|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
This November, Mountain View voters will get the chance to decide whether to approve technical updates to the City Charter that largely focus on revising outdated language and clarifying certain provisions.
In a unanimous vote, the City Council backed a recommendation Tuesday evening to place the changes on the Nov. 3 general election ballot. The charter is a legal document that lays out foundational rules for how the city should operate.
Assistant City Attorney Francesca Serrano described the proposed changes as “non-substantive” and “non-controversial” at the June 9 council meeting.
“It is very limited in scope,” Serrano told the council. The changes include fixing typographical errors, clarifying existing language, revising outdated terminology and improving internal consistency. The updates will also align the charter with current state law, Serrano said.
On the ballot, voters will see the specific changes, which are expected to include replacing gender-specific language with gender-neutral language, extending the period to fill a council vacancy from 30 days to 60 days and eliminating a requirement for a Council member to read an ordinance or resolution, or its full title, out loud before adoption.
Placing the measure on the ballot will cost the city approximately $100,000, according to the staff report. The city plans to put forward a second ballot measure with more substantive charter revisions in 2028, Serrano noted.
City Council debates specifics of charter updates
Council members viewed the current changes favorably, expressing general support for the revisions. Only one proposed addition gave them significant pause.
Council member Pat Showalter suggested changing a charter provision that currently does not allow commission, board or committee members to hold paid employment or office with the city during the term of their appointment.
Showalter pushed to make the rule applicable only for bodies established by the charter, which are currently the Environmental Planning Commission, Board of Library Trustees and Parks and Recreation Commission. The change would give the City Council the authority to decide whether paid employees or officers could participate in all other legislatively-created bodies.
Showalter argued that this would open up more possibilities for people with unique insights and experiences to serve.
“If we wanted to have a committee sometime related to the way the Sevens was working, we would want some of them to be city employees because that’s who lives there,” she said, referring to an affordable housing complex with units set aside for city and school district staff.
Council member John McAlister initially voiced reservations about the proposal, preferring to prohibit city employees from participating in any advisory body to avoid conflicts of interest.
If the council allowed paid employees or officers to serve on advisory bodies, City Attorney Jennifer Logue said that the city would need to conduct additional oversight, which could include conflict-of-interest assessments.
Council member Chris Clark supported Showalter’s recommendation, arguing that only fundamental items should be under the charter’s purview with everything else left to the council’s discretion.
“[Let’s] not tie our hands to the extent where we actually have to go to the voters and ask permission to make a change for something like for a committee that we might want to create in the future that may very well need to have an employee or two from the city,” Clark said.
Other council members agreed. Ultimately, McAlister supported the motion to approve the revisions, including Showalter’s change.
“I appreciate everybody’s input,” McAlister said, while adding that he felt “a clear-cut case is usually a little easier to work with.”
