South Lake Tahoe City Council to discuss possible change to Charter City

SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, Calif. - When the City formed in 1965 it was incorporated as a general law city for the purpose of having more local control over public services such as police, fire, and snow removal.

Now there is discussion about changing to a charter city. During their March 5 meeting, Councilmember Cody Bass asked that this subject come forward at a future meeting and Councilmembers Jason Collin and Devin Middlebrook said they were interested in learning more about what the differences are between the two, and what it would mean to South Lake Tahoe to switch.

During Tuesday's meeting on June 4, the South Lake Tahoe City Council will decide if they want to start exploring a possible change from being a general law city to becoming a charter city.

City Attorney Heather Stroud is asking the Council these questions:

(1) Does City Council want to initiate the process to become a charter city at this time?
(2) If so, which pathway does City Council want to use: elected charter commission, City Council-appointed charter committee, or City Council-drafted charter?
(3) If so, what are the most important municipal affairs City Council desires to address in a city charter?

The main differences between charter cities and general law cities:

General law cities may enact and enforce ordinances to advance the public health, safety, and welfare that are not in conflict with state law. Charter cities may enact ordinances in conflict with state law in areas of “municipal affairs.” Charter cities are required to follow state law in matters of statewide concern.

In a general law city, the police department is under the control of the chief of police. Charter cities may establish other forms of governance, including police commissions or independent police auditors.

General law cities must have at least five council members, a city clerk, city treasurer, police chief, and fire chief. The city council may by ordinance establish the city manager form of government, where the city manager carries out the policies of the council. Charter cities may establish other forms of government including having any number of councilmembers and a strong mayor form of government.

General law cities must conduct their elections in accordance with state law. Charter cities may establish municipal election procedures including all mail ballots, terms for elected officials, campaign finance limits, and redistricting commissions to establish city council districts.

Charter cities may establish rules and conditions for service of its officials, such as different rules than mandated by state law for conflicts of interest or incompatible offices. Charters may also establish certain positions not mandated for general law cities, such as a city auditor, and may increase the salary above state law levels for city councilmembers.

Types of municipal affairs (also known as the “home rule” provision) recognized by the courts include elections, finance, planning and land use, public contracts and prevailing wages, and employment and compensation:

General law cities are subject to the Public Contract Code’s procedural requirements for awarding public works contracts above a certain dollar threshold to the lowest responsible bidder. Charter cities may establish other procedures for awarding contracts, including best value awards and alternate contracting methods such as design-build and job order contracting.

The ability to avoid state prevailing wage requirements on locally-funded projects used to be a significant advantage to being a charter city. Senate Bill 7 (2013), however, imposed severe consequences for not paying prevailing wage and has altogether undermined this advantage.

General law cities and charter cities have the same taxing authority, except that
courts have upheld the authority of charter cities to establish real estate transfer taxes that exceed the limits imposed on general law cities.

(Full list of differences from California League of Cities - http://www.cacities.org/Resources-Documents/Resources-Section/Charter-Cities/Chart_General_Law_v-_Ch...)

In her report to the Council, Stroud says the trend over the last decade has been an expansion of areas defined as matters of statewide concern, and a corresponding contraction of areas defined as municipal affairs. Thus, there are not as many advantages to being a charter city as there used to be.

Bass said in March he wanted the City to investigate the change to establish higher transfer taxes.

As of the last census, there are 58 total counties in California, 44 are subject to General law and 14 are subject to the Home rule. There are 482 total municipalities in California, 361 of them are General law municipalities while the remaining 121 are Charter/Home rule cities.

The has been statewide discussion on the pros and cons of the two types of government. The last three major California cities to file for bankruptcy (Stockton, San Bernardino and Vallejo) have something in common: They are all charter cities. They have their own constitutions, or charters, granting them more freedom than non-charter cities to govern their affairs. Charter cities operate under their own rules and tax structures, designed to encourage enterprise, thus enticing entrepreneurs and investors to the area.

There are three ways a charter may be drafted by:
(1) a 15-member charter commission elected by voters;
(2) a charter committee appointed by the City Council;
(3) or the City Council itself.

A ballot measure to approve a charter may be submitted to the voters by either an elected charter commission or by the city council. A charter only may be adopted, amended, or repealed by majority voter approval.

The City Council meeting starts at 9:00 a.m. Tuesday in Council Chambers at the Lake Tahoe Airport.