charter review committee

10
Charter Review Committee Issues for Discussion March 6, 2014

Upload: chaz

Post on 06-Feb-2016

34 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Charter Review Committee. Issues for Discussion March 6, 2014. Form of Government/City Attorney. Change from Council/City Manager to “strong” Mayor form of government. Should the City Attorney report to Council instead of the Manager?. Council. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Charter Review Committee

Charter Review CommitteeIssues for Discussion

March 6, 2014

Page 2: Charter Review Committee

Form of Government/City Attorney

• Change from Council/City Manager to “strong” Mayor form of government.

• Should the City Attorney report to Council instead of the Manager?

2

Page 3: Charter Review Committee

Council

• Add two, non-voting, positions for high school students • Eliminate separately elected Mayor (they would be

selected from among the Councilmembers)• Election of Councilmembers by ward/district• Eliminate the mid-term “safe” run for mayor• Must be a resident for two-years to run for Council.

Clarify counting from when?• Remove requirement for full reading of an ordinance

3

Page 4: Charter Review Committee

Salary Review Committee

• Increase members from 5 to 7• Add provision allowing Councilmembers to turn down a

salary increase• Require the Mayor’s salary be calculated as some

proportion of the Council’s (like double)

4

Page 5: Charter Review Committee

Boards & Commissions

• Should residents from outside the city limits be allowed to serve on the Parks Commission?

• Clarify if the representatives of the school districts on the Parks Commission are voting or non-voting members.

• Instead of specifying a few boards & commissions in the Charter (Parks, Planning Commission) outline the process for creating, managing and sunseting boards & commissions.

5

Page 6: Charter Review Committee

Initiative & Referendum

• Should the deadline for submitting a referendum be longer than 30 days?

• Address problem of confusing initiative petition language:• Require the City Attorney’s office to write the text • Require a judge review and certify language

• Is it local or state law that requires 5 registered voters be listed as the petitioners? Can that be changed and should it be?

6

Page 7: Charter Review Committee

Initiative & Referendum

• Should there be a specific time frame in which the County Auditor’s office needs to verify the sufficiency of the signatures on an initiative petition.

• If an initiative petition is deemed “insufficient” there is 20 days to amend it. Should there be the same provision for a referendum that is deemed insufficient?

7

Page 8: Charter Review Committee

Charter Review

• Should the Committee be elected instead of appointed?

• Should there be a standing Committee instead of one appointed every 5 years?

• Should the Committee be able to place issues directly on the ballot rather than making recommendations to Council?

8

Page 9: Charter Review Committee

Administrative Changes

• Administrative clean up package?• Update the discrimination clause• Make personnel regulations consistent with state

and federal laws• Change “Publicity” section to “Public Information

and Disclosure”• Clarify does removal from office for “conviction of

drunkenness” mean a DUI?• More current definition of “immediate family”

9

Page 10: Charter Review Committee

Other

• Add a section on Post Service Employment

10