law a. General Law(A)required no Departments, and does not provides for a Water Department,but allows Council to establish such departments as may be appropriate. b. More than 2/3 of California's Cities are General Law. 10. My Preliminary Thoughts: (A) Probably the Charter should address some issues concerning Water. (B) I like the independence of a Board running the Water Dept, so as to be less affected by political issues. However, it is most difficult with such structure to coordinate water and sewer services and to determine appropriate charges by the City for administrative services for the Water Dept. I need more information from both the Water Dept. and the City administration on this issue. (C) If there a Water Dept is dealt with in the Charter,probably its Board should be appointed by the Mayor and Council, but I feel that it's administration should be under the responsibilities of the Manager. Having it under the Manager's responsibilities should better facilitate coordination of water and sewer services as well as dealing with appropriate allocation of City administrative expenses to it. 39 Management Partners To: Volunteer Citizen-Based Charter Committee From: Cathy Standiford,Partner Subject: Water and Wastewater Utility Functions and Boards Date: October 27,2015 The Charter Committee is considering elements that should be included in the Charter "skeleton." On September 15 the Committee approved a preliminary recommendation that, "no departments be specifically mentioned in the Charter except as otherwise provided or delineated." In other words, the preference is to avoid mentioning specific departments(or in some cases commissions) in the Charter unless there is a compelling reason to do so. The Committee is reviewing each of the departments,boards and commissions currently referenced in the Charter to determine whether such compelling reasons exist. The Committee is scheduled to discuss possible charter provisions regarding the Water Department at its October 27,2015 meeting. In anticipation of the Committee's discussions,Management Partners has conducted interviews with some of the potentially affected stakeholders and has researched the practices of 17 comparable peer agencies. We also have examined the practices of independently operated public water and wastewater utilities (i.e.,not operated by a city). The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the input received and provide additional information Committee members may wish to consider in developing specific recommendations. Background San Bernardino Charter Article XI establishes the Water Department, governed by a five- member Board of Water Commissioners (Water Commission). Members of the Water Commission are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the Common Council. Section 163 of the Charter gives the Water Commission the authority to: • Establish and collect all water rates, rentals from water bearing lands, and generally regulate, control,manage, renew,repair and extend San Bernardino's entire water system; • Employ personnel, including the general manager of the department and any other employees required to operate the enterprise; • Regulate, control,manage, renew, repair and extend the City's wastewater treatment (i.e., sewage disposal)plants, as directed by the Mayor and Common Council; 40 Water and Wastewater Utility Functions and Boards • Incur debt or liability so long as it does not exceed the department's annual income and revenue provisions or exceed debt limitations as established by the State of California; • Make rules and regulations regarding the conduct of members of the Water Commission; and • Control and order the expenditure of monies received from the sale or use of water. These Charter provisions enable the Water Department to operate somewhat independently from the rest of the City organization. Interview Results Stakeholder interviews were conducted with the city manager,Mayor,Water Department general manager,Water Commission President, and a former Mayor who also had prior service on the Water Commission. The purpose of the interviews was to hear various perspectives about the extent to which a new charter should retain any of the existing provisions related to the Water Department. The interviews generated widely varying opinions,which tended to fall into one of two themes: 1. The Charter should contain provisions that allow the Water Department to maintain its operational independence from the rest of the City, or 2. The Water Department should be treated the same as any other department and be accountable to the city manager and Common Council under a council-manager form of government. All of the opinions expressed during the interviews are represented below. The Charter should contain provisions that allow the Water Department to continue operating independently from the City under the governance of the Water Commission. Reasons given for this perspective include the following. • The Water Department is one of San Bernardino's most successfully managed and efficiently operated departments. "If it's not broken, it shouldn't be fixed." • The Water Commission's authority to set water rates and charges allows such decisions to be made based on the needs of the system and the community it serves,without the influences of politics.This also provides political benefit to the Common Council,which can shift blame to the Water Commission when customers are unhappy. There is a "profound" difference in the time and effort required to raise water rates compared to the process for adjusting sewer/wastewater rates,which are under the control of the Common Council. We were told one reason the City's sewer/wastewater system is deficient is the consistent reluctance of the Common Council to raise the fees necessary to ensure adequate maintenance. • The independent ability to set water rates and charges and issue debt allows the Water Department to maintain and improve the water system infrastructure and provide high quality customer service consistent with best practices. This is critical to the City's economic development efforts. The same cannot be said for the maintenance and improvement of San Bernardino's other infrastructure systems. 41 Water and Wastewater Utility Functions and Boards • The Water Department has completely separate and far superior internal support systems and personnel. It has separate finance and procurement systems,uses a different method of accounting than the City, and has independent information technology and human resources functions and staff. It was necessary to develop these separate systems to comply with highly technical rules and regulations governing water/wastewater operations, as well as the requirements of a consent decree the City was under for remediation of groundwater contamination. Some might consider these systems redundant and therefore inefficient. However,forcing the department to use the City's internal support systems and staff would severely impair its ability to operate efficiently and effectively. The City's internal support departments lack the capacity or expertise to handle the demands of the water/wastewater operation and would likely be overwhelmed. • The independence of the Water Commission and Water Department allows more rapid, nimble response to changing water service delivery needs. For example,the Water Department was able to meet state-mandated water conservation targets quickly by being able to create and deploy its own community outreach and education programs. • The Charter provides better protection than the municipal code or other policy documents against potentially harmful interference by the Mayor, Common Council or city manager. Such protection is important,given the history of San Bernardino's leadership and management. This has protected the Water Department against the negative effects of the City's bankruptcy. • Because it must function as a public utility, the Water Department is unique and substantially different from the other City operating departments. Giving it special protection in the Charter recognizes this difference. • The relative independence of the Water Department has allowed it to recruit and retain quality employees who may otherwise be concerned about working for San Bernardino. It was pointed out that unlike the rest of the City,Water Department employees are not unionized, and operate under labor agreements negotiated and approved by the Water Commission. They also have different benefits provisions than other City employees. • The effective and efficient provision of water services to the community is an important consideration,even if the Water Department's existing governance structure and authority is different from that commonly found in municipal water utilities. The Water Department should receive no special Charter provisions or protection. Instead, the Water Board should be accountable to the Common Council and the general manager should be accountable to the city manager, consistent with the council-manager form of government. In a democratic republic,rate setting, employment and debt issuance powers are more appropriately assigned to an elected body,in this case the Common Council. Reasons given for this perspective include the following. • The Common Council should be able to determine whether the Water Department should be an independent entity and what the powers and authorities of the Water Commission are. The City's municipal code is a more appropriate place for specific reference to the Water Department,Water Commission and their delegated powers. 42 Water and Wastewater Utility Functions and Boards • Efficiency should never trump democracy. Those responsible for setting fees and charges paid by the public should be accountable to the public. As an appointed body, the San Bernardino Water Commission is accountable only to itself,even though it has a history of serving the interests of the community well. A public utility,whether operated by a city or as an independent special district, typically places rate setting authority with elected officials who are accountable to the voters. • The general manager is accountable only to the Water Commission because s/he is hired by the Water Commission. This is inconsistent with best practices for municipal water departments,which typically have the general manager or department director reporting to the city manager. San Bernardino is fortunate to have had highly competent, professional management overseeing the Water Department. But what if this were not the case? The current charter provisions preclude the Mayor,the Common Council or the city manager from holding the general manager and other Water Department staff accountable. Like rate setting authority, the authority to hire and remove public employees should be given to someone other than an appointed body. The common practice is for this to be the city manager. • Although the internal support systems of the Water Department may be more effective than the City's, they are redundant with the City's, creating inefficiencies for the public being served. In other words,the public is paying for two finance operations,two information technology operations,etc.,when it would be more efficient to pay for one. Centralized internal support services create greater efficiency through economies of scale and foster data sharing by multiple departments. The charter should not limit San Bernardino's ability to consolidate such systems in the future • Even though the Water Department may operate as a public utility,it is still part of the City organization,not an independent special district. When the Water Department has disagreed with something the City wanted to do(e.g., a cost allocation plan for City administrative services provided to the department),it has used its independent resources to fight City Hall. This illustrates potential problems with accountability. • San Bernardino needs to operate as one team to effectively serve the community. It isn't a true council-manager form of government if certain departments are excluded from being within the City's control. These two divergent perspectives, i.e.,practical efficiency and effectiveness vs. democratic governance and accountability, are difficult to reconcile. However,the practices of comparable peer agencies indicate an emphasis on governance and accountability, followed by efficiency and effectiveness. Comparison with Peer Agencies Management Partners reviewed the charters,municipal codes and websites of 17 peer agencies to gather information on municipally operated water utilities and their governance. A summary of the water service providers for the 17 peer agencies is provided in Table 1. It shows 12 out of 17 peer agencies operate a water utility. The other five communities receive water service through either a private water company, an independent special district, or a county. 43 Water and Wastewater Utility Functions and Boards Some peer agencies include water services as part of a larger Public Utilities Department. A table providing the details for each peer agency is provided as an attachment. Table 1. Summary of Peer Agency Water Service Providers city Water Operated . . Water Another Population Utility Entity Comments 200,000 to 2 2 Modesto and Stockton administer a water utility. Chula Vista is served E 299,000 by a joint powers agency led by National City and an independent special district. Irvine is served by the Irvine Ranch Water District,an independent special district. 300,000 to Bakersfield administers a water department.Anaheim, Riverside,and 399,000 Santa Ana have public utilities departments that include water 4 0 provision. 150,000 to Glendale,Santa Rosa,Oceanside, Hayward, Pomona,and Torrance 199,000 administer water functions.A portion of Torrance receives water services from a private water company.Salinas receives water from two private water companies, Lancaster receives water from Los Angeles County, and Palmdale receives water services from an 6 3* independent special district. TOTAL 12 5 Source: Peer agency charters,municipal codes and websites. *Although a portion of the City of Torrance receives water service from a private company,the City has been counted as a City- operated water department for purposes of this analysis. Table 2 provides information on the peer agencies with established water or utilities boards or commissions. Of the 12 agencies providing water/wastewater utility services, eight have a water or public utility board or commission. Table 2. Summary of Peer Agency Water Boards and Commissions Operated City Water Water Population Department* Board Comments 200,000 to 2 1 Stockton has a Water Advisory Group,which is advisory to a City 299,000 Council Water Subcommittee. Modesto does not have a water board. 300,000 to 4 3 Anaheim, Bakersfield,and Riverside water or public utilities boards. 399,000 Santa Ana does not have a water board or commission. 150,000 to 6 4 Glendale,Santa Rosa,Oceanside,and Torrance have water boards. 199,000 1 Hayward and Pomona do not have water boards. TOTAL 12 8 Source: Peer agency charters,websites and municipal codes *More specific city-operated water department information was previously provided in Table 1 above. Management Partners examined the charters of the 12 agencies having a water utility to determine whether the departments providing the service and/or associated boards or 44 Water and Wastewater Utility Functions and Boards commissions are specifically referenced in the charter. Table 3 shows that only two of the cities (Riverside and Glendale) have specific charter provisions regarding a water or public utilities department. Three cities (Anaheim, Riverside and Santa Rosa) have charter provisions for the establishment of a Water or Public Utilities Board. Table 3. Summary of Water Utility and Water Board Charter References Charter- Department Referenced Water Utility Population in Charter Board Comments 200,000 to 0 0 Stockton's Water Advisory Group is appointed by the City Council, 299,000 but it is not specifically identified in either the City's charter or municipal code. 300,000 to 1 2 Anaheim's charter establishes a Public Utilities Board(Article IX), 399,000 but does not specifically reference a utilities department. Riverside's charter describes the Public Utilities Department and the Board of Public Utilities(Article XII). Bakersfield's charter discusses general city management of public utilities but does not specifically reference a water department or a water board(Article IX).The Santa Ana charter does not mention public works,water services, or a water board. 150,000 to 1 1 Santa Rosa's charter describes the water board,water utility,and 199,000 the water rate setting process(Section 25 and Section 26), but makes no reference to specific departments.Glendale's charter mentions a Water and Power Department but does not mention a water board(Article XXII).The Hayward,Oceanside,and Torrance charters provide general information about public works but they do not specifically reference a water department,utility or board. Pomona's Charter does not mention public works,water services,or a water board. TOTAL 2 3 Source: Peer agency charters,websites and municipal codes Our research indicates specific references to water or public utilities departments and/or water boards or commissions are more commonly found in a municipal code. Table 4 summarizes how members of the water/public utilities board are appointed in the eight agencies having them. It shows that five boards are appointed by the City Council as a whole. In two cases (Riverside and Bakersfield) the members are appointed by a Mayor or Vice Mayor, subject to confirmation by the City Council. The Torrance Mayor has independent authority to appoint members of that city's water board. 45 Water and Wastewater Utility Functions and Boards Table 4. Appointment of City Water Utility Boards Appointment by City Appointment i Population • by 200,000 to 1 0 Stockton's Water Advisory Group members are nominated by 299,000 individual Council members but appointed by the whole City Council. 300,000 to 1 2 Anaheim's Public Utilities Board members are appointed by the City 399,000 Council as a whole. Riverside's Board of Public Utilities members are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council. Bakersfield's Water Board members are appointed by the Vice Mayor and confirmed by the City Council. 150,000 to 3 1 Glendale and Santa Rosa water board members are appointed by the 199,000 City Council. Oceanside Utilities Commission members are nominated by the mayor, but approved by the City Council.Torrance Water Commission members are appointed by the Mayor. TOTAL 5 3 Source: Peer agency charters,websites and municipal codes Table 5 summarizes the common powers of peer agency water utility boards. It shows that all of the boards are advisory in nature when it comes to rate setting. One board, Stockton's Water Advisory Group, reports to a City Council subcommittee and appears to have no involvement setting rates. None of the water boards or commissions have independent rate setting authority, and none of them have the power to hire or remove their own staff. Table 5. Rate Setting and Staff Appointment Powers of Peer Water Utility Boards Appointment Rate Setting Rate Staff Advisory Setting Population 200,000 to 01 0 0 Stockton's Water Advisory Group(WAG)is advisory 299,000 to a City Council Water Subcommittee. It does not appear to have any role in rate setting. 300,000 to 3 0 02 Anaheim's City Council sets rates with advice from 399,000 the Public Utilities Board. Bakersfield and Riverside water boards establish rates that require approval by City Council. 150,000 to 4 0 0 Glendale,Oceanside,and Torrance water rates are 199,000 established by City Council. Santa Rosa City Council establishes rates, but the Water Board may establish other fees and charges associated with operations. TOTAL 7 0 0 Source:Peer agency websites,charters and municipal codes 1Stockton's Water Advisory Group is focused on"current and future issues impacting water,wastewater and storm water utilities"and reviews the Department of Municipal Utilities'monthly operations and maintenance report. Advisory powers related to rate setting appear to be delegated to the City Council Water Subcommittee. 2Riverside's Public Utilities director is appointed by the city manager,subject to approval by the Public Utilities Board. 46 Water and Wastewater Utility Functions and Boards Conclusion The following conclusions can be made from the interviews and peer agency research. • There are two divergent points of view regarding the San Bernardino Water Department. One is that the Charter references the Water Department to protect its independence and existing powers. The other is that the department should not receive special Charter protections. There are compelling rationales for both. • Most peer agencies make no reference to a water department or water board or commission in their charter. • Of the agencies that have water boards,none have independent rate setting authority. Instead, rates are established by an elected governing body that is accountable to the public. In fact,Management Partners could not find a single public water/wastewater utility in California that does not vest rate setting authority in an elected body. • None of the peer agency water boards or commissions have the independent ability to retain or remove department staff. The executive responsible for water/wastewater operations (i.e., director or general manager) is appointed by and reports to a city manager. I 47 Water and Wastewater Utility Functions and Boards Attachment—Water Utility Provisions by Peer Agency Table 6 contains more specific information about water utility boards and systems for each of the 17 peer agencies. Table 6. Summary of Peer Water Utility Provisions—Charter and Municipal Code Water Utility System Water Described in Utility Board Peer Agency Charter 200,000 to 299,000 Chula Vista No No Chula Vista does not administer a water utility.There are two water agencies operating in Chula Vista.The first is The Sweetwater Authority which is a JPA that operates out of the City of National City.Sweetwater Authority has a seven- member water utility board. Five board members are publicly elected by the citizens of each of five voting districts.The Mayor of National City also appoints two board members.The second water service provider is Otay Water District,a private water company. Irvine No No Irvine does not administer water utilities.The Irvine Ranch Water District is the water service provider. Irvine Ranch Water District has a five-member Board of Directors that are publicly elected by the residents in the water district. Elections are general and not based on districts. Modesto No No Modesto does not have a water board.Title 11,Chapter 1, section 1.01 of the municipal code authorizes the management, control and care of the municipal water system of the City to be vested in the Public Works director under the general direction of the city manager. Stockton No Yes Stockton has a water advisory group that made up of seven members.One member is appointed by each Council member and the Mayor. 300,000 to 399,000 Anaheim No Yes Anaheim's Charter establishes a Public Utilities Board(Section 909).The Public Utilities Board has seven members.Board members are appointed by City Council. Bakersfield No Yes Bakersfield's Charter discusses city management of public utilities but does not specifically reference a water utility or a water board (Article IX). Bakersfield's Vice Mayor appoints board members who are confirmed by City Council. Riverside Yes Yes Article XII of the Riverside charter describes the Department of Public Utilities and the Board of Public Utilities. Board of Public Utilities members are appointed by City Council and the Mayor. Each of the nine members represent one of the nine wards in the city. 48 Water and Wastewater Utility Functions and Boards Board Water Utility System Water Described in Utility Peer Agency Charter Santa Ana No No Santa Ana administers its water utility but does not have a water board. 150,000 to 199,000 Glendale Yes Yes Article XXII of Glendale's Charter provides a general definition of the Glendale Water and Power Department. Glendale Water and Power Commission has eight members who are appointed by the City Council. Hayward No No Hayward administers its water utility but does not have a water board. Lancaster No No Lancaster does not administer its water utilities. Los Angeles County Water District No.40 provides water services to Lancaster.This water district is governed by the County Board of Supervisors. Oceanside No Yes Oceanside Utilities Commission has nine members who are nominated by the Mayor and approved by City Council. Palmdale No No Palmdale does not administer water utilities. Palmdale Water District provides water services to Palmdale.The Palmdale Water District is governed by a water board made up of five members who are publicly elected by districts. Pomona No No Pomona administers its water utility but does not have a water board. Salinas No No Salinas does not administer a water utility.Water services are provided by two private water companies. Santa Rosa Yes Yes Section 25 of Santa Rosa's Charter details the Board of Public Utilities. Board is appointed by City Council and has the authority to establish other fees and charges associated with water operations. However,the City Council has authority to set water rates. Torrance No Yes Torrance administers a water utility but part of the city is serviced by a private water.The Torrance water utility has a Water Commission made up of seven members appointed by the Mayor. Total 2 8 Source: Peer agency websites,charters and municipal codes 49