San Diego Rules Committee Meeting of May 16, 2018: Records Management, Charter Transparency, and Charter Review Proposals
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
San Diego Rules Committee Meeting – May 16, 2018
The Rules Committee of the San Diego City Council met on May 16, 2018, with committee members Bree Ward and Kate present (Council President Cole absent due to illness). The meeting covered records management updates, a charter amendment to enforce a 1992 transparency law, and a discussion of five charter amendment proposals from a previous review. A proposed housing bond ballot measure was postponed to June 13, 2018.
Consent Calendar
- Approval of committee actions from April 11, 2018 – approved by unanimous consent.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Stephen Russell (Executive Director, San Diego Housing Federation) thanked the committee for rescheduling the housing bond ballot measure discussion to June 13. He presented a report from the California Housing Partnership Corporation showing the deepening housing crisis and urged action on the bond proposal.
- Beryl Flum (League of Women Voters, 1577 Vista Clara, La Jolla) supported the charter amendment to merge Article 15 into the charter body, as recommended by the League's charter review committee.
- Robert McNamara (District 3) supported a charter amendment to rename the Ethics Commission to the San Diego Fair Political Practices Commission, noting that most violations are inadvertent and the name change aligns with the state commission. He also supported the Charter Section 225 amendment.
Discussion Items
Housing Bond Ballot Measure Proposal
The item, "Further Consideration of a Ballot Measure Proposal by the Housing Federation Regarding a Proposed Housing Bond," was removed from the agenda at the request of Stephen Russell. The committee agreed to hear it at the June 13, 2018, Rules Committee meeting.
Records Management Amendments (Item 1)
City Clerk Liz Maland presented proposed amendments to the municipal code records retention provisions and City Clerk Administrative Guidelines. The key change is transitioning from department-specific records disposition schedules to a citywide master records schedule, which is current best practice. The new structure is intended to promote consistency, reduce liability, and lay groundwork for electronic records management. The committee forwarded the amendment to the full council for approval (motion by Kate, seconded by Bree, unanimous aye).
Charter Section 225 Amendment (Item 2)
Council President Pro Tem Barbara Bree presented a ballot measure to amend Charter Section 225, originally approved by 86% of voters in 1992 to require disclosure of business interests in city contracts. The section has been unenforceable due to vague language. The proposed amendment clarifies disclosure requirements: names of natural persons receiving more than 10% of contract amount or owning more than 10% of the entity, and applies to transactions requiring council approval. Exemptions for public agencies and publicly traded companies. The committee voted unanimously to forward the measure to the full council for consideration for the November 6, 2018, ballot, with a second committee review scheduled before final council action.
Charter Amendment Proposals from 2015-2016 Charter Review (Item 3)
Senior Chief Deputy City Attorney Priscilla Dugard reported on five proposals: (1) moving sections from Article 15 (strong mayor) to Article III (legislative power); (2) moving Sections 260 and 265 to Article 4 (the Mayor); (3) consolidating independent non-mayoral departments into a new article; (4) moving Planning Commission duties to municipal code; (5) renaming Ethics Commission to Fair Political Practices Commission. Cost concerns were raised: each ballot measure costs approximately $500,000, making the total potential cost $2.5 million. The committee discussed consolidation and timing. A motion by Councilmember Kate, seconded by Councilmember Ward, directed the City Attorney to bring these proposals back to the Rules Committee in 2019 for further review, with consideration of the 2020 election cycle. The motion passed unanimously.
Key Outcomes
- Records Management Amendments: Forwarded to full council for approval. (Unanimous)
- Charter Section 225 Amendment: Forwarded to full council for ballot placement, with a second committee review pending. (Unanimous)
- Charter Proposals from 2015-2016: Deferred to 2019 for further study and potential ballot placement in 2020. (Unanimous)
- Housing Bond Ballot Measure: Rescheduled to June 13, 2018, Rules Committee meeting.
All votes were unanimous.
Meeting Transcript
Well, good afternoon, everybody. I am going to call to order our Rules Committee meeting of May 16th, 2018. Let the record reflect that we have committee members Bree Ward and Kate with us today. Council President Cole, unfortunately is ill and unable to join us. So we will turn to the approval of the committee actions. Our committee record of actions from April 11th will be approved by unanimous consent unless they are pulled for discussion. Seeing none, they are approved. We will now turn to non-agenda public comment. Do we have any members of the public on non-agenda? We do not. Turning right along. Hold on. Yeah, yeah, we'll get we'll get to you just a second, Mr. Russell. Turning to members of the committee. Any committee comment? No. Okay. Very good. So at the request of uh Stephen Russell, who is the executive director of the San Diego Housing Federation, uh, the item which is called further consideration of a ballot measure proposal by the Housing Federation regarding a proposed housing bond, uh that was removed from today's agenda. So that will be heard at our June 13th rules committee hearing. Mr. Russell, would you like to come forward and make any comments? Thank you. Thank you. Members of the committee, uh I am Stephen Russell, Executive Director of the San Diego Housing Federation. And I'm here today to uh thank the Council President and Absentia and all of you for uh delaying the hearing until June 13th. We are reviewing the draft ordinance, conducting additional research and additional dialogue in the community with the hopes that we can cue up the best possible discussion when we next come before you. Uh I also want to take the opportunity to share with you if you should have copies on your desk of a report that was just released today from the California Housing Partnership Corporation that uh is a benchmark. It's an annual report that serves to document the current state of the housing market for moderate and low-income households in the region, and it's intended to provide critical data for decision makers at all levels to use and evaluating uh performance and guide future decisions. Uh I'll be blunt that the latest findings really show that the housing crisis is deepening, which should surprise no one. I would just say that at a time when the Board of Sandag is asking the state to lower its expectations about the housing needs of our regions, at a time when the proposed City of San Diego budget calls for the wholesale allocation of housing production funds to temporary homelessness solutions, at a time when the county is stockpiling cash reserves in the face of a growing health and human services crisis, and at a time when this uh our bond proposal is being considered. This report underscores the urgency for taking action, provides the data that I believe you, as our elected officials need for making informed decisions on all of these matters. So we look forward to continuing this discussion and thank you again for rescheduling the item to the June meeting. Thank you, Mr. Russell. Appreciate those comments. We'll look forward to the discussion next month. Are there any comments from the mayor, IBA, City Attorney? Uh anybody else. Seeing none, moving right along. We will now move to our discussion agenda. Item number one is a report from the City Clerk proposing amendments to the municipal code records retention provisions and city clerk administrative guidelines. I want to welcome our City Clerk and her trusted staff here this afternoon. How much time would you like for your presentation? I'm going to ask for 10 minutes, but I'm going to try to do it in much less. We we love that. We love the sound of that. Please proceed. Thank you so much.
openpublica.com