Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011/06/21 Item 11CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT CITY OF CHULA VISTA JUNE 21, 2011, Item~_ ITEM TITLE: REPORT FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION REGARDING GENERAL DISTRICT ELECTIONS (AND ALTERNATIVES) FOR CITY COUNCIL SEATS AND REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION SUBMITTED BY: DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY, DAVID MILLER~M ON BEHALF OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION REVIEWED BY: GLEN GOOGINS, CITY ATTORNEY~~--- 4/STHS VOTE: YES ~ NO SUMMARY On May 10, 2011, the City Council approved a referral to the Charter Review Commission to report on their previous work and to discuss the establishment of City Council seat district elections, and to consider "hybrid" election alternatives The Charter Review Commission held an open meeting on June 6, 2011 and discussed the issue. This report is being presented to inform Council of the actions of the Charter Review Commission to recommend further consideration and public outreach, and to request City Council direction. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sec. 15378(a) this activity is not a Project as defined by CEQA and no environmental review is necessary. RECOMMENDATION Accept the Report and provide the Commission and staff with direction fox further action. DISCUSSION I. Background In June 2010, then Councilmember Mitch Thompson circulated a memo related to term JiJNE 21, 201 I, Item Page 2 of 3 limits for City Councilmembers and the Mayor and the possibility of an associated ballot measure on the November 2010 ballot. At the June 22, 2010 council meeting, Councilmember Thompson discussed this issue during in the "Council Comment" portion of the meeting. Following that discussion, the Council referred several issues/questions to the Charter Review Commission for review. The referral relevant to this report was whether the City should establish council districts and hold district elections. The Charter Review Commission met on July 1, 2010 and discussed, among other items on its agenda, district elections. The commissioners concluded that additional research must be performed prior to any decision-making, including a review of options for establishing districts and legal issues. At the Council meeting of July 13th, Deputy City Attorney David Miller presented a report detailing the Charter Review Commissions discussion and the associated actions. Following the presentation, the City Council voted 3-2 to direct staff to return to Council on July 27, 2010 with draft Charter amendments, one of which was for the establishment of City Council geographic voting districts. As requested by Council, the City Attorney's Office returned to the July 27th council hearing with a proposed Charter amendment for the establishment council districts and the holding of district elections. The Council continued the item to August 3, 2010, and also requested that the City Clerk return with an estimate of costs associated with placing the item on the ballot. At the August 3rd meeting, the City Clerk provided an estimate of costs related to a ballot measure and informed the Council that monies would need to be appropriated in order to pay such costs. Council took no further action with respect to district elections at that time. On May 10, 2011, Councilmembers again introduced the idea of establishing council districts and holding district elections. Ultimately, Council requested that the Charter Review Commission convene in order to identify and evaluate election options for City Council elections including: No change (all at large seats) 2. District Elections (based on geographic boundaries) 3. Hybrid District Elections (e.g., (1) a combination of at large and district seats, (2) district candidate qualification requirements, but with at large elections, etc.) II. Commission Action. In order to take up the Council referral, the Charter Review Commission held a properly noticed meeting on June 6, 2011 at the Chula Vista Police Department Community Conference Room. Mr. Miller presented a brief overview of the history of this item and 11-2 JiJNE 21, 2011, Item Page 3 of 3 reviewed some documents and legal issues he had presented at previous Council meetings. After commissioner and public comments, the commissioners voted unanimously to recommend to City Council that they continue their discussion related to district elections, hold public meetings in different location in order to obtain sufficient public input, research election options, including methods used by other cities within the state of California, to evaluate the efficacy of such options, and to further understand some of the legal framework and issues associated with establishing districts and having district elections. In accordance with this action the Charter Review Commission requests that Council provide direction as to any further action they would like the Commission to pursue, such as: 1.) act in accordance with the Commission's unanimous vote, and/or 2.) work to draft a proposed Charter amendment related to the formation of districts and district elections. A tentative meeting of the Charter Review Commission has been scheduled for June 27, 2011, to receive this direction. III. Potential Ballot Measure. In the event that Council chooses to pursue a ballot measure, the first opportunity to place a measure on the ballot would be November 2011. To date, the state has not called an election for November. City Clerk research indicates that the Governor's authority to call an election expired on June 13th. The state legislature itself may still be able to vote to schedule an election, but the time limits and vote required is unclear. If the state does not call an election, the City would incur the cost of a stand-alone election, currently estimated at $600,000. If the City were to consolidate with the presidential primary in June 2012, the estimated cost would vary depending on the number of pages contained in the ballot measure (a recently proposed measure of 18 pages would have cost approximately $246,000). If the City were to consolidate with the statewide general election in November 2012, the estimated cost would be approximately $67,000. In order to place a measure on the ballot, the City must provide a signed City Council Resolution with full ballot language to the County Clerk at least 88 days prior to an election. For the November 8, 2011 election, the deadline would be August 12, 2011. DECISION MAKER CONFLICT Staff has review this action and has determined that it is not site specific and no conflicts of interest have been identified. CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT The fiscal impact would depend on the direction given by Council. If Council directs the Commission and staff to conduct additional study, research, and outreach, the out-of- pocket cost would be nominal; however attorney staff time could be significant. In the event that Council directs the preparation of a ballot measure, the City Attorney's office would need to retain specialized, outside council; the cost of this is currehtly unknown. In addition, there would be the cost to place the item on the ballot discussed above. 11-3