PD Endorsement Measure I &J : Support updates to Santa Rosa’s charter

Santa Rosa’s charter doesn’t begin with a grand preamble (“We the people …”), but it is the city’s constitution. The charter establishes the framework for municipal government and defines responsibilities of ranking officials including the mayor and city manager. Other sections address contracts, ethics, public participation in city government and more.

Only the voters can change the charter, and Santa Rosa’s charter says revisions are allowed just once every 10 years.

Charter amendments, like constitutional amendments, can instigate political free-for-alls. This year, however, the City Council bypassed two potentially controversial proposals: pay raises for council members and allowing voters to choose the mayor in Sonoma County’s largest city.

Instead, the council put two relatively benign amendments on the Nov. 8 ballot.

Measure I recognizes that Santa Rosa switched from at-large elections to district elections for the City Council beginning in 2018.

Measure J clarifies some ambiguities and updates language to reflect present practices. Among other things, it affirms the city manager’s duty to manage emergency operations, clarifies the scope of the Board of Public Utilities’ responsibilities and adopts gender- and citizenship-neutral language.

Measure J also allows the City Council to adopt multiyear budgets and propose charter revisions on an as-needed basis.

From our perspective, the revisions provision is the most impactful recommendation of the citizen committee that reviewed the charter.

There is a high bar for constitutional amendments. Changing the U.S. Constitution requires a two-thirds majority in each house of Congress and approval by three-quarters of the states. There have been just 27 amendments in 234 years.

California’s constitution changes more often. It was rewritten in 1879 and has been amended almost 500 times since then. Yet changes require voter approval and must be proposed by supermajorities of the Legislature or via petition, with a much steeper signature requirement than other initiatives.

We don’t foresee a rush to pack Santa Rosa’s ballot with charter amendments. But the present rules needlessly shackle the council and the local electorate.

Here’s an example: Council members opted against asking voters about electing a mayor at least in part because approval would have triggered a need for new City Council district boundaries — the third set in four election cycles.

Had this been on the ballot in 2020, six council districts could have been drawn following the census, with a mayor elected at large for the first time this November. But because charter amendments were on the ballot in 2012, the council was prohibited from proposing an elected mayor prior to this year.

If Measure J is approved, voters might get a crack at deciding whether they want to choose their mayor, like Petaluma, Windsor and dozens of other cities, before new district lines are drawn after the 2030 census.

Santa Rosa dropped at-large elections to settle a California Voting Rights Act lawsuit, and the City Council is now more diverse and has three members from west of Highway 101, including the first council member from Roseland.

Some critics of district elections would like to see Measure I fail, but that alone wouldn’t force a change. Besides, no city has prevailed in a California Voting Rights Act lawsuit, and there is no reason to believe Santa Rosa would be the first. The city could spend millions on litigation and end up where it started. Besides, district elections have promoted competition and produced a more diverse City Council. That’s bad?

The Press Democrat recommends yes votes for Measure I and Measure J.

You can send letters to the editor to letters@pressdemocrat.com.