Council could move in June to put amendments to Santa Cruz city charter on November ballot

The Santa Cruz City Council held its second public hearing on proposed amendments to the city’s charter at its Tuesday meeting, and staff is expected to return to the June 23 meeting with a resolution to put the proposed changes on the November ballot. City Clerk Bonnie Bush presented the proposed changes on Tuesday.

Voters must approve any proposed changes to the city’s charter. Although many of the proposed changes are fairly minor, including language changes and clarifications, there are also some proposed amendments to the city manager’s powers and duties, and to the frequency of meetings each month.

Some of the more minor changes include reformatting, fixing typos and applying gender-neutral language throughout the document. Other changes include tossing the specific dollar amounts for councilmembers’ and mayors’ salaries because they are out of date, shifting vice mayor elections to the regular December meeting each year, and clarifying residency rules for councilmembers and mayors. The proposed changes would force a mayor to vacate their position if they move outside of city limits, and councilmembers would be able to continue to serve if they move districts but remain within city limits in a term of two or fewer years remaining.

There was more debate about proposed changes to residency requirements for the city manager. The city’s charter says that the city manager needs to reside in the city of Santa Cruz, which is unconstitutional under the California Constitution, according to City Attorney Cassie Bronson. City staff recommended removing that requirement, but the city clerk’s presentation included suggested language from public input that would instead “highly recommend” that the city manager live in the city or within a certain number of miles of the city.

Vice Mayor Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson requested that it be changed so that it is recommended that the city manager live within Santa Cruz County and/or a certain number of miles from the city, which staff would ultimately determine.

Another clause in the current charter bars the city from employing any relative of the city manager “by blood or by marriage.” Bronson said that this section is “a little bit more tricky.”

“What’s currently in our charter is very broad, and would prohibit even somebody who was a cousin, nephew or niece of the city manager from taking any position of employment with the city, even including some entry-level positions,” she told the council. “This type of clause could be challenged on discrimination grounds, given that it’s a clear bar, and not very tailored to the types of positions that the city manager would directly be overseeing.”

Bronson said despite the issues with the existing policy, it is reasonable to be concerned about the city manager overseeing people they are related to. Staff will work to form an “anti-nepotism” policy by the end of the year to better address that concern and tighten the scope of the employment restrictions. 

There are also proposed changes to the number of council meetings per month, reducing the number of required meetings from twice a month to once a month. Bush said this largely pertains to the fact that during the holiday season, particularly in December, the council occasionally has to cancel one of its meetings due to traveling or scheduling conflicts, rendering the body out of compliance with the city charter. The presentation showed that public feedback suggested the council keep it at two meetings per month, aside from the holiday months and in July, when many legislative bodies do not meet at all. However, the council did not make a decision during the meeting.

The city council will hold a third and final public meeting at its June 23 meeting.

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.