The charter is divided into 17 articles: Article I. - Name
and Succession; Article II. - Boundaries of City and Council Districts; Article
III. - City Powers; Article IV. - Elective Officers; Article V. - The Council; Article
VI. - City Manager; Article VII. - Other Officers, Departments and Employees
and General Provisions; Article VIII. - Appointive Boards and Commissions; Article
IX. – Elections; Article X. - Financial Procedures; Article XI. - Revenue Bonds;
Article XII. - Contracts and Purchasing; Article XIII. – Franchises; Article
XIV. - Municipal Campaign Financing and Conflict of Interest; Article XV. -
Definitions and Miscellaneous; Article XVI. - Charter Amendment:
Article XVII. - Charter Commission. Within each article are
sections which elucidate the provisions under the article.
I think I’ll be going through the charter article by
article, discussing what the last review came up with and my personal comments
on where I think we should go in 2020.
ARTICLE I -- Name and Succession
This one was easy. The last commission had no recommended
changes. Section one covers the name of the city. Section two covers that any
existing ordinances/laws in effect will not be changed unless they violate the
new provisions of the charter. And Section three covers rights and liabilities
of the city.
ARTICLE II -- Boundaries of City and Council Districts
This is where the 2010 commission saw started to see the
need for some changes. Section one sets the city boundaries. Since this is
covered by state law regarding annexation, there is really nothing to look at
there. Section two just says that there will be 6 council districts. If we wish
to have a larger council or if we wish to have a smaller council, this is where
it would be done. I don’t recommend changes at this time but others might
decide that the size of the city warrants more citizen governance or that the
council is too large. Section three is about district boundaries. The 2010
commission was concerned about how boundaries are set and their recommendation
(put on the ballot) was:
Where practical. The City Council
may also consider the following factors: (a) topography, (b) geography, (c)
cohesiveness, contiguity, integrity, and compactness or territory and (d) community
of interest of the Districts. In considering the preceding factors, the Council
may also consider:
1.
Community Identity-boundaries should respect, support,
and build the sense of local community.
2.
Compactness and Contiguity-boundaries should enable
ease of voter access to all parts of a District, and the District's area should
be territorially linked.
3.
Recognition of Natural and Man-Made Features boundaries
shall account for recognizable features that contribute to community identity
and shape the social, political and economic life of the City.
4.
Administrative Units- Boundaries should respect census
tract and precinct boundaries, although irregularities in Council District
boundaries lines may result.
5.
Population Growth-Boundaries should reflect likely
growth patterns and anticipate future population growth.
While not considered in 2010, I am concerned about the
process of changing boundaries. In 2021, when the census data from the 2010
census was released, the then council considered the boundaries in response to
shifting populations. The goal is to set boundaries which are reasonably equal
in population. However, what I witnessed was an over concern by some
councilmembers that their district would change in a way that they didn’t like.
The result was that no district changes were made despite the fact that there
was significant population differences in the districts (I don’t recall what
the differences were, but the council was advised by their consultant that
change should be made and they decided to leave it as it was). Perhaps the 2020
commission should consider the recommendations from 2010 as well as a trigger
figure for forcing boundary changes.
ARTICLE III – City Powers
This Article elucidates the powers of the city, the extent
of those powers, and intergovernmental relations. All of these were deemed to
be appropriate in 2010. However we did have an impassioned plea to add the
Youth and Family Master Plan to the charter. The proposed wording for a Section
4 was:
The City declares its commitment to establishing a comprehensive process that fosters a community that cares and engages all members of the community and its leaders who have a stake in promoting positive youth and family development in the City. The City endorses a process that is inclusive and based on collaboration, focuses 011 preventive measures instead of negative social behaviors that have become entrenched, is supported by proven research, is specific to our community needs and one that will be sustainable. This comprehensive process will serve to develop, monitor and sustain the Youth and Family Master Plan.
The 2020 commission might wish to reconsider this section
and/or change it to reflect our current Pomona’s Promise and Compassionate City
initiatives. While it probably wouldn’t really make a change to these important
programs, it would codify them in our main legal document.
I think this is enough to try to digest in one sitting
(or perhaps too much?). My plan is to write one of these about every 2 weeks
from now until about October when it is hoped the process of selecting the 2020
commission will begin. Next up, Elective Offices and City Council.
