The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPackets - Council Packets (1401) AGENDA ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL AND GOVERNMENT REVIEW TASK FORCE JOINT STUDY SESSION JANUARY 8, 2001 ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE STUDY SESSION - AT OR AFTER 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 1. GOVERNMENT REVIEW TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS: a. Selection of Vice Mayor b. 5 or 7 Council members c. Elected by Districts vs. At large 2. AGENDA PRODUCTION DEADLINES ADJOURNMENT The Town of Oro Valley complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If any person with a disability needs any type of accommodation, please notify Kathryn Cuvelier, Town Clerk, at 297-2591. POSTED: 01/05/01 4:30 p.m. lh TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: January 8,2001 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCIL FROM: Kathryn Cuvelier, CMC Town Clerk SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT REVIEW TASK FORCE SUMMARY: On April 19, 2000 the following citizens were appointed to serve on the Government Review Task Force: Jim Kriegh, Vice Chair Marilyn Cook Don Dvorak Richard Feinberg Larry Holden The Task Force's Scope of Work was to study and make recommendations to the Town Council as outlined below: • Appointments to Boards/Commissions • Vice Mayor Selection Policy • Town Council Policies & Procedures • Advisory Board &commission Rules review • Increasing Council membership from 5 to 7 members The GRTF is ready to present their recommendations to the Town Council regarding: • Vice Mayor Selection Process • 5 to 7 member Council • District System ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vice Mayor Selection Process—Draft Ordinance 2. 5 to 7 member Council Report 3. District System Report q •Vi' ent R: iew Task For e ,A.A.d Town Man.ger ORAFT ORDINANCE NO. (0) 00 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA, RELATING TO PUBLIC OFFICERS; AMENDING BY REFERENCE "ARTICLE 2-1, COUNCIL" AND "ARTICLE 2-2, MAYOR," OF THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY; REPEALING ALL RESOLUTIONS, ORDINANCES, AND RULES OF THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY IN CONFLICT THEREWITH; PRESERVING THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES THAT HAVE ALREADY MATURED AND PROCEEDINGS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEGUN THEREUNDER. WHEREAS, on September 27, 1989, the Town Council did approve Ordinance Number (0) 89-21, which adopted that certain document entitled, "Oro Valley Town Code, Chapter 2, Mayor and Council," as the second chapter of the official Town Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ARS § 9-272.01 and Ordinance No. (0) 95-82, the Council ordained that the Mayor shall be directly elected by the voters of the Town for a term of four (4) years and the Council shall elect one of the Council Members as Vice-Mayor; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the town that the fair and impartial election of the Vice- Mayor from among the Council Members is made by the Mayor and Council for a term of two (2) years; and WHEREAS, the Town has deemed it necessary to strike the existing Articles 2-1 and 2-2 and replace them with new text to clarify the duties and office of the Mayor and Vice-Mayor, and how these positions are affected by either parties' absence, resignation, or abandonment of office. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and the Council of the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona that the certain document, known as "The Code of the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona," is hereby amended as follows: SECTION 1. That "Article 2-1, Council" and "Article 2-2, Mayor," of the Oro Valley Town Code, three copies of which are on file in the office of the Town Clerk of the Town of Oro Valley, which document was made a public record by Resolution No. (R) - of the Town of Oro Valley, is hereby referred to, adopted, and made part hereof as if fully set out in this Ordinance, the provisions thereof to become effective on the day of , 2001. SECTION 2. Pursuant to ARS § 41-1346, the governing body of each county, city, town, or other political subdivision shall maintain efficient record management for local public records and it has been determined that this Ordinance is a public record with three copies of said Ordinance to remain on file in the office of the Town Clerk. 2-2 Amendment(24) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 SECTION 3. All Oro Valley Ordinances, Resolutions, or Motions and parts of Ordinances, Resolutions, or Motions of the Council in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 4. if any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED by Mayor and Town Council, the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona, this day of , 2000. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY ATTEST: Paul H. Loomis, Mayor Kathryn E. Cuvel i er, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Dan L. Dudley, Town Attorney 2-2 Amendment(24) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 ARTICLE 2-1 COUNCIL DRAF r 2-1-1 Mayor and Council 2-1-2 Eligibility 2-1-3 Office of Mayor 2-1-4 Office of Vice-Mayor 2-1-5 Vacancy 2-1-6 Compensation 2-1-7 Financial Disclosure 2-1-1 MAYOR AND COUNCIL A. Elected Officers. The elected officers of the Town shall be a Mayor and four (4) Council Members, one of whom shall be elected by the voters as Mayor in accordance with this Article. The Mayor and Council Members shall constitute the Council and shall continue in office until their successors are elected and sworn-in. Council Members shall serve four (4) year overlapping terms. B. Public Officers. The Mayor and Council are Public Officers as defined in ARS § 38- 502. C. Corporate Powers. The corporate powers of the Town shall be vested in the Council and shall be exercised only as directed or authorized by law. All powers of the Council shall be exercised by ordinance, resolution, order, or motion. D. Oath of Office. Immediately prior to assumption of the duties of office, each Council Member shall, in public, take and subscribe to the oath of office. E. Assumption of Duties. Council Members shall assume the duties of office at the regularly scheduled Council meeting next following the date of the General Election at which, or effective as of the date which, the Council Members were elected. F. Bond. Every Council Member shall have executed an official bond on their behalf paid by the Town, which shall be conditioned on the due and faithful performance of the Council Member's official duties, and payable for the benefit of the Town or any person who may be injured or aggrieved by the wrongful act or default of such officer in their official capacity. A person so injured or aggrieved may bring suit on such bond under provisions identical to those contained in ARS § 38-260. 2-1-2 ELIGIBILITY. Pursuant to ARS §§ 9-232 and 38-201, no person shall be eligible to any of the offices provided in this Article except a person of the age of not less than eighteen (18) years, who shall have 2-2 Amendment(24) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 been a qualified elector residing within the Town at the time of the election, and has resided in the Town for one (1) year next preceding the election. 2-1-3 OFFICE OF MAYOR A. Election. Beginning with the election to be held at the primary election in 1998, the Mayor of the Town of Oro Valley shall be directly elected by the qualified electors of the Town. The term of office of the Mayor shall be four (4) years or until a successor is elected and sworn-in. B. Qualification and Tenure. Except during the final year of the term being served, no incumbent may offer their nomination for the office of Mayor. Once an incumbent formally resigns from their duly elected office and nomination is deemed official upon the filing of nomination papers pursuant to ARS § 16-311(a) or by formal public declaration of candidacy for office, whichever comes first, may the incumbent be a candidate for the office of Mayor. C. Powers and Duties. The powers and duties of the Mayor shall include the following: 1. The Mayor shall be the Chief Executive officer of the Town. 2. The Mayor shall be the Chairperson of the Council and preside over its meetings. The Mayor may make and second motions and shall have a voice and vote in all its proceedings. 3. The Mayor shall enforce the provisions of this Code. 4. The Mayor shall execute and authenticate by his/her signature such instruments as the Council or any statutes, ordinances, or this Code shall require. 5. The Mayor shall make such recommendations and suggestions to the Council as is considered proper. 6. The Mayor may, by proclamation, declare a local emergency to exist due to fire, conflagration, flood, earthquake, explosion, war, bombing, or any other natural or man-made calamity or disaster or in the event of threat or occurrence of riot, rout, or affray or other acts of civil disobedience which endanger life or property within the Town. After such declaration of such emergency, the Mayor shall govern by proclamation and impose all necessary regulations to preserve the peace and order of the Town, including but not limited to: a. Imposition of a curfew in all or any portion of the Town. b. Ordering the closing of any business. c. Closing to public access any public building, street, or other public place. d. Calling upon regular or auxiliary law enforcement agencies and organizations within or without the political subdivision for assistance. 2-2 Amendment(24) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 7. The Mayor shall perform such other duties required by state statue and this Code as well as those duties required as Chief Executive officer of the Town. D. Leave of Office. The Mayor shall not leave the office of Mayor, ceasing to discharge the duties of Mayor, for a greater period than fifteen (15) days without the consent of the Council. E. Failure to Sign Documents. If the Mayor refuses or fails to sign any ordinance, resolution, contract, warrant, demand, or other document or instrument requiring his signature for five days consecutively, then three (3) members of the Council may, at any regular or special meeting, authorize the Vice-Mayor or, in his absence a Mayor Pro Tempore, to sign such ordinance, resolution, contract, warrant, demand, or other document or instrument which when so signed shall have the same force and effect as if signed by the Mayor. 2-1-4 OFFICE OF VICE-MAYOR A. Election. Beginning with the swearing-in of the Mayor following the general election of 1998 and at the first council meeting following the general election every two (2) years thereafter, the Mayor and Council shall elect one of its members as Vice-Mayor by a majority vote. B. Term. The Vice-Mayor shall serve at the pleasure of the Council for a term of two (2) years or until a successor is elected and sworn-in. C. Duties. The Vice-Mayor shall be appointed to perform the duties of the Mayor during his absence, pursuant to ARS § 9-236. In the event of a vacancy in the office of Mayor, the Vice-Mayor shall succeed to the office of Mayor until the end of the term to which the Vice-Mayor was elected or the end of the term to which the Mayor was elected, whichever comes first, and then a new Vice-Mayor shall be elected. 2-1-5 MAYOR PRO TEMPORE. In the absence of both the Mayor and the Vice-Mayor, the Council may designate another of its members to serve as Mayor Pro Tempore who shall have all the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the Mayor during such absence. 2-1-6 VACANCY A. Vacancy Defined. An office shall be deemed or considered vacant as provided for in ARS § 38-291. For the purposes of the Article governing the Mayor, Vice-Mayor, and Council Members, the words, terms, and phrases defined in this Article 2-2 Amendment(24) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 hereunder, but not limited to, shall have the meanings respectively assigned to them, unless a different meaning is plainly required by the context. B. Office of Mayor. 1. In the event of a vacancy in the office of the Mayor, the Vice-Mayor shall succeed to the office of Mayor. Any successor to the office shall become Mayor-in-Fact and entitled to all of the emoluments, powers, and duties of Mayor upon taking the oath of office. 2. A special election shall not be held to elect a new Mayor, but the Vice-Mayor shall act in the Mayor's stead until the end of the term for which the Mayor was elected or the end of the term to which the Vice-Mayor was elected, whichever comes first. If a vacancy is created in the office of Mayor due to the expiration of the Vice-Mayor's term, the council shall elect a Vice-Mayor for the remainder of the original Mayor's term from among the Council. C. Office of Vice-Mayor. In the event a vacancy is created in the office of Vice-Mayor, the Council shall elect one of its remaining members to fill the vacancy in accordance with this Article. D. Office of Council Member. In the event of a vacancy created in the office of Council Member, the Council shall fill such vacancy, by appointment, for the unexpired term of that vacancy. The individual appointed by the Council to fill a vacancy among the membership of the Council pursuant to ARS. § 9-235, must also meet the qualifications of ARS § 9-232(A). 2-1-7 COMPENSATION The compensation of elective officers of the Town shall be fixed from time to time by resolution of the Council. 2-1-8 FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE The Mayor and each Council Member shall file by January 31 of each year, on a form prescribed by the Clerk, a financial disclosure statement setting forth such information as determined by resolution of the Council. ARTICLE 2-2 MAYOR Reserved. 2-2 Amendment(24) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 STRIKE OUT VERSION ARTICLE 2-1 COUNCIL 2-1-1 Mayor and Council 2-1-2 Eligibility 2-1-3 Office of Mayor 2-1-4 Office of Vice-Mayor 2-1-5 Vacancy 2-1-6 Compensation 2-1-7 Financial Disclosure 2-1-1 Elected Officers MAYOR AND COUNCIL A. [formally 2-1-1] Elected Officers. The elected officers of the Town shall be a five MAYOR AND FOUR (4) COUNCIL MEMBERS, one of whom shall be designated ELECTED BY THE VOTERS as Mayor in accordance with Section 2 2 3 THIS ARTICLE. The Mayor and Council Members shall constitute the Council and shall continue in office until . . -- : °: - : : . °= : : _t t° . THEIR SUCCESSORS ARE ELECTED AND SWORN-IN. Council Members shall serve four(4) year overlapping terms. B. PUBLIC OFFICERS. THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL ARE PUBLIC OFFICERS AS DEFINED IN ARS § 38-502. C. [formally 2-1-2] Corporate Powers. The corporate powers of the Town shall be vested in the Council and shall be exercised only as directed or authorized by law. All powers of the Council shall be exercised by ordinance, resolution, order, or motion. D. [formally 2-1-6] Oath of Office. Immediately prior to assumption of the duties of office, each Council Member shall, in public, take and subscribe to the oath of office. E. [formally 2-1-3] Assumption of Duties. Council Members shall assume the duties of office at the regularly scheduled Council meeting next following the date of the General Election at which, or effective as of the date which,the Council Members were elected. F. [formally 2-1-7] Bond. P-Fierzaking office, E(e)very Council Member shall execute HAVE EXECUTED an official bond ON THEIR BEHALF PAID BY THE TOWN, WHICH SHALL BE = -t. : = . • .'- - : '- -•:. . •:: ° sureties, conditioned on the due and faithful performance of the Council Member's official duties, AND payable for the benefit of the Town or any person who may be injured or aggrieved by the wrongful act or default of such 2-2 Amendment(25) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 officer in their official capacity. A person so injured or aggrieved may bring suit on such bond under provisions identical to those contained in ARS § 38-260. goads . 2-1-2 Corporate Powers ELIGIBILITY PURSUANT TO ARS §§ 9-232 AND 38-201,NO PERSON SHALL BE ELIGIBLE TO ANY OF THE OFFICES PROVIDED IN THIS ARTICLE EXCEPT A PERSON OF THE AGE OF NOT LESS THAN EIGHTEEN (18) YEARS, WHO SHALL HAVE BEEN A QUALIFIED ELECTOR RESIDING WITHIN THE TOWN AT THE TIME OF THE ELECTION, AND HAS RESIDED IN THE TOWN FOR ONE (1) YEAR NEXT PRECEDING THE ELECTION. 2-1-3 OFFICE OF MAYOR A. [formally 2-2-1] ELECTION. Beginning with the election to be held at the primaryelection in 1998, the Mayor of the Town of Oro Valleyshall be y directly elected by the qualified electors of the Town. The term of office of the Mayor shall be four (4) years OR UNTIL A SUCCESSOR IS ELECTED AND SWORN-IN. B. QUALIFICATION AND TENURE. EXCEPT DURING THE FINAL YEAR OF THE TERM BEING SERVED, NO INCUMBENT MAY OFFER THEIR NOMINATION FOR THE OFFICE OF MAYOR. ONCE AN INCUMBENT FORMALLY RESIGNS FROM THEIR DULY ELECTED OFFICE AND NOMINATION IS DEEMED OFFICIAL UPON THE FILING OF NOMINATION PAPERS PURSUANT TO ARS § 16-311(A) OR BY FORMAL PUBLIC DECLARATION OF CANDIDACY FOR OFFICE, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST, MAY THE INCUMBENT BE A CANDIDATE FOR THE OFFICE OF MAYOR. C. [formally 2-2-4] Powers and Duties. The powers and duties of the Mayor shall include the following: 1. 44e THE MAYOR shall be the Chief Executive officer of the Town. 2. 44e THE MAYOR shall be the Ghaifffiail CHAIRPERSON of the Council and preside over its meetings. 44e THE MAYOR may make and second motions and shall have a voice and vote in all its proceedings. 3. 44e THE MAYOR shall enforce the provisions of this Code. 4. 44e THE MAYOR shall execute and authenticate by his/HER signature such instruments as the Council or any statutes, ordinances, or this Code shall require. 5. He THE MAYOR shall make such recommendations and suggestions to the Council as IS CONSIDERED proper. 2-2 Amendment(25) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 6. 44e THE MAYOR may, by proclamation, declare a local emergency to exist due to fire, conflagration, flood, earthquake, explosion, war, bombing, or any other natural or man-made calamity or disaster or in the event of threat or occurrence of riot, rout, or affray or other acts of civil disobedience which endanger life or property within the Town. After such declaration of such emergency, the Mayor shall govern by proclamation and impose all necessary regulations to preserve the peace and order of the Town, including but not limited to: a. Imposition of a curfew in all or any portion of the Town. b. Ordering the closing of any business. c. Closing to public access any public building, street, or other public place. d. Calling upon regular or auxiliary law enforcement agencies and organizations within or without the political subdivision for assistance. 7. 44 THE MAYOR shall perform such other duties required by state statue and this Code as well as those duties required as Chief Executive officer of the Town. D. [formally 2-2-5] Absence o f Mayor LEAVE OF OFFICE. The Mayor shall not LEAVE THE OFFICE OF MAYOR, CEASING TO DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF MAYOR, fromhe Town for a greater period than fifteen (15) days without the consent of the Council. E. [formally 2-2-6] Failure to Sign Documents. If the Mayor refuses or fails to sign any ordinance, resolution, contract, warrant, demand, or other document or instrument requiring his signature for five days consecutively, then THREE (3) members of the Council may, at any regular or special meeting, authorize the Vice- Mayor or, in his absence A MAYOR PRO TEMPORE, to sign such ordinance, resolution, contract, warrant, demand, or other document or instrument which when so signed shall have the same force and effect as if signed by the Mayor. 2-1-4 [formally 2-2-2] Office of Vice-Mayor A. ELECTION. BEGINNING WITH THE SWEARING-IN OF THE MAYOR FOLLOWING THE GENERAL ELECTION OF 1998 AND AT THE FIRST COUNCIL MEETING FOLLOWING THE GENERAL ELECTION EVERY TWO (2) YEARS THEREAFTER, THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL SHALL ELECT ONE OF ITS MEMBERS AS VICE-MAYOR BY A MAJORITY VOTE. B. TERM. THE VICE-MAYOR SHALL SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL FOR A TERM OF TWO (2) YEARS OR UNTIL A SUCCESSOR IS ELECTED AND SWORN-IN. 2-2 Amendment(25) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 C. DUTIES. THE VICE-MAYOR SHALL BE APPOINTED TO PERFORM THE DUTIES OF THE MAYOR DURING HIS ABSENCE, PURSUANT TO ARS § 9- 236. IN THE EVENT OF A VACANCY IN THE OFFICE OF MAYOR, THE VICE-MAYOR SHALL SUCCEED TO THE OFFICE OF MAYOR UNTIL THE END OF THE TERM TO WHICH THE VICE-MAYOR WAS ELECTED OR THE END OF THE TERM TO WHICH THE MAYOR WAS ELECTED, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST, AND THEN A NEW VICE-MAYOR SHALL BE ELECTED. 2-1-5 [formally 2-2-3] Acting Mayor PRO TEMPORE In the absence or-Elisabi.lity of both the Mayor and the Vice-Mayor, the Council may designate another of its members to serve as Acting Mayor PRO TEMPORE who shall have all the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the Mayor during such absence or-disability. 2-1-6 ° VACANCY A. VACANCY DEFINED. AN OFFICE SHALL BE DEEMED OR CONSIDERED VACANT AS PROVIDED FOR IN ARS § 38-291. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE ARTICLE GOVERNING THE MAYOR, VICE-MAYOR, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE WORDS, TERMS, AND PHRASES DEFINED IN THIS ARTICLE HEREUNDER, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, SHALL HAVE THE MEANINGS RESPECTIVELY ASSIGNED TO THEM, UNLESS A DIFFERENT MEANING IS PLAINLY REQUIRED BY THE CONTEXT. B. OFFICE OF MAYOR 1. IN THE EVENT OF A VACANCY IN THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR, THE VICE-MAYOR SHALL SUCCEED TO THE OFFICE OF MAYOR. ANY SUCCESSOR TO THE OFFICE SHALL BECOME MAYOR-IN-FACT AND ENTITLED TO ALL OF THE EMOLUMENTS, POWERS, AND DUTIES OF MAYOR UPON TAKING THE OATH OF OFFICE. 2. A SPECIAL ELECTION SHALL NOT BE HELD TO ELECT A NEW MAYOR, BUT THE VICE-MAYOR SHALL ACT IN THE MAYOR'S STEAD UNTIL THE END OF THE TERM FOR WHICH THE MAYOR WAS ELECTED OR THE END OF THE TERM TO WHICH THE VICE-MAYOR WAS ELECTED, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST. IF A VACANCY IS CREATED IN THE OFFICE OF MAYOR DUE TO THE EXPIRATION OF THE VICE-MAYOR'S TERM, THE COUNCIL SHALL ELECT A VICE- MAYOR FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE ORIGINAL MAYOR'S TERM FROM AMONG THE COUNCIL. 2-2 Amendment(25) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 C. OFFICE OF VICE-MAYOR. IN THE EVENT A VACANCY IS CREATED IN THE OFFICE OF VICE-MAYOR, THE COUNCIL SHALL ELECT ONE OF ITS REMAINING MEMBERS TO FILL THE VACANCY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS ARTICLE. D. [formally 2-1-4] Office of Council Member. IN THE EVENT OF A VACANCY CREATED IN THE OFFICE OF COUNCIL MEMBER, T(t)he Council shall fill SUCH VACANCY, by appointment, for the unexpired term a OF THAT vacancy. -= : . = = e THE INDIVIDUAL APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL TO FILL A VACANCY AMONG THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COUNCIL PURSUANT TO A.R.S. § 9-235, MUST ALSO MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS OF A.R.S. § 9-232(A). 2-1-7 Compensation The compensation of elective officers of the Town shall be fixed from time to time by resolution of the Council. 2-1-8 [formally 2-1-8] FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE The Mayor and each Council Member shall file by January 31 of each year, on a form prescribed by the Clerk, a financial disclosure statement setting forth such information as determined by resolution of the Council. ARTICLE 2-2 Reserved. 2-2 Amendment(25) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY GOVERNMENT REVIEW TASK FORCE COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP REPORT .JANUARY 8, 2001 *** PAUL LOOMIS, CHAIRMAN JIM KRIEGH, VICE-CHAIRMAN MARILYN COOK DON DVORAK RICHARD FEINBERG LARRY HOLDEN STAFF SUPPORT: KATH1 CUVELIER, TOWN CLERK DAN DUDLEY, TOWN ATTORNEY SUSAN BACZKIEWICZ, CIVIL PARALEGAL TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Summary II. Background III. Existing Procedures IV. Legal Analysis V. Task Force Recommendations Appendices Appendix A PROs/CONs matrix Appendix B Public Opinion questionnaire Appendix C Arizona Municipality Population matrix Appendix D August 23, 1999 memo of Town Manager Appendix E Proposed Ordinance 2 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 I. SUMMARY The Government Review Task Force was formed by the Oro Valley Town Council on April 19, 2000 to explore some of the Town's current operating procedures and evaluate if these policies and procedures are still applicable in light of the Town's growth. Among the various areas under review by the Task Force was whether the Town would be better served by seven (7) Council Members since the Town has surpassed the population threshold of 1500 persons as set by state statute, which permits the Town to increase Council Membership. The Task Force has met on several occasions in order to examine and evaluate the practices of other municipalities within Arizona. The examination revealed that the Town is the only municipality of its size with a 5-Member Council. All others chose to incorporate with a 7-Member Council or currently are below the population threshold. On November 13, 2000, Don Dvorak moved to recommend an increase from a 5-Member Town Council to a 7-Member Town Council. Seconded by Richard Feinberg. Motion carried 3-1. Although Member Marilyn Cook was not present at the November 13, 2000 meeting, she expressed her support prior to the meeting in favor of a 7-Member Council. Vice-Chairman Jim Kriegh — AYE Member Don Dvorak — AYE Member Richard Feinberg — AYE Member Larry Holden — NAY Based upon its research, the Government Review Task Force is pleased to offer the following recommendation to the Town Council: The Government Review Task Force recommends to the Town Council that Council Membership should increase to a 7-Member Council, to become effective by ordinance, in order to better serve the community of the Town of Oro Valley. 11. BACKGROUND During a Council Retreat held June 5, 1999, discussion took place regarding an increase of Council Membership. The Government Review Task Force has since been charged by the Town Council to recommend a Council Membership policy as it relates to remaining as a 5-Member Council or increasing to a 7-Member Council. After examining the legal issues and conducting an informal public opinion questionnaire, the Government Review Task Force developed a matrix of the PROs and CONs concerning remaining as a 5-Member Council in comparison to increasing membership to a 7-Member GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 Council. See Appendix A. Also, data was gathered from among other Arizona municipalities as to their current Council Membership. The Task Force developed a public opinion questionnaire to be completed by members of the public following an August 24, 2000 meeting with guest speaker Cathy Connolly, Executive Director of the Arizona League of Cities and Towns. Of the sixteen (16) members of the public who responded to a public opinion questionnaire, a matrix was compiled to describe the thoughts of the general public concerning the Town remaining as a 5-Member Council as compared to increasing membership to a 7-Member Council. See Appendix B. However, the sample taken following the presentation by Ms. Connolly is not necessarily believed to be representative of the general public as a whole. Based upon the public opinion questionnaire, comments by staff, and the presentation by Ms. Connolly, the Task Force found the following: STATUTORY REFERENCE: In light of state statute (Arizona Revised Statute § 9-231), because the Town's population has exceeded fifteen hundred (1500) persons as determined by the latest official United States consensus, the Council may pass an ordinance increasing to a 7-Member Council with the additional two (2) members to be elected at the first election subsequent to the passage of the ordinance. STATISTICALLY: Of the eighty-seven (87) municipalities in Arizona and in accordance to the 1995 Special Census figures, only eleven (11) Councils are made up of five (5) members. See Appendix C for a complete list of the Arizona municipalities, however, the eleven (11) municipalities with 5-Member Councils are listed as follows: Clarkdale... ...2,600 persons Duncan... .....735 persons Fredonia... ... 1,250 persons Jerome... .....460 persons Oro Valley... .25,455 persons Pima... ... ... ...1,850 persons Springerville..1,920 persons Tombstone... 1,405 persons Wel Iton... ... .. 1 ,126 persons Winkelman...676 persons REPRESENTATION: An argument for a 7-Member Council is thought that it may be an ongoing challenge of a 5-Member Council to meet a quorum of three (3) Members. In this instance, decisions made for the Town are made by essentially only two (2) Council Members. A 7-Member Council may encourage more varied viewpoints when making the important decisions affecting the Town, in particular, decisions regarding the Town's budget. In addition, a 7-Member 4 (=iRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 Council may lessen the likelihood of an individual to polarize the meetings. Strong personalities may not be so inclined to dominate proceedings, and one strong willed or demanding person may not be able to control or influence a Council vote. Also, a 7-Member Council may allow more Council Members to serve as Council Liaisons on the various Boards and Commissions, which could lessen the burden which may be felt by the current 5-Member Council. COST: On August 23, 1999. the Town Manager addressed the issue of any additional impact upon the staff should the Council increase membership to a 7-Member Council. He expected that the increase in Council membership would have an impact on staff time and resources. Although there would be an impact on staff resources if two (2) additional Council Members were added, the Town Manager believes the increased membership is a positive move for the Town. Because the Town's population nears 30,000 persons, the Town Manager believes that the Town deserves representation from a 7-Member Council to set policy for the Town's future. See Appendix D. DIVERSITY: Some members of the Task Force stated that a greater number in the Council may provide more individual experience that can be brought to the Council as a whole, which may be a more accurate representation of the Town's demographics. It has also been distinguished that if the Council increases to a 7-Member Council, that this increase does not presume to divide the Town into districts. By law, the Town would have to get approval from the voters if the Council decides to go to district form of government. Districts could still be designated in the Town if the Council decides to remain a 5-Member Council. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: It was discussed by the Task Force that a larger number on the Town Council, may provide a better opportunity for a member of the public to meet and discuss individual concerns with a Council Member. In addition, the Task Force considered that a larger number on the Town Council may provide a broader oversight to other Town Officials and Town Staff of what types of projects the Town is involved with and in so doing, allowing the Town to stay on track with as much information as possible. 111. EXISTING PROCEDURES Pursuant to the Oro Valley Town Code § 2-1-1, the elected officers of the Town shall be five (5) Council Members, one of whom shall be designated as Mayor in accordance with § 2-2-1 . The Mayor and Council Members shall constitute the Council and shall continue in office until assumption of duties of office by their duly elected successors. Council Members shall serve four (4) year overlapping terms. (:TRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Towns Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 IV. LEGAL ANALYSIS Pursuant to ARS § 9-231 , the common council of every town shall consist of five (5) members if the population is fifteen hundred (1500) persons or less, or seven (7) members if the population exceeds fifteen hundred (1500) persons at the time of incorporation. If thereafter the population of such town exceeds fifteen hundred (1500) persons as determined by the latest official United States census, the council may pass an ordinance increasing membership to seven (7), with the additional two (2) members to be elected at the first election subsequent to the passage of the ordinance. At the time that the Town of Oro Valley was incorporated in 1974, we had 1184 persons, and a 5-Member Council. The official 1995 United States census determined that the Town had a population of 19,657 persons of which the Town is expected to have a population at, near, or in excess of 30,000 persons at the 2000 official United States census. The Task Force took into consideration whether the Town must increase Council Membership from a 5-Member Council to a 7-Member Council and whether membership must be brought before the voters. The Town Council may increase Council Membership, but case law indicates that the Town can do so only through the Mayor and Council. The Council does not have authority to pose questions on a ballot concerning whether the members of the public would favor the possibility of increasing Council Membership. A survey is permissible, and such public opinion questionnaire was presented to members of the public by the Task Force during the presentation of Ms. Connolly. On February 22, 2000, in a memorandum addressed to the Mayor and Council, this issue was addressed as follows: Council Member LaSala asked whether the Council may, either by ordinance or resolution, refer the proposal to increase the Council Membership from a 5-Member to 7-Member Council to the ballot. In order for the Council to place the membership issue on the ballot, specific authority must be delegated to the Council by legislature. However, no such delegation of authority exists. Although there is not any authority directly on point, in City of Scottsdale v. Superior Court, 103 Ariz. 204, 439 P.2d 290, the Court stated that a town is without authority to voluntarily submit an ordinance to a vote of the people absent a delegation of authority by statute. Pursuant to ARS § 9-231, the original Oro Valley Town Council consisted of a 5-Member Council due to its population on the date of incorporation. The authority to increase the number of council members resides with the Council as established by State statute, ARS § 9-232. Therefore, the Oro Valley Town Council is without authority to place the measure on the ballot since the statutes reserve the power to increase council membership from five to seven members 6 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 to the council itself. In the event it is the Oro Valley Town Council's pleasure to increase the membership of the Council, an ordinance will need to be adopted pursuant to ARS § 9-231, amending Oro Valley Town Code § 2-1-1. Pursuant to Article IV, Part 1 , Section 8, of the Arizona State Constitution, the residents of Oro Valley retain the authority granted under initiative and referendum provisions to initiate an amendment to the Town Code. Therefore, the Town is not statutorily required to increase Council Membership from a 5- Member Council to a 7-Member Council, nor is this an issue that may be referred to the voters by the Oro Valley Town Council. If it is the Council's pleasure to implement an increase to Council Membership, then this can be done so by ordinance. See Appendix E for a proposed ordinance increasing Council Membership to a 7-Member Council. Finally, if the Town were to increase membership and found that it was not suitable for the Town, the Town would be unable to return to a 5-Member Council because there is no process in place to allow the Town to return once elected to a 7-Member Council. V. TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION The Government Review Task Force recommends to the Town Council that Council Membership should increase to a 7-Member Council, to become effective by ordinance, in order to better serve the community of the Town of Oro Valley. GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 APPENDIX A 8 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 •�� - _-___--------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------- PROs CONs Better representation when voting upon If it isn't broke, don't try to fix it. an issue since a higher quorum is (If things are working well now, leave it avoidable if 1+ CM are absent; alone.) Reduces the odds of a small quorum when making big decisions; If CM are absent, voting outcome can represent more limited viewpoint; More CM Deciding important decisions affecting The Town Larger membership will be less likely to More staff time needed to provide polarize and have consequent ill will services to the new CM, since less time between CM; 5 CM may be involved in required to staff for 5 CM; More burden more personal attacks and 7 CM may on staff leading to more employees to Be more of a collective decision; Larger serve CM membership will provide less Opportunity for strong personalities to dominate proceedings; Less likely to Have one strong willed and demanding person controlling/influencing a council vote 7 CM super majority rezoning issues Public would have fewer CM to lobby require more `yes' votes to obtain on an issue passage of a rezoning 7 CM can shoulder more of the liaison If a majority of CM are elected from a work with Boards/Commissions; More particular part of Town, may lead to diversified control over the Boards/ Unfair concessions being made for that Commissions; More CM making part of Town decisions concerning Board/ Commission appointments More individual experience can be Meetings may be shorter with 5 CM; brought to the table; More accurately Easier to obtain consensus on an represented demographics of the issue with fewer CM, since there would growing Oro Valley; More diverse be fewer view points to consider with 5 backgrounds CM Better representation to set policy for Easier to get 5 qualified candidates, Oro Valley; More representation over a than 7 candidates broader range of issues More evenly distributed work load for Possibly more argumentative and CM Longer CM meetings 9 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 PRO I CON Most cities/towns have 7 CM, only Oro Valley is the largest Town to have 11/87 have 5 CM only 5 CM May be easier for citizens to meet with Increase cost to Town a CM to discuss Town matters More CM to handle the finances/ Oro Valley has a lot of volunteers Budget for the Town Broader oversight 10 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 APPENDIX B 11 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 Please read the questions and mark the box "Yes" or "No" following the question or rate the answer from 1-5, with 5 being the most important issue. 1. Do you feel that you have enough information to make a decision whether to vote for or against the Town forming a District system for electing Council Members? YES ■ (14) or NO ❑ (2) 2. If you do not favor Districting, would you be in favor of enlarging the Council to seven (7) members; i.e., six (6) Council Members and Mayor? YES ■ (11) or NO Li (4) 3. If you favor the concept of Districting, would you be in favor of four (4) Districts (four (4) Council Members and Mayor) or six (6) Districts (six (6) Council Members and the Mayor)? 4 ❑ (2) or 6 ■ (7) 4. Do you believe that Districting would lead to an adverse division of the Town; i.e., fighting, resentment, etc.? YES ❑ (7) or NO ■ (9) 5. Do you sense "adequate" representation of the Council under the present "at large" process of electing Council Members? YES ■ (10) or NO Li (5) 6. Is "Districting" a better system of "Representative Government" — Council Member selection process? YES ■ (7) or NO ■ (7) 7. What would you define as the "benefits" of a Districting system for the Town? See the following matrix: 1 2 3 4 5 Least Most Important Important Representation 5 0 0 3 7 Service 6 1 4 4 3 Responsiveness 5 1 2 5 3 Access to Members 4 1 5 2 3 12 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 8. What are the pros/cons for the Town to remain a five (5) member Council as compared to seven (7) Members? See the following matrix: 1 213 4 5 Least Most Important ! Important Better Representation 5 3 2 1 3 Costs 1 5 2 3 0 5 Diversity 4 2 1 2 5 Community Involvement 5 3 21 1 3 9. Do you favor the Council putting the issue on a future ballot to allow the residents to decide whether the Town should or should not go to the Districting system? YES ■ (10) or NO ■ (4) *NOTE: Only sixteen (16) members of the public were in attendance and participated in the public opinion questionnaire. This sample is not believed to be representative of the general public as a whole. 13 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 APPENDIX C 14 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiMigiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiTOWNiiii0FORG.VALLIEVENENBEigiiiiinligniiii TlililliI.11 ................................... ................................... .................................. OiVfRN:44E .)e:REEEEwjrisgifionefigEggmigili ---v:immiiiiii::iii:i:.im:,.:_::.ii::::.:K:i.i:] ::•i*:ii•i•i:.,•iingini"ii",i'i"i'io::•-:"i'-':::"i'm-:AIZIEZ:e).::"IV.i41::42:012:ttiN4.:i.VICIN:iiiiiiPtik :i:::i:...i.-:::*-:....:iiiiii:ii.::i:.:.::i.::i-:-:.i.....::::iiiiiiiiiii:iiii!iii i . -j.i..i:::::::-i::::.i.iii-i-i.i.:.i::::ii-:.i.i::.i.i--;:;.,.::::.:::]..i::::::-i.:::.i::::::-:-:::.g.:;::::.:::::.,:::::::ii,-::::::,,,-:-:.::,-,:i,:::-:-,,-,-*,-,-,,,,:.,-i-,:-,::i::.,....,:- .,::::.--i::ii,.::::::::::.,,-:::::,i,,ia.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.,::::-,-,iiiii,,iiii:i.:::::::::::-..,:i:---:i:::::-,----.-----..:.i*i:x:i:i::::::::::::.,..,::- :.:.::::::,,,,,,,..::.....,.: City/Town Population # of Council Members Phoenix 1,149,417 Mayor + 8 Tucson 442,910 Mayor + 6 Mesa 338,117 Mayor + 6 Glendale 182,615 Mayor + 6 Scottsdale 168,176 Mayor + 6 Tempe 153,821 1 Mayor + 6 Chandler 132,360 1 Mayor + 6 Peoria 74,565 Mayor + 6 Yuma 60,547 Mayor + 6 Gilbert 59,338 Mayor + 6 Flagstaff 54,480 Mayor + 6 Sierra Vista 37,815 Mayor + 6 Lake Havasu City 36,285 Mayor + 6 Prescott 30,606 Mayor + 6 Bullhead City 26,940 Mayor + 6 Oro Valley 25,455 Mayor + 4 Avondale 22,771 Mayor + 6 Casa Grande 20,880 Mayor + 6 Nogales 20,655 Mayor + 6 Apache Junction 19,525 Mayor + 6 Kingman 16,769 Mayor + 6 Prescott Valley 16,043 Mayor + 6 Douglas 14,780 Mayor + 6 Fountain Hills 14,146 Mayor + 6 Paradise Valley 12,448 Mayor + 6 Florence 11,390 Mayor + 6 Payson 11 ,004 Mayor + 6 1 Winslow 10,780 Mayor + 6 Surprise 10,737 Mayor + 6 Goodyear 9,250 Mayor + 6 Eloy 8,915 Mayor + 6 Sedona 8,894 Mayor + 6 Safford 8,773 Mayor + 6 San Luis 8,026 Mayor + 6 Page 7,950 Mayor + 6 Camp Verde 7,465 Mayor + 6 Globe 1 7,058 Mayor + 6 15 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 City/Town Population # of Council Members Coolidge 7,055 Mayor + 6 Show Low 6,988 Mayor + 6 Cottonwood 6,545 Mayor + 6 } Bisbee 6,500 Mayor + 6 6 278 Mayor Chino Valley + 6 } t Somerton i 5,824 Mayor + 6 El Mirage 5,741 Mayor + 6 Gaudalupe 5,458 Mayor + 5 South Tucson 5,452 Mayor + 6 Marana 5,309 Mayor + 6 Holbrook 5,070 Mayor + 6 Buckeye 4,857 Mayor + 6 Wickenburg 4,765 Mayor + 6 Eager 4,515 Mayor + 6 olleson 4 436 Ma T or + 6 Ty or 4,120 Mayor + 6 Benson 4,115 Mayor + 6 Thatcher 3 957 Mayor + 6 I Litchfield Park 3,739 Mayor + 6 Willcox 3,533 Mayor + 6 Superior 3,485 Mayor + 6 p f St. Johns 3,360 Mayor + 6 Pinetop-Lakeside 3,301 Mayor + 6 Colorado City _ 3,190 Mayor + 6 Cave Creek 3,076 Mayor + 6 Queen Creek 3,072 Mayor + 6 Clifton 2,995 Mayor + 6 Parker 2,950 Mayor + 6 Youngtown 2,694 Mayor + 6 Williams 2,690 Mayor + 6 Taylor 2,655 Mayor + 5 I Clarkdale i 2,600 Mayor + 4 Kearney 2,455 Mayor + 6 Carefree 2,286 Mayor + 6 Sahuarita 2,173 Mayor + 6 Miami 2,040 Mayor + 6 Quarzsite 2,005 Mayor + 6 Mammoth 1 ,960 Mayor + 6 Huachuca City 1 ,940 Mayor + 6 Springerville 1,920 Mayor + 4 Pima 1 ,850 Mayor + 4 Gila Bend _ 1 ,747 Mayor + 6 Tombstone 1 ,405 Mayor + 4 Fredonia 1 1 ,2501 Mayor + 4 16 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 City/Town Population # of Council Members Wellton 1,126 Mayor + 4 Patagonia 945 Mayor + 4 Hayden 910 Mayor + 6 Duncan 735 Mayor + 4 Winkelman 676 Mayor + 3 Jerome 460 Mayor + 4 NOTE: The matrix was compiled in 1998 by the Human Resources department in an effort to conduct a salary survey. For purposes of our report concerning Council Membership, the matrix has been modified (eliminating the salary amounts), but keeping the 1995 Special Census figures as they relate to the number of Council Members for each Arizona municipality. 17 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 APPENDIX D j1 ` i { J 18 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CHUCK SWEET, TOWN MANAGER DATE: August 23, 1999 SUBJ: Staff Impact- Expansion of Town Council from 5 to 7 The possible expansion of the Town Council from five to seven members would have an expected appropriate impact on staff time and resources. The following is a list of impacts anticipated should the Council decide to expand the membership for the Oro Valley Town Council with the election in March 2000: • Meeting Agendas and Packet material preparation will have a minimal impact on the Manager and Town Clerk's office personnel. • Council Member inquiries to the Manager's office will increase proportionally depending upon the individuals elected to the two new Council positions. • Council Liaison responsibilities could be spread between seven members instead of five members, but could impact staff time and resources to some limited degree. Other considerations that are more of an indirect impact on staff resources that should be considered include: • Quorum needed. • Super majority vote calculation • Council member space needs • Budget impact for additional Council Member travel, training & salary Recommendation: Although there definitely would be an impact on staff resources if two additional Council Members were added, it is my professional recommendation that the Town Council view this action as a positive move for our community. Oro Valley population is expected to be close to 30,000 citizens by the time the 2000 Census is completed, which I believe deserves representation from seven elected officials to set policy for Oro Valley's future. Thank you. i CHUCK SWEET TOWN MANAGER APPENDIX E 19 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 ORDINANCE NO. (0) 00- AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA AMENDING SECTION 2-1-1 (ELECTED OFFICERS) OF THE ORO VALLEY TOWN CODE; REPEALING ALL RESOLUTIONS, ORDINANCES, AND RULES OF THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY IN CONFLICT THEREWITH; PRESERVING THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES THAT HAVE ALREADY MATURED AND PROCEEDINGS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEGUN THEREUNDER. WHEREAS, on September 27, 1989, the Town Council did approve Ordinance Number (0) 89-21 , which adopted that certain document entitled, "Oro Valley Town Code, Chapter 2, Mayor and Council," as the second chapter of the official Town Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Arizona Revised Statute (ARS) § 9-231 , the corporate powers of an incorporated Town shall be vested in a common council; and WHEREAS, since the date of incorporation in 1974, the Town of Oro Valley Town Council has been made up of five members; and WHEREAS, the latest official United States census of 1995 determined that the Town of Oro Valley had a population of 19,657 people of which the Town is expected to have a population at, near, or in excess of 30,000 people with the United States census of 2000; and WHEREAS, ursuant to ARS § 9-231 and since the population of the Town of Oro p Valley exceeds 1,500 persons, Council may increase the membership to seven Council members, with the two additional members to be elected at the first election subsequent to the passage of this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Town has deemed it necessary to amend Section 2-1-1, increasing the Council membership to seven members, so that the Town is more accurately represented among the demographics of the growing Town of Oro Valley. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and the Council of the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona that the certain document, known as "The Code of the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona," is hereby amended as follows: SECTION 1. Section 2-1-1 is amended and divided into two subsections to read as follows, with additions being shown in ALL CAPS and deletions being shown in Strikeout text: • 20 (TRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 2-1-1 Elected Officers Mayor and Council A. Elected Officers. The elected officers of the Town shall be a Mayor and FOUR (4) SIX (6) Council Members, one of whom shall be elected by the voters as Mayor in accordance with this Article. The Mayor and Council Members shall constitute the Council and shall continue in office until their successors are elected and sworn-in. Council Members shall serve four (4) year overlapping terms. SECTION 2. Pursuant to ARS § 41-1346, the governing body of each county, city, town, or other political subdivision shall maintain efficient record management for local public records and it has been determined that this Ordinance is a public record with three copies of said Ordinance are to remain on file in the office of the Town Clerk. SECTION 3. All Oro Valley ordinances, resolutions, or motions and parts of ordinances, resolutions, or motions of the Council in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED by Mayor and Town Council, the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona, this day of , 2000. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY ATTEST: Paul H. Loomis, Mayor Kathryn E. Cuvelier, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Dan L. Dudley, Town Attorney 21 GRTF Council Membership Report(5) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 1.4.2001 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY GOVERNMENT REVIEW TASK FORCE DISTRICTING REPORT .JANUARY 8, 200 '1 *** PAUL LOOMIS, CHAIRMAN JIM KRIEGH, VICE-CHAIRMAN MARILYN COOK DON DVORAK RICHARD FEINBERG LARRY HOLDEN STAFF SUPPORT: KATHI CUVELIER, TOWN CLERK DAN DUDLEY, TOWN ATTORNEY SUSAN BACZKIEWICZ, CIVIL PARALEGAL TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Summary II. Background III. Existing Procedures IV. Analysis V. Task Force Recommendations Appendices Appendix A PROs/CONs table Appendix B Public Opinion questionnaire Appendix C July 27, 2000 Memo re District Systems (with November 21 , 2000 Addendum to Memo) 2 (:RTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 1. SUMMARY The Government Review Task Force was formed by the Oro Valley Town Council on April 19, 2000 to explore some of the Town's current operating procedures and evaluate if these policies and procedures are still applicable in light of the Town's growth. Among the various areas under review by the Task Force is whether the Town would be better served by incorporating a district form of municipal government. The Task Force has met on several occasions in order to examine and evaluate the practices of other municipalities within Arizona. The examination revealed that very few municipalities within Arizona have a district form of government and that a larger population threshold tends to be the determining factor in considering a district system. On October 9, 2000, Don Dvorak moved to have the Task Force present a report to the Mayor and Council which would recommend that districting should not be considered at this time, but rather table the district concept for Oro Valley at a later date. Seconded by Richard Feinberg. Motion carried 5-0. Vice-Chairman Jim Kriegh — AYE Member Marilyn Cook — AYE Member Don Dvorak — AYE Member Richard Feinberg — AYE Member Larry Holden — AYE Based upon its research, the Government Review Task Force is pleased to offer the following recommendation to the Town Council: The Government Review Task Force recommends to the Town Council that a district form of government should not be considered at this time but rather the consideration of a district system for the Town of Oro Valley should be tabled until the Town reaches a population threshold of 60,000 persons or reaches build-out. 11. BACKGROUND On June 8, 2000 during a regularly scheduled Task Force meeting, it was brought to the table that Senate Bill #1372 amended Arizona Revised Statute § 9-232.04 regarding a district system as a means for alternative organization. Since the Task Force was initially charged with the duty to evaluate Town Council Membership as it relates to remaining as a 5-Member Council or increasing to a 7-Member Council, the Task Force found it appropriate to address the recent amendment to the state statute concerning districting. The GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 Town could be reorganized in up to six (6) districts, though four (4) districts would also be an option to consider. The formation of districts could also coincide with the possibility of an increased Council Membership. The Town could be organized into four (4) districts with the current Council Membership, however, an increase in Council Membership to a 7-Member Council would be considered if the Town would reorganize into six (6) districts. The Task Force has considered and evaluated the merits of a districting form of government for the Town. The statutory amendment would allow Towns, by a majority vote of the electors, to establish a district system. If the Town were to increase Council Membership, a district system would be implemented based upon the population of the Town however the Town could not designate more than six (6) districts. These boundaries may fluctuate due to a disproportionate population, however fluctuations in population may not occur as often if the Town is built-out. According to Bayer Vella, Senior Planner for the Town of Oro Valley, build-out is a term utilized to indicate the point at which all land within a specific geographic area has been developed at the density threshold enabled by zoning. The Task Force reviewed data from among the other municipalities within Arizona, attended a presentation by Cathy Connolly, Executive Director of the League of Arizona Cities & Towns, and heard from staff and members of the public in order to develop a PROs and CONs table concerning the districting option. See Appendix A. The Task Force also developed a public opinion questionnaire, which was presented to the members of the public following an August 24, 2000 meeting with guest speaker Ms. Connolly. The questionnaire addressed issues such as whether a district form of government would be favorable for the Town, whether the Town would be better suited with four (4) districts or six (6) districts, whether a district form of government would be a `better' system, and whether the Council Members would be more responsive and easier to access with questions or concerns. The questionnaire described the thoughts of the general public concerning the Town structuring a district system, though their determination was not necessarily in favor nor greatly opposed, and the sample taken following Ms. Connolly's presentation is not necessarily believed to be representative of the general public as a whole. See Appendix B. STATISTICALLY: As of July 27, 2000, eighty-seven (87) municipalities in Arizona were investigated, and only seven (7) municipalities had a district form of government. These cities are Glendale, Globe, Mesa, Peoria, Phoenix, Surprise, and Tucson. From among six (6) of the cities that use the district system, both Globe, AZ and Surprise, AZ are not Charter cities. See Appendix C for a detailed list of these Arizona municipalities. According to the 1995 Special Census figures and 2000 projected population figures by the Pima Association of 4 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 Governments (PAG), the following list depicts the population for each city as it compares to the population to Oro Valley. ARIZONA MUNICIPALITIES WITH A DISTRICT FORM OF GOVERNMENT Town or City Population Figures 1995 Special Census PAG (projected 2000) City of Glendale 182,615 216, 843 Cityof Globe 7,058 7,568 338,117 425,238 City of Mesa , ..Y. for mpari=son ::: oses.onl . City of Peoria 74,565 93,675 149 417 i 1 298 City of Phoenix 1 , ,121 City of Surprise 10,737 26,506 1 Tucson is not considered in further discussion relative to the district system form of municipal government due to the fact that Tucson has formed a partisan ward system under their Charter Code, which is different from the district system that the Town of Oro Valley would consider. COST: Inevitably, there would be an increase in costs with the district system. A consultant would need to be retained to evaluate and reorganize the Town by drawing the districts, which would then need to be approved by the United States Department of Justice. This process is lengthy and time- consuming relative to scrutiny of the Justice Department. In addition, the districts would need to be re-evaluated at least every ten (10) years as districts can be evaluated based upon the official United States Census count and/or the United States Special Census count. REPRESENTATION: An argument for a district form of government is that a Council Member from a certain district might be more aware of `district' problems and concerns, thus being more zealous regarding those issues presented to the Town Council. As with the City of Surprise, since they just recently adopted the district system, they intend to maintain an equal voice from the old `core' of the City along with the new developments surrounding the core community. With their growing population, they saw that their original core community could be heard while surrounded by those varied opinions of those in the outskirts of the core. An argument against a district form of government for the Town is that districting may not properly represent the minority voters. Minority voters include, but are not limited to, voters distinguished by race, ethnic background, and income level. Any displacement of minorities would need to be 5 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 evaluated when determinations are made considering where district lines would be drawn. SERVICE: It would appear that a representative from one geographical district may have an easier time establishing relationships with their constituents and it may be likely that campaigns would become more personable. However, a Council Member may not be motivated to concern himself with the community as a whole, but rather only for his district. Some members of the Task Force considered the drawing of the various districts might divide the community, where a `division' may not be felt with the current form of government. In addition, some members of the Task Force eluded that those geopolitical communities larger than the Town seem to benefit from districting. As with the City of Goodyear, a decision has been made to re-evaluate the benefit of districting once they have reached a population of 60,000 persons. RESPONSIVENESS/ACCESS: Some members of the Task Force stated that a district form of government could provide members of the public within a district with one representative to contact about issues that concern them and their district. This process and/or relationship may invite more members of the public to become interested and more responsive to the issues presented to the Town Council. However, there can be no assumption made that districting would bring local government closer to the people of the community. 111. EXISTING PROCEDURES Currently, the Town does not have a district form of municipal government. In reference to Arizona Revised Statute § 9-232.04, the revisions to this statute allow a town to be governed by a district system. The process would begin by placing the question on a future ballot regarding a district form of government for the Town of Oro Valley. If a majority of the residents of the Town are in favor of the district system, the Council shall by majority vote adopt an ordinance (or resolution) that divides the Town into districts in accordance with Arizona Revised Statute § 9-232.04, which gives the Council the authority to redistrict and subdivide the Town into districts. The Town may consider a division of either four (4) districts or up to six (6) districts. The Mayor is elected at large and does not affect the division of the districts. Each district would need to contain a nearly equal number of inhabitants at the time of the redistricting and would be entitled to one Council Member for each district. Under general law and pursuant to Arizona Revised Statute § 9-473(C), each district is entitled to one (1) Council Member representing each district. (A charter city has the authority to have multiple Council Members representing one district.) Every resident of the Town has a right that each district be divided equally so that each Council Member represents the same number of residents as every other 6 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley TOWIl Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 Council Member, and that at least in mathematical terms, each resident has representation in the same ratio as every other resident of the Town. At this point in the process, it is recommended that a consultant who specializes in preparing districts be hired to calculate and draw the districts, which would be submitted for approval by the Justice Department. One way to comply with the equal protection clause of the federal Constitution, the Town could consider the test of districting based upon population rather than on the basis of registered voters. Once in place, the Town's current candidates may be working only two (2) years because the Council Members thereafter shall be elected as representatives of the newly formed districts. Once districting has been completed, the additional Council Members would not be elected at a Special Election, but at the next regular election, and the Mayor shall be elected at large in accordance with Oro Valley Town Code § 2-1-3(A). IV. ANALYSIS Procedurally, a question needs to be placed on a future ballot regarding districting. However, the residents of the Town would vote for the district system without knowing the exact district boundary lines. If the community is in favor of the district system, the Town needs to hire a consultant to calculate and draw the districts. The districts should be geographically compact within reason and made up of a collection of persons with like interests. At this point, the proposed districts will then need to be approved by the Justice Department. Once in place, the Town's current candidates would be the last group not elected by district. Therefore, they would be working only two (2) years thereafter, which could change their terms. Once districting has been completed, the additional Council Members would not be elected at a Special Election, but at the next regular election. Districting may take up to ten (10) years to establish and then re-districting would have to be conducted every ten (10) years thereafter due to increases in population of the Town. At the time that the Town of Oro Valley was incorporated in 1974, we had 1 ,184 persons and a 5-Member Council. The official 1995 United States census determined that the Town had a population of 19,657 persons of which the Town is expected to have a population at, near, or in excess of 30,000 persons at the 2000 official United States census. Because of the Towns steady growth, the mechanics of districting should not dissuade the consideration of districting for the Town if this form of government is indeed in the best interest of the Town. The Town's boundaries or population density may change, which would precipitate the need to re-district. This would need to be addressed after each decennial federal census or by Special Census. The process could include contracting with a consultant and must include approval through the Justice Department as was necessary at the beginning of the districting process. If the 7 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 Town annexes more land, the newly annexed land would be added to an adjacent district affecting population in that district. Specifically, the property to the west of the Town is not completely built-out, and because the Tortolita issue is still pending, the Town's boundaries may change making the district boundaries disproportionate, thus resulting in the need for a Special Census. It was determined that if the Town increases from a 5-Member Council to a 7-Member Council, that this increase does not require the division of the Town into districts and all members could still be elected at large. By law, the Town would have to get approval from the voters if the Council decides to go to the district system. If in fact the Oro Valley residents favor the idea of districts, the Mayor and Council would designate district boundaries in accordance with the Voting Rights Act, and then elect representatives of each district. However, if the Town remained as a 5-Member Council, then the Town could still be divided into districts. V. TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION The Task Force suggests that because such a small number of the 87 cities and towns in Arizona chose the district system; it may not be a valid system to implement at this time. Therefore, the Government Review Task Force recommends to the Town Council that a district form of government should not be considered at this time but rather the consideration of a district system for the Town of Oro Valley should be tabled until the Town reaches a population threshold of 60,000 persons or reaches build-out. 8 GRTF Districting Report(4b) (_)Rice of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 APPENDIX A 9 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 PROs I CONs It would be less costly for a candidate a Districting is costly. A consultant would easier to cover the area of votes need to reorganize the Town to draw Because it will be a smaller area than the districts and then obtain approval covering the whole town; Campaigns from the Justice Department, which the would become more "personable," districts may need to be re-evaluated Easier, and less campaign funds would at every Council election; Expensive be needed by a candidate oversight of the Justice Dept. to be sure district boundaries are fairly drawn A CM from a certain district might be An increase in costs with the district more aware of "local" problems, thus system since focus may be being more zealous when such issue concentrated in a particular district and is presented to the Council; An area such district may have many with a minority population may count designated Town staff members for on the person they elect to strongly that district; More costly due to addition support their needs; CM is more of CM aides; More staff may be added responsive to just his district voters Assured representation from all parts A CM may not have concern for the of Town; Eliminates domination by one community as a whole, but rather only segment of community {Sun City} for his district; CM may have more which may field more Council positions concern for his district than for the when voting 'at large' good of the entire Town; CM is less responsive to voters in other districts who did not vote for him A representative from a geographical There may be a concentration of district may have an easier time preferred candidates for Council living establishing relationships with in a small geographical area and constituents; Easier for citizens to talk districting may preclude those most to CM about concerns within own beneficial as CM; Finding qualified district candidates to run for office might be more limited; Outstanding candidates in one small geographical area will eliminate good CM Fewer signatures are needed on a Because of Oro Valley's rapid growth, Recall election by district boundaries will quickly be disproportionate particularly because the Tortolita issue is still pending; Oro Valley should grow to over 50,000 people before districting occurs 10 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Uro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 PRO CON Newly formed districts may realign the The drawing of the districts may divide Town so that no one part bears the the community, where there was no burden of poor roads, etc feeling of division with the current form government. Fewer nominating petition names are Some districts may influence other CM required to run for office; Ballots would regarding issues that may not affect the shorter Town as a whole; CM may not look at the big picture if he feels he is elected by only his district voters Could lead to specific CM Districting may not properly represent appointments which would reflect the the minority [racial, ethnic, income same representation from each district level, etc.] voters and the displacement on the Boards/Commissions of minorities will need to be evaluated when drawing the districts May lead to more candidates for office, Districting passes the responsibility of a giving citizens more choices in resident to its CM and the resident elections ceases to become personally involved The Mayor must look to the community as a whole since his election is "at large." The present 'at large' system has not raised discontented voters Only 6/87 AZ cities/towns have a district form of government Elections are more expensive 11 (TRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 APPENDIX B 12 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 Please read the questions and mark the box "Yes" or "No" following the question or rate the answer from 1-5, with 5 being the most important issue. 1. Do you feel that you have enough information to make a decision whether to vote for or against the Town forming a District system for electing Council Members? YES ■ (14) or NO ❑ (2) 2. If you do not favor Districting, would you be in favor of enlarging the Council to seven (7) members; i.e., six (6) Council Members and Mayor? YES ■ (11) or NO ❑ (4) 3. If you favor the concept of Districting, would you be in favor of four (4) Districts (four (4) Council Members and Mayor) or six (6) Districts (six (6) Council Members and the Mayor)? 4 ❑ (2) or 6 ■ (7) 4. Do you believe that Districting would lead to an adverse division of the Town; i.e., fighting, resentment, etc.? YES ❑ (7) or NO ■ (9) 5. Do you sense "adequate" representation of the Council under the present "at large" process of electing Council Members? YES ■ (10) or NO ❑ (5) 6. Is "Districting" a better system of "Representative Government" — Council Member selection process? YES ■ (7) or NO ■ (7) 7. What would you define as the "benefits" of a Districting system for the Town? See the following table: 1 2 3 4 5 Least Most Important Important Representation 5 0 0 3 7 Service 6 1 4 4 3 Responsiveness 5 1 2 5 3 Access to Members 4 1 5 2 3 13 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 8. What are the pros/cons for the Town to remain a five (5) member Council as compared to seven (7) Members? See the following table: 1 2 3 4 5 Least Most Important Important Better Representation 5 3 2 1 3 Costs 5 2 3 0 5 Diversity 4 2 1 2 5 Community Involvement 5 3 2 1 3 9. Do you favor the Council putting the issue on a future ballot to allow the residents to decide whether the Town should or should not go to the Districting system? YES ■ (10) or NO ■ (4) *NOTE: Only sixteen (16) members of the public were in attendance and participated in the public opinion questionnaire. This sample is not believed to be representative of the general public as a whole. 14 (TRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 APPENDIX C 15 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 MEMORANDUM TO: Government Review Task Force Members FROM: Kathi Cuvelier, Town Clerk DATE: July 27, 2000 SUBJ: District System In response to our discussion at our last meeting regarding the possibility of Oro Valley going to a district system. I have investigated those cities that have a district system. Currently, out of 87 cities/towns, five have a district form of government. All cities with the exception of Globe, have Charters. Here are some of their comments: City of Globe (No Charter) • 7 member council • 6 districts (950 — 1000 population per district) • At budget time, each district is allocated a certain amount of money that can be used in each district for projects. • A recent redistricting was completed because of growth. • Redistricting was done in house by the engineering department who worked with the Census Bureau. • Submitted to Department of Justice —took 1 year to get approval. • Comments from City Clerk: "They have had a district system for many years, seems to work for them." City of Mesa (Charter) • District system approved by voters in 1998. • Citizens Group filed an Initiative Petition to place this on the ballot. • Had a 5-member Citizens Oversight Committee to oversee how the boundaries were drawn. • A consultant was hired to help with the initial district process to ensure that it was a very open and public process. • Ten public hearings were held throughout Mesa where citizens could participate with what they called "a citizens kit" so they could mark where they thought the boundaries should be. • In 2000 had first election where 3 council members were elected by district. 16 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 • In 2002 the other 3 council members will be elected by district. (Currently serving at large). • In the process of redrawing the district boundaries because of 2000 Census. • Some concerns the City Clerk expressed: - Going to districts has been very costly for Mesa. - The members that were elected by district now have Council aides to assist them with correspondence to their constituents and arranging meetings with citizens within their districts. - Elections are more expensive because ballots must be rotated per polling place within each district, a polling place must be designated within each district, etc. - Each council member wants a map of their own district, rather than just the City as a whole. - Because Mesa is growing so fast, (especially on the East Side) the boundaries are quickly disproportionate resulting in larger/smaller populations because redistricting is based on the official census count. - Staff has increased to accommodate the district system. - Suggested inviting other cities that have districts to talk with us if this is something that the Council wants to consider seriously. *** Cathy Connolly inquired whether voter turnout changed once the district system was in place? ***According to the City Clerk, the district system will be in full force in the 2002 election phase. Phase I indicated that the voter turnout was high, however the election had the largest ballot in Mesa's history. City of Phoenix (Charter) • Districts approved by voters in 1981 • 8 Districts (population ranges from 80,000 to 104,000 per district) • Used consultant to prepare initial district system and again for redistricting. (Rose Institute, San Francisco) • Redistricting is done at time of official census. • Comments from City Clerk's Office - "Council Members tend to defer to the council member in that district when making council decisions, such as liquor licenses, zoning matters, etc. because they rely on that council member to know the issues in their district.' "Each council member takes on the responsibility of knowing the issues in their district and representing their people in the district." - "Public hearings are held in each district on items of interest. " *** Cathy Connolly inquired whether voter turnout changed once the district system was in place? ***According to the City Clerk, the voter turnout did not increase, it stayed comparably the same. 17 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 City of Peoria (Charter) • Voters approved district system in 1989. • 6 districts (population around 16,000 per district). • Used consultants for initial districting and for redistricting, which is done with every official census. • Going out to bid now for a consultant. They have budgeted $50,000 for the consultant. • Comment from City Clerk's Office "Each council member tends to be very territorial of their district." - The Clerk has worked with both at large elections and with district elections. Her experience has been that she prefers the at large elections because they are less expensive and less difficult than district elections. *** Cathy Connolly inquired whether voter turnout changed once the district system was in place? ***According to the City Clerk, the voter turnout did not increase, and districting began too soon while the City was still rapidly growing. City of Glendale (Charter) • Initiative filed in 1988 • District system approved by voters in 1988 • 6 Districts. • Comments from City Clerk's Office: - "Seems to work well." - "Council Members seem to work for the good of the city." - Person that handled redistricting for the city recently retired, so the person I spoke with was unable to provide specific information. City of Tucson (Charter) • Tucson is considering amending their Charter to make their elections non- partisan and to consider "at large" elections rather than Districts. Not sure when this will go before the voters who live in Tucson. 18 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Town Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 ADDENDUM TO MEMORANDUM TO: Government Review Task Force Members FROM: Kathi Cuvelier, Town Clerk Susan Baczkiewicz, Civil Paralegal DATE: November 21, 2000 SUBJ: District System In light of the recent change in government by Surprise, AZ to a district system, there are currently six out of 87 cities/towns that have a district form of government. Here are comments from the City of Surprise: City of Surprise (No Charter) • 7 member council • Mayor and Council adopted by district system by resolution in 1997, then it went to a vote of the people • The City went to a district form of government in March 1999 • Comments from City Clerk: "The City is too small to benefit from the district system." 19 GRTF Districting Report(4b) Office of the Oro Valley Towel Attorney/sib 12.22.2000 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY Study Session COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: January 8, 2001 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCIL FROM: Kathi Cuvelier, Town Clerk SUBJECT: DISCUSSION REGARDING AGENDA PRODUCTION DEADLINES SUMMARY: Council Member Johnson has requested discussion regarding Agenda Production Deadlines. Attached for your review is information previously submitted to the Mayor and Council regarding this issue. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Memorandum dated 8/4/00 to Council Member Dick Johnson regarding estimated time and cost to prepare agendas and packet materials. 2. Excerpt from 8/5/00 Council Retreat regarding the Agenda Process. 3. List of Deadlines for Council Packet Materials for Calendar Year 2001. eaLt D- . ment Head Town Manager MEMORANDUM TO: Council Member Dick Johnson FROM: Kathi Cuvelier, Town Clerk DATE: August 4, 2000 SUBJ: Estimated Time and Cost to prepare Agendas and packet materials Per your request, I have attached the following responses received from the Clerk's Office, Manager's Office, Public Works, Legal and Community Development. The attached includes the estimated hours and costs incurred to prepare Agendas and to prepare Council packets for regular and special meetings and any amendments to the regular meeting agendas. Clerk's Office Regular meeting Agendas Deputy 6-7 hours per agenda /i/ � Sec. II 6-7 hours per agenda Ti 't, Clerk 7-8 hours per agenda a)9 Amended Agendas for Deputy 2-4 hours per agenda (03 9 Regular Meetings Sec. II 2-4 hours per agenda 41-f � �� Clerk 3 hours per agenda i-z Special Meeting Agendas Deputy 1-2 hours per agenda 5) Sec. !! 1-2 hours per agenda )-v )09 Clerk 2 hours per agenda S5 Study Session Agendas Deputy 1-2 hours per agenda 31' 0 Sec. II 1-2 hours per agenda .v Clerk 1-2 hours per agenda 5 Minute preparation for regular Sessions Deputy 12 — 15 hours per meeting 1: Sessions Minute preparation for Clerk 1 — 2 hours per meeting S 6 Special/study or Executive Session Cuvelier, Kathryn From: Sweet, Charles Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 2:31 PM To: Cuvelier, Kathryn Subject: HRS. TO PREPARE FOR AGENDAS I would estimate that the following hours are expended for regular, special and study session agendas by myself and staff: Regular Meeting Agendas: Mgr. 8hrs per agenda S 3 s� kl, -01Assistant 2hrs per agenda � yo Amended Agendas for /3 Reg. Mtgs: Mgr. 3 hrs per amended agenda Special Meeting agendas: Mgr. 4 hrs. per agenda 17i 166 Assistant 1 hr. per agenda olS) Study Session Agendas: Mgr. 4 hrs. per agenda t I 7S i) I el% Assistant 1 hr. per agenda a0 Page 1 Cuvelier, Kathryn From: Ridenour, Lynn Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 2:41 PM To: Cuvelier, Kathryn Subject: Council Packets Hi Kath i, Bill said the Mayor requested an approximately time as to how long it takes to put together a Council Communication once you have done all the background work. I spoke with the guys and we accumulatively determined that it usually takes around 1 hour. Hope this helps. Have a great day! l • Lynn fi24 1-ta-ve- Page 1 Cuvelier, Kathryn From: Acheson, Carol Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 12:01 PM To: Cuvelier, Kathryn Subject: FW: Reminder Kathi - note hours next to meetings. Questions, please call me. Carol Original Message From: Dudley, Dan Sent: Tuesday,August 01, 2000 6:14 PM To: Acheson, Carol Subject: FW: Reminder REMIND ME TO SEND INFO TO KATHI RTE THIS ITEM. Original Message From: Cuvelier, Kathryn Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 10:40 AM To: Dudley, Dan; Sinclair, Brent Subject: Reminder Hi, Remember at the last staff meeting, Dick Johnson asked me to convey to the Department Heads that he wants an estimate of how much time we spend on preparing for meetings. Are you interested in responding? Format should be: S 300 _ (COO Regular Meeting Agendas - all staff time 10-20 hours depending upon agenda. X15 300 Amended Agendas for Regular Meetings - 5-10 hours 4. /50 - 3°° Special Session Agendas - 5-10 hours Study Session Agendas - 0-2 hours a (00 I need your response by today at noon, we are in the process of preparing Retreat Packets now. Kathi Page 1 COUNCIL MEETING PREPARATION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Regular Meeting Agendas or Amended Agendas for Regular Meetings = 17 hours staff time or$505.00 per item Special Session or Study Session = 3 hours stafftime or$90.00 per item • Costs above are based on an average hourly rate for all staff involved. • Tasks include: reviews of resubmittals,public notification,preparation of Council Communications. 8/5/00 Oro Valley Town Council 2000 Annual Retreat 6 Town Council Operations: • What is the Issue? - Agenda/Agenda Management. - Procedure for Agenda Development. - Electronic Communications. - Council Communications. Discussion: • Agenda/Agenda Management has improved. • Council packets out 2 weeks prior to a meeting. - Additional items are distributed close to the meeting date. - Short Time-frame might have necessitated addendums. - Need to find appropriate length of time that would ensure a complete package. - Public needs the time to review the package also. Develop Agenda Process: • Monday prior to Friday. - Agenda Committee meets. - If the packets are not complete or additions are made, the item would be continued. Consensus points for the Agenda process: • Council wants complete packages one week prior to meeting. • If not complete, postpone item to the meeting one month ahead. • Keep current timeframe in place to receive information from developers/departments. • Examine the alignment of P & Z, DRB, etc. meeting timeframes. • Agenda is fixed on the Friday, one week prior to the meeting. Ensure that: - Adequate review time - Public review time is adequate. - Limit the amount of last minute items. - Ability of staff to produce a complete packet. - Look at ways to distribute the information. Bold a study session to specifically discuss this issue and the issue of electronic packets. DEADLINES FOR COUNCIL PACKET MATERIALS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2001 Regular FridayDeadline for Friday Deadline for Tuesday Deadline g Meeting Providing Town Attorney Providing Clerk's Office for Receipt of Dates with Ordinances and with List of Items to be Packet Materials Contracts Placed on Agenda to Manager's Office 01/03/01 Noon — 12/01/00 Noon — 12/15/00 Noon — 12/19/00 01/17/01 Noon — 12/15/00 Noon 12/29/00 Noon — 01/03/01 02/07/01 Noon — 01/05/01 Noon — 01/19/01 Noon — 01/23/01 02/21/01 Noon — 01/19/01 Noon — 02/02/01 Noon — 02/06/01 03/07/01 Noon — 02/02/01 Noon — 02/16/01 Noon — 02/20/01 03/21/01 Noon - 02/16/01 Noon — 03/02/01 Noon — 03/06/01 04/04/01 Noon - 03/02/01 Noon — 03/16/01 Noon — 03/20/01 04/18/01 Noon — 03/16/01 Noon — 03/30/01 Noon — 04/03/01 05/02/01 Noon — 03/30/01 Noon — 04/13/01 Noon — 04/17/01 05/16/01 Noon — 04/13/01 Noon — 04/27/01 Noon — 05/01/01 06/06/01 Noon — 05/04/01 Noon — 05/18/01 Noon — 05/22/01 06/20/01 Noon — 05/18/01 Noon — 06/01/01 Noon — 06/05/01 07/04/01 Fourth of July Meeting - Date to be determined 07/18/01 Noon — 06/15/01 Noon — 06/29/01 Noon — 07/03/01 08/01/01 Noon — 06/29/01 Noon — 07/13/01 Noon — 07/17/01 08/15/01 Noon — 07/13/01 Noon — 07/27/01 Noon — 07/31/01 09/05/01 Noon — 08/03/01 Noon — 08/17/01 Noon — 08/21/01 09/19/01 Noon — 08/17/01 Noon — 08/31/01 Noon — 09/04/01 10/03/01 Noon — 08/31/01 Noon — 09/14/01 Noon — 09/18/01 10/17/01 Noon — 09/14/01 Noon — 09/28/01 Noon — 10/02/01 11/07/01 Noon — 10/05/01 Noon — 10/19/01 Noon — 10/23/01 11/21/01 Night before Thanksgiving — meeting date to be determined 12/05/01 Noon — 11/02/01 Noon — 11/16/01 **Noon — 11/10/01 **Monday due to Thanksgiving 12/19/01 Noon — 11/16/01 Noon — 11/30/01 Noon — 12/04/01 Packets will be distributed to the Town Council on the Friday 2 weeks prior to the first and third Wednesday of every month).