Voters in the City of Orange will get a say later this November on whether the city becomes a charter – a move some city council members say will mean greater local control over planning and increased revenue.
It’s the second city measure to hit the ballot in Orange this November after council members decided to ask city voters if they want to increase the local sales tax by 1% in an effort to curb a structural budget deficit that’s led to a host of spending cuts.
[Read: Orange Officials Place 1% Sales Tax Measure on November Ballot After Indecision]
Councilmember Kathy Tavoularis, who spearheaded the measure, said the switch to a charter city could lead to a reduced budget deficit.
“We were told one day, ‘Guess what? You’re $30 million in debt,’ and that started at the beginning of all of our terms. And it’s a cold slap in the face,” Tavoularis said at the July 13 meeting.
[Read: An End to The ‘Orange Way’: Scrambling to Prevent Municipal Bankruptcy]
“And that, to me, means we have to change in the city. And change is hardest in Orange than in any other city,” she said.
A city charter effectively serves as a local constitution, giving the city more power surrounding housing, elections and zoning. If the city adopted a charter, it would become one of 121 in the state.
Currently, Orange is a general-law city, meaning that it follows laws set by the state, including requirements to be a council member.
The final vote comes after months of debate between council members and the public, with the dais being nearly evenly split on the issue.
[Read: Another Orange County City Eyes a Governing Charter]
The council ultimately voted 4-3 on July 14 to put the measure on the ballot, with council members Ana Gutierrez, John Gyllenhammer and Arianna Barrios voting against it.
All three councilmembers who voted against the measure had concerns about how thorough the charter could be, comparing it to the charters other cities, like Huntington Beach, have created.
“I fear that if we pass this tonight, we might be missing quite a bit in terms of the depth and detail of what I see as comparable charters out there,” Gyllenhammer said at the meeting.
“And we may be in perpetual fixing or adding or adjusting mode, which would cause us the time and cost of going to multiple elections.”
Tavoularis refuted that, saying other cities’ charters had become so robust because of the constant changes made as the cities come across problems that need to be addressed.
Several residents spoke about the charter, both against and in support.
Mary Oberschlake, mentioned concerns of local government overreach.
“As someone that grew up with with family from the deep South, when I hear somebody talking about, ‘We know best about our way of life, how we want things to be, we don’t need big government coming in here telling us how to behave,’ I start getting the creeps,” Oberschlake said.
“The implications of what could happen if you were to go forward with the charter city with a mindset like that, with officials that could get elected – it’s very frightening.”
In contrast, another resident was in full support of the charter and the extra control it could provide the city.
“We in Orange know better what is good for us than broader state politicians. We would practice local control better and our needs would be better served as a result,” said public commenter Betty Talbert.
Before the final vote took place, council members voted to clarify wording on specific sections of the charter.
One section, looking to determine how many terms council members should have, was brought to question, with Gutierrez and Barrios supporting two four-year terms, and Tavoularis and Jon Dumitru supporting the originally proposed three.
Mayor Dan Slater moved to change the term limit to two, as Gutierrez and Barrios supported, but Tavoularis then introduced a substitute motion supporting it as-is – three four-year terms.
In voting, Slater accidentally voted yes for the substitute, making the final vote on the section 4-3 and passing it as-is with the three term limit. The vote was final despite the error.
Charters to Fight Housing Mandates?
OC cities have been increasingly considering charters in an effort to gain more control over their city and move away from Sacramento’s housing mandates.
Fountain Valley and Fullerton have taken a charter into consideration in the past two years, but plans to move forward have stalled or been dropped entirely.
More than anywhere else in Orange County, the charter discussion has been a flashpoint in Huntington Beach after the city sought to use their charter status in a series of unsuccessful court battles.
Surf City’s biggest uphill battle has been against statewide housing mandates. Every city in California is required by the state to zone for specific amounts of housing, including an allotted amount for low-income residents.
Huntington Beach has opposed these requirements, arguing the city’s charter nullifies the mandates.
But those arguments have been repeatedly struck down in court.
[Read: ‘Beaten Into Submission’ HB Signs Off on Housing Plan After Yearslong Court Battle]
Just last month, Huntington Beach officials submitted a housing plan in alignment with state requirements to avoid paying compounding fees, with the potential to eventually surmount to $900,000 a month.
