This Work Session is designed to determine the Council's interest in moving the identified technical changes forward to the May 2015 ballot.  Those amendments identified or determined to be policy items will be given additional public participation through focus group, survey and any other public forum the Council deems appropriate.  Policy amendments would be placed on a ballot later than May 2015.   The first attachment itemizes both the technical and policy amendments for ballot sequencing.
 

Amendments to the City Charter require a vote of the citizens and therefore a mail-in ballot election was budgeted in FY15 (July 1, 2014- June 30, 2015).  There would also be some small reprinting costs associated with updating the Charter with the measures that pass.

The review and possible election of Charter amendments support the following Council Goal:

11. Effective governance

REGIONAL PLAN:
Goal ED.1. Create a healthy environment for business by ensuring transparent, expeditious, and predictable government processes.
Goal ED.7. Continue to promote and enhance Flagstaff's unique sense of place as an economic development driver.

Council discussed this item earlier this year on January 21, March 11, and October 28 in work sessions.  It initially gave direction to conduct a  comprehensive review of the City Charter through a City Manager-appointed resident committee, resulting in development of amendments for Council consideration by using citizen input, with a goal of presenting these to the voters in March or May 2015.  Most recently Council asked for additional options for public input beyond the citizen committee, even possible rewrite of the Charter,  potentially delaying some or all of the changes beyond a May 2015 election.

This meeting is intended to review and give guidance on the following options:

1.  Recommend division of Charter changes into categories ready for the May 2015 ballot which are more technical and have received sufficient public review.  Council would need to call the election by January 2015.  If Council goes forward with this option, the City Attorney's Office, along with the Clerk and Deputy City Manager Jerene Watson will proceed to prepare language appropriate for the ballot for each recommended change to the Charter.
2.  Create additional public discussion opportunities, such as focus groups, on those proposals Council agrees are more policy-driven that would come back again for Council discussion and direction, and fall to a later ballot than May 2015.
3.  Consider allowing an elected committee to rewrite a City Charter which could incorporate all recommended changes into a comprehensively updated document that aligns with changes in State law if the committee chooses to consider and accept Staff and Council recommendations.

Recapping the progress of this public process and Council guidance:  Council majority gave direction to conduct a comprehensive review of the City Charter in a March 2014 Council meeting through a City Manager-appointed committee.  Twelve residents worked over four months in ten meetings to develop 20 recommendations generated from the Committee members and staff.  Their work was facilitated by  a Deputy City Manager, City Clerk and City Attorney.  A series of footnotes accompany the recommendations in those instances where State law supersedes the Charter due to the number of questions.  This has been common practice from prior Charter amendment changes.  Finally, the Committee felt it important to capture items which were discussed for the City Manager and Council, but did not move these forward with any recommendation.  They are found in the final attachment.

The City Manager took their report and added recommendations, predominantly supporting the Committee's recommendations. Under State law, each change to the Charter must be considered by the voters independently. Because there were so many changes discussed, the Committee and the City Manager felt it important to limit the recommendations to twenty amendments.  By forwarding the technical changes for the May ballot, it helps resolve the 'long ballot' issue, minimizing ballot fatigue.

The Manager recommended against two items. Additionally, in consultation with the City Attorney in order to ensure compliance with State law, consolidated two items. He also recommended that one of the "No Action" items (regarding the sale of property) be moved to the technical list consideration. One additional advantage of putting smaller groups of items on multiple ballots is that it allows for one or two changes that may be recommended pending the outcome of the Phoenix and Tucson lawsuit against the State requiring consolidated elections.

Categorizing the recommendations by technical or house-keeping clean ups for the May ballot and then working on broader policy amendments for a later ballot  in order to seek additional public dialogue keeps the number of amendments to a manageable number on the ballots.  Fewer items increases the odds of voters completing the ballot in full.

The City Manager Appointed a Citizen Advisory Committee and ultimately any Charter amendments require a vote of the electorate.  Therefore the following levels of community involvement are associated with this agenda item.

Consult
Involve
Empower

The suggestion by a Councilmember to consider scrapping the entire Charter and seating a committee to re-write it is not recommended at this time due to the length of such a process and the potential for negative, unintended consequences which were not considered during the drafting and implementation of the original Charter in 1958.