Hello everyone,
How many of you would rather have "General State Law" govern a city council verses a "City Charter"?
I think the FIRST STEP to taking back control of our local city government(s) is to vote out the city charter and replace with general law.
It looks as if general law would keep a better handle of the actions of a city council. Of special interest to me is finding ways to hold city officials accountable for their actions when they break a law by omission or any other means. Most important is for the citizens to have an avenue to lodge complaint against a city council or city official. Then if a city council is found to breach or break state general laws, we citizens likely have better recourse then with use of a loosely translated and toothless city charter. What I'd like to see are ways to enforce laws on behalf of us citizens so we don't have to sue our city council members into behaving ethically or abide by the state law constitution.
I'm unhappy with the Santa Rosa City Charter. There are no enforcement provisions for breach of ethics or charter violations (constitutional document). I suppose it will take a city wide vote to expel the city charter document and replace it with general law. A lot of work to collect signatures for a measure on the ballot. Any shortcuts? LOL
Link below is a good comparison chart of the difference in powers of general law vs. city charter.
https://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/Albuquerque4_-_General_Law_City_v_Charter_City.pdf