The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1995-06-05 CRC MINS MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION JUNE 5, 1995 June 5, 1995 City Attorney's Conference Room 4 : 30 p.m. ----------------------------------------------------------------- MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Campbell, Deric Prescott, Rosie Bystrak, John Dorso, Sharon Reid and Janet Lawry MEMBERS ABSENT: Jack Blakely STAFF .PRESENT: City Attorney Bruce Boogaard The meeting was called to order by Chairman Campbell at 4 : 35 p.m. The roll was called and all members were present except Member' Blakely (unexcused) . MSUC (Reid/Lawry) to approve the minutes of May 16, 1995. . Referral by Councilman Rindone for Clarification of the One Year Hiatus Period for Councilmembers. Chairman Campbell reviewed Proposition. B ballot language and Council minutes from the April, 1973 election relating to §300 dealing with terms of Councilmembers. He pointed out the last sentence allowing incumbent Councilmembers., regardless of terms served' to seek one additional term, was a contradiction with other portions of the section. From a reading of the . 1973 minutes, Member Reid noted the only person who would be ineligible to run for another term was Frank Scott and that particular wording allowed Mr. Scott to run for one more term. Frank Scott indicated to Member Reid' it was never the itent of the Council for an absolute limit 'of two terms. Attorney Boogaard stated the proper way to draft that intent would have been .to have the effective date in a separate section of the ordinance and not placed in the Charter. The -Commission's position on Councilman Rindone's request is that no clarification is needed to the language of the Charter because it was felt no ambiguity exists. MSUC (Reid/Lawry) it is the consensus of the Commission Section 300 was made clear by the City Attorney's opinion and there is no need to recommend to . the Council that they place it on the ballot because the Charter Review Commission concludes that election means either election by the people or by the Council to fill an unexpired term and if any member of the Council wishes to discuss it further with the Commission, they would be happy to do so. Charter Review Commission Minutes June 5, 1995 Page 2 Agenda Item 4 - Council Review of Budget for Charter Review commission. The Commission was notified the Council ' will be reviewing all board/commission budgets on June 14, 1995 from 6: 00 p.m. to 9 : 00 p.m. if any members wished to appear before Council to .make a presentation. The . Commission decided to accept the cuts recommended by the Budget Manager. Agenda Item 5' - Continued Review of Measures. Measure 'No. 20 providing for Vacancy Replacement Reform was again reviewed by the Commission due to its priority in being placed on the March, . 1996 election ballot. Specifically, the Commission evaluated the recommendations and comments of the Charter Review Commission prepared by the City Attorney. Discussion ensued regarding various scenarios of anticipated vacancies occurring and it was agreed to add the phrase "if it materializes" after the words "the vacancy expected to be created" to Section 303 . Vacancies, Subsection B. Anticipated Vacancies with Intervening Consolidated Elections; Duration of Elected Replacee's Term. Subsection C. Duration of Appointed Replacee's Term was discussed in detail as to seating date and an appointee not having to run for re-election for the segmented period between elections. After the City Attorney completes his analysis, the measure will be brought back again for a cursory review by the Commission and then be ready to be sent to the Council. Since it is a complex issue and time sensitive, it will be sent separately to Council for its reivew. The remaining issues are more "housekeeping" items which need to be dealt with 113 days prior to the March election or around November and it was agreed the Commission should bring the other items in final form to Council by October, 1995. The Commission reviewed .Measure No. 14 relating to the Youth Commissioner terms being reduced to two years. Attorney Boogaard was concerned about adding language to the Charter relating to the Youth Commission because they are created by Council ordinance and any change relating to the terms of the members, would have to go back to a vote of the people for changes. The City Attorney suggested making it flexible. Member Prescott,. having previously been a Youth Commissioner, expressed the concern the Youth Commission had, which was that Charter Review Commission Minutes June 5, 1995 Page 3 members had to resign because of- other commitments or college. A two-year, term would be more reasonable with possible reappointment fora second two-year term. Sharon Reid recalled a previous argument .for changing the term was an imbalance of power. Janet Lawry inquired as to the average age of a Youth Commissioner. Member Prescott reported it to be 17. Member Lawry asked Member Prescott who the Youth Commission serves? Mr. Prescott responded there were 3 groups: junior high, high school and students from Southwestern College. Member Prescott felt the basis was prevention and assistance and if a wide input can be gained from both the junior high and college students, it was beneficial. Member Prescott is in favor of two two-year terms. Attorney Boogaard suggested the Council could have representatives from junior high school, high school and junor college. Words could be added requiring the composition of the Youth Commission to be spelled out in the ordinance rather than setting it . out in the Charter. Member Prescott did not feel it should be a mandate, but that the best-qualified should be appointed. After hearing input from the Charter members, Attorney Boogaard suggested the following language be added to Section 602 of .the Charter: "Members thereof shall serve for a term of four years, except in the case the Council authorizes or continues to authorize by ordinance a Youth Commission, in which case, members of the Youth Commission shall serve for two years and -until their respective successors are appointed and qualified. " Member Reid inquired if there would be an argument in favor of Charter language that would give back to the Council the ability to limit terms in an ordinance, but no more than four years, or no more than two consecutive terms, or if Council wanted, a three year term or a two-year term for non-Chartered commissions. Attorney Boogaard felt we could deal with the micro issue by the language he suggested or if the Commission wished to deal with the broader issue, it should be referred to the next meeting. The whole intent of the language would change to provide Charter- required commissions to serve two four-year terms at most, The Council could do whatever they wanted to do with the ordinance- created commissions, but they cannot allow them to serve more than eight years. MS (Campbell/Dorso) to offer the micro approach dealing only with Youth Commissioners and the language format suggested by the City Attorney. Motion carries by a vote. of 4-1-1-1 with Reid opposing, `' Bystrak abstaining, and Blakely absent. Member Reid voted "no" Charter Review Commission Minutes June 5, 1995 Page 4 because philosophically we have tried to propose fixes that are specific without requiring a return to a Charter amendment because of language added. Council should have that authority and she prefers the ' fix that does not elevate the Youth Commission to specific reference in the Charter. If Member Reid's approach was used, it would mean recommending to the Council the amendment of the Youth Commission ordinance. It was suggested that the broad form be added as another measure for the Charter Review Commission to consider. The Commission decided to have their next meeting on Monday, July 17, 1995 at 4: 30 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 6: 00 p.m. C) Lorraine Kraker, Secretary C:\crc\minute\6-5-95