Recommend that the City Council Adhere to the Council Referral Process Adopted by the City Council on December 4, 2007.  (Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft)
Recommendation that the City Council adhere to the Council referral process adopted by the City Council on December four, 27. The Senate was placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Rosa Ashcroft. Member Ashcraft. Thank you. And I it's probably somewhat ironic or not that we're hearing this almost at midnight. I was concerned about meetings going long and maybe lacking direction earlier on. And so I went back and I did a little research into the whole council referral process and how an item is placed on an agenda. And I learned that indeed another council back in 2007 brought this very issue of who could place an item, who and how place is an item on the agenda. And what I found is that that job really belongs to the city manager. But a council member could bring a referral, could do a council referral to place an agenda on the item. And then it is simply up to their colleagues to decide whether or not or what to do about that proposal. And in fact, in going back and doing my research, I would think that the attachment is familiar to at least one member of this council, because the Vice Mayor was a member of the council at that time. And I thought that there was a so there was a workshop that took place in November of 2007, and it was a priority setting workshop, and it was the council setting deciding what their priorities would be and how they would accomplish them. And the executive management team of the city wanted one of the topics to be addressed to be their dilemmas. So Department Head City Managers Dilemma When a council member requested some action or a report or something to be done and that staff member was not really clear on whether that was the will of the whole council or just this individual. And it put staff in an awkward position because they didn't want to be the one to say no. They never want to say no to us, of course. But at the same time they realized that the Council as a whole or an individual coming with those requests might not see the big picture and realize what this meant in terms of staff time, monetary expenditure, pushing one priority off to the side while another one I took its place. And so there was I thought it sound like a very good workshop that was done. The consultant put together a great report and the they looked at, among other things, methods used by other cities to determine council direction on a council members request. And there was a consensus of all five council members at the time to use the Fremont City Council's council referral process. And the the combination of this workshop was a next step section that included council referral process will be written up and implemented. And then on December 4th, 2007, at a City Council meeting, the City Council adopted a resolution referencing this November 13th, 27 meeting to add a council referral section at city council meetings and even where on the agenda would go. The staff report included the precise wording of the Fremont City Council referral process and a council referral form which we currently use as an attachment. And lastly, the Council referral process makes no distinction between the mayor and other council members placing an item on the agenda. And so the one and only way any of us would be able to request that an item be agendas is through the council referrals process. And then the precise wording of the Fremont City Council referral process was included in that staff report. So I'm suggesting that this is something that a previous council spent a lot of time going over a Saturday workshop at the library, and they decided that this was a good method to follow. And I think that for clarity, I mean, this is actually on the books, it's what was voted. And so that decision stands. And I'm just asking that we adhere to this procedure that has been previously adopted. Thank you. So I'd I'd like to actually clarify what you presented as there are minutes from the December 4th to 2007 meeting that are not included in your referral, that speak to some of what you're saying. But and I don't know if we're going to have this come back, but the motion for the resolution and the resolution that was that is included does speak to where the agenda item will go. And that was a 4 to 1 vote. It was not unanimous. And then the motion from. December 4th are separate minutes that are not here and that includes the motion was actually. Made by Mayor ah Johnson Councilmember Gilmore at that time in the matter as seconded it. But that included some of what but it was here from Fremont. It also included a point that it would be implemented in six months after adoption. The issue would be placed on the agenda to discuss whether council likes the practice and hear what the public thinks. And it's my understanding that that did not happen that come back in six months. So. And another way to look at this would be that we could have it come back and we could review it as a council. I am interested in hearing what my colleagues think. I think that enough information was actually included in this council referral form. To move forward tonight. But and we certainly have an actual witness to that event here. And if anyone would like to chime in, please feel free. Yes. Vice Mayor. I do think the whatever happened after this, the council referral process actually fixed the problem that we were having. And I think it puts some structure around. A council member going to the city manager or going to a staff person and making a request that was. Constituted allocation of staff time, basically without out a vote of the council. So I think and by and large, it's worked. The question of what gets on an agenda, I think this is. Was for that initiative type. I effort that was I think was going on at the time. And the question of what goes on a regular agenda I think is a little fuzzy as far as I read the charter and as far as I look at our rules. So I think there may be some. Some. A point in looking at how an agenda is constructed in a first place. But as far as I do think we should follow the the council referral process as far as we all go with council members and it's working so far and I, I support following what we have in that resolution from back in 2007. If there are other issues that. Are outside the scope of of this things getting on the agenda in another way. I think that might be something for what we talked about it. If there's a gap in our procedures, there's a gap in the charter that we look at it in the Rules Committee. I think we talked about that at one at one point. It's the order of business and what kind of priority that has with against all the other things we have to do. I'm not going to suggest that. As an outcome for tonight. I think we have enough to deal with aside from that and as council members and our staff certainly has enough to deal with now. So I'm fine with we follow our counsel referral. Process as is codified in that resolution. And we try and be mindful of the job in front of us so that we don't take too many detours. And I'd like to clarify, the resolution speaks to where it goes on the agenda. The most. The minutes speak to the process. And I think we all know the process. And the staff reports fills in the rest to Mr. Odiase. And. So oti. Thank you. I guess the. So the gist of this is that in order to get something on the agenda, that all five of us have to follow the same counsel referral process. And I think that kind of, you know, is a natural progression to the, you know, thought I expressed earlier about if we have new commissions that, you know, each council member has an opportunity to appoint a person because I think that council equity know is important, you know? We're all elected. But, you know, ultimately we all have one vote. And, you know, I, I have to commend the city manager for extending the courtesy that he extended to the previous mayor, that if the mayor wants to put something on the agenda, she has the courtesy to do that. But, you know. With great power comes great responsibility. And that's not from Spider-Man. That's from Voltaire. In case anyone wants to clarify that. And I think you know. We've seen in just a short time we've been here, you know, a couple of instances where, you know, I'm not sure that great responsibility was exercised with caution. You know, we had the first meeting on the Del Monte project that took up a considerable amount of time. And, you know, from what I understand, that was the mayor putting that on the agenda. There was no staff recommendation. There was no opportunity for members of council to sit there and sit up here and say, well, we think that's a good idea. I think that's a bad idea. You know, can staff come back and give us a report? Can they evaluate, you know, the positive and negatives of this? Can they evaluate how we can do this or how we can't do this? And there was no staff report. And, I mean, to this day, you know, we still don't have a reason to why that meeting was here. I mean, I, I checked in the minutes and, you know, in the newspaper and said, well, that's because we want to do it because of you. Councilmember de Song in your concern. And then, you know, there was another article online here that basically said, well, you know, staff made a mistake. You know, they didn't provide lack of supporting information. So, you know, maybe if everyone followed the council referral process, you know, then staff would have an opportunity to hear the input of the council, all of us, all five of us, and put together that process. And then I thought that meeting that we had on on that Wednesday, I guess I'll politely describe it is interesting because again, I think if we had an opportunity to go through the council referral process and have all of us say, Well, what do we want to see in a workshop? You know, what do we want staff to give us as guidelines? What do we want staff to give us as, you know, suggestions? So I think that would have been a lot more productive meeting because it ended up being, in the end, a free for all that that didn't follow any agenda , that people were getting up and talking and not filling out speaker slips and raising their hands and. Yeah. I think there could have been a little more order to that. So I guess, you know, tomorrow's the first day of spring training, you know, two strikes. And, you know, I'm not sure I really want to have a third strike. So what I'm willing to do is to try this way, you know, maybe for a year and then see if it's working. And, you know, if, you know, we discover and staff says, well, I only really need the mayor to have the opportunity to put things on the agenda without going through the formal process. Then we can come back and revisit it. But, you know, I think, you know, we all should should be treated equally and we all should be. You know, if one person can put it a can go to the city manager and say, I want to put this on the agenda. I think we all should have that that ability. And if we all have if four of us have to go through the staff process, then I think all five of us need to go through that process. So that's my thoughts. Member day. Thank you, Mayor Spencer. On the matter of the first council meeting, my sense is that we were in a interesting situation where we were running up against time. And in terms of when you can file something. And so I so I understand, Mayor Spencer, his desire to do agenda is the matter. That's the agenda on the regarding the Del Monte because there was a time frame and and there was it was just one of those odd things that every now and then you have to do some kind of pretzel shaped. And and I think within that context, I think all of us did our level best. On the second matter. I thought that, well, it's a workshop. So, you know, I think there are two issues. The first issue is agenda raising the matter, which is what is at the heart of this right now, this discussion. So in terms of agenda raising the matter, I had no problem with having a Wednesday workshop. Now, there were. Now, in terms of the meeting itself, you know, there were differing opinions. I you know, I don't have any particular opinions about the meeting. The meeting to me was a workshop. But nonetheless, there were differing opinions. But that is separate from from the heart of the matter. The heart of the matter for right now is agenda izing items. Now, if it is true that that there is some deference given by city managers to mayors. And that is a and I always thought that was the case. That is a deference and a traditional practice that I can live with for the reasons that I do believe that, as you had indicated, Spider-Man says, with great power comes great responsibility. And I suspect that, you know, as other mayors in the past, all mayors in the future and now will rise to the responsibility of this position and and deal with matters and place them on the agenda accordingly. So. I am not of the opinion of treating the mayor differently from not differently from the city council members. The mayor is different, and it is my understanding that there has been some deference given when it comes to interactions between city managers and the mayor. Maybe I'm wrong on that. It's just been my opinion. I've always thought that there was. But I do think that, you know, we're all. You know, if there needs to be pushback, the mayor can be rightfully pushed back, as I'm sure in the past, mayors have always been rightfully pushed, push back by, you know, by the city manager who, you know, in the past and to this day who we trust to do a level best professional job for the for the residents of Alameda. Oh, my. My thoughts on this. I'd like to speak to this. If you go to the minutes back from December 7th, there is discussion from the attorney at that time. Mayor Johnson inquired whether one council member directing a member amounted to be placed on the agenda is a charter violation. And the attorney responded that making a request is not a charter violation. That is up to the city manager to put something on the agenda. If you're here would be he determines that is an operational matter that comes under the authority of the charter. It doesn't matter that one council member may have suggested it. However, no council member individual has the authority to direct the city manager to do a certain thing, a certain way if it's under operations. And. That's my understanding, is that all of us can equally suggest something to the city manager, and then the city manager ultimately determines what what is being put up, what actually ends up on the agenda. However, if in fact. The there's something that you want to have on the roof, but some other matter. And I think you do a referral for it. Now, I haven't done any. Me, personally, I haven't done. The only to I haven't done any of the referrals. I have done the special meeting. And that the mayor calling a special meeting something separate from what is on here. And then regards to the first item. I and I appreciate Member De Sykes comments. There was a 30 day period to take action and and I would actually suggest at some point that that be looked at in regards to if any council member thinks that there's something that comes up that we're not paying attention to for whatever reason, that that be brought to the city manager. And I would, you know, again then and I would expect actually more than likely that our city manager would accommodate any of us. And it's my understanding that that is how the process is explained and has been working. Yes, I think I. Think that's the key word in the referral process. If you notice, it's not a direct staff, but it's direct manager. So that the referral was to prevent spurious direction from. Opinion from a single council member. Regardless it is. And when there was a direction and having to do with operation or expenditure that would come a majority vote of the council that was that was at the root. Of. Setting this up and the referral form the way it is. I just want to make it clear, though, I think what I'm trying to defend, the argument that I'm trying to defend is and I could be wrong, but if there has in the past and I'm not I don't just mean with the manager, Russo and the previous mayor, Mary Gilmore. I don't get that. I mean, many, many city managers, if there have been, has been a deference given to by the city manager to requests made by the mayor so long as it was reasonable. And it didn't require any kind of, you know, going through the the the the process. Whether the process was the one that was said in 2007 or the process that was put in place per the ordinance that's already in there, that that specifies that we have to turn something in at Monday at 5:00, blah, blah, blah. If that difference has been there, I'm arguing that I don't think that we should now do away with that difference. If at some point in time it becomes unreasonably overbearing, then, you know, that's why I say, you know, I have all trust that this city manager and any future city manager would say, you know what, I'm out . And they would first say that to the mayor. So if I could address that, you know, we spent a lot of time on this council talking about transparency and allowing the public to understand what we do when we when we take action and the the tradition of deference. And I you know, I don't dispute that it's been there is not something that was voted by this body and it is not something that you will find written down or, you know, could search for in the city's archives or on the website. I think that we are better served as a body and we serve the public that we that elected us better when we are a council that adheres to rules and regulations that are in place. And three of us on this body are attorneys. And we understand the concept of stare decisis, roughly translated to what let the decision stand. And it doesn't have to be a unanimous decision, of course. So I feel that what I'm trying to do is make. Bring attention to this procedure. That, again, has already been. Approved by a previous council and for all intents and purposes has been in place. And especially now, as we're starting out the new council, we have a lot before us with some very substantive issues that are coming before us. We want to make sure that we're using our staff's time and also the public's time with meetings and agendas that they have to sit through and listen to. We want to make sure that we're we're doing that judiciously and prudently. And so, again, as as the mayor pointed out, I think we all would agree with her. There is nothing that would keep any of us from going to the city manager and saying, Mr. City Manager, there is an issue I think is important and should come before the council. What do you think? And trust me, he'll he he's he's a very wise, experienced man with a lot of depth of experience in city government and was formerly a city attorney. He'll he'll he'll listen to us. And I, you know, so I don't think in that regard any, you know, any special requests that anybody had as long as, again, that it's operational and it's within reason can still be addressed. So I don't think we're foreclosing anyone from from taking that course of action. But at this point in time, I'm ready to call for the question. Their motion. I will move that the city council adhere to the Council referral process adopted by the City Council on December four, 27, as referenced in my Council referral. I'll second. And discussion. My my discussion quickly is one, we had a similar issue way back in 1997. And while it wasn't involving the mayor at the time, it was involving a city council member. And issues like this arise from time to time. And I guess something happened in 2007 that led to that. My sense is that there are two incidences that are leading to this issue being discussed tonight. From my interpretation, I don't I don't I don't see them as defining moments that the system is broken, quite frankly, in terms of the first item, it was just one of those odd things, you know, you just had to do it in terms of the second item. I do believe it is a city's city mayors prerogative to to call special meetings. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's in the charter. So, you know, you might say there are two strikes. I. I'm not seeing these strikes. I mean, I have no vested interest to defend this. But I do feel like that that that this is, you know, a an issue of mayoral prerogative and an issue of the council's relationship relative to that and to the city manager. And and the practice that I've seen in the past, the deference that I do believe had been given in the past, I see no reason why that ought not to be continue. And I think we can all agree that, you know, so long as, you know, we proceed reasonably. The other comments. BRODY You know, and to kind of give the flip side, you know, I'm not here to attack Mayor Spencer, but I'm concerned that, you know, we have this process in place and I think it's worked. We had the referral on the Park District and collaborating and we had a really robust discussion. We gave staff directions. They came back with a resolution that that fit exactly what we wanted to do. And the idea got fleshed out. We all had an opportunity to weigh in and discuss it, and I think we can be very proud of the end product. The same thing with the you know, the traffic idea. The traffic study idea. Now, I'm not quite exactly sure it was the exact same idea that, you know, it may not be the same that you envision it when you first put in the referral councilman or de song. But, you know, I think the amount of time that staff has put into it and and given thought to it and researched it and looked at all the different studies that have been out there, you know, I think we're going to have a really quality product that we can all be proud of when we're done. So I think that, you know, that's I like that process. I think that process works, you know, when we still don't have, you know, the vice mayor brought up, again, a rules committee. You know, I think if if that. Meaning. While I do Grant, the mayor has the project to call a special meeting. Yes, that's true. But I think if we'd been able to go through a more thorough discussion during the council referral period and give staff some direction, you know, we might have, you know, some actual concrete action items that we could discuss like a rules committee and some other agenda change ideas and things like that. So I guess I'm concerned that as Councilmember Ashcraft stated about the transparency and I, I got an email a couple of weeks ago about from a Sunshine Committee member, you know, wanting to decrease the amount of of notice that the city gives for our agenda item . So I guess I'm just concerned that if one person can put a not fully vetted item on the agenda and we're moving towards, you know, a discussion of, you know, contracting our transparency instead of expanding our transparency that, you know, we're not going to get the best ideas and we're not going to get them that are not fully baked and we're not going to get them that, you know, that the public has a real opportunity to discuss. So I mean, I, I do think maybe this is something we try on a trial basis. And, you know, if we want to revisit it in six months and revisit it in a year, you know, I think that would be a good idea. And if we say, well, it's kind of stupid, you know, we don't need that, or we say, yes, it's working, you know, let's let's keep it in place. But, you know, I I'm fully open to having some, you know, time limit on it. As we all know, start to get used to each other and learn how to work together. Any other comments? Vice Mayor. This information the. Was adopted. 27 did not. The mayor calling a special meeting, that is. I remember. That special meetings were called by the mayor after the. Bay is just reaffirming. We already have on the books. Of course, I'd like to cover the question after hearing your comments. All those in favor. I suppose I. I suppose so. I suppose. So. Three, two, two. A motion carries. And did you want to explain your proposition? I just. Did. Okay. So he explained, I will be opposing because I think that it's unfortunate that this was brought. I think that I have been afforded the same courtesies by the city managers were afforded to the prior mayor. And I think that a review of the referrals by the prior mayor make it clear that that was in fact the practice. So I would submit that it's unfortunate that I am being afforded a different respect from council members than the prior mayor. And with that, I will. Oh, actually, I think there's more on the agenda. Council Communications Number ten.