(May 16, 2008) -- Councilwoman Rae Gabelich has agendized an item for the May 20 City Council agenda calling for the convening of the Council's Charter Amendment Committee (comprised of all Councilmembers, chaired by the Mayor) to discuss possible amendments to the City Charter (the city's constitution) for approval or rejection by voters on the November 2008 LB ballot.
"We are all aware of the significant needs and inadequate budget concerns for the City of Long Beach . In order for us to discuss our options in a timely manner and knowing that the outcome could require a vote of Long Beach citizens, a charter reform meeting should be called this month," Councilwoman Gabelich writes.
In her agendizing memorandum, Councilwoman Gabelich cites the current 1980's era Charter section that limits to 10% an annual transfer of Port net income (profits) to LB's Tidelands.
"With the projected growth of triple the current port activity in the next 15 years and the port projects that will be required to handle that growth, it may be time to readjust those numbers for an increased benefit to the City of Long Beach and its citizens," Councilwoman Gabelich writes, adding that a "review of all other suggestions that were presented in 2006 would also be appropriate at this time. As we discussed, the charter is a living document that should be continually reviewed and presented to the public for their input and decisions for change."
In January 2008, Councilwoman Gerrie Schipske agendized an item urging a measure for the June 2008 ballot to let voters decide whether to increase the share of Port's transferrable for Tidelands uses (ranging from beach cleanup and improvement to shoreline infrastructure improvements) from 10% to 15%...plus a new 5% for the General Fund.
After City Attorney Bob Shannon stated that a 5% transfer to the General Fund isn't legally possible without a statewide vote of the people, Schipske pared down her ultimate motion to seek just a 5% increase in Port profits for the Tidelands...and Councilwoman Gabelich and Councilwoman Tonia Reyes Uranga supported sending this to a Council Committee for discussion.
LB's six other Councilmembers -- Vice Mayor Bonnie Lowenthal, Councilmembers Suja Lowenthal, Gary DeLong, Patrick O'Donnell, Dee Andrews and Val Lerch -- didn't speak a word publicly...but voted in unison to kill Schipske's proposal without discussion.
Present in the Council Chamber, but not testifying publicly, were two LB Harbor Commissioners. TheDistrictWeekly.com's Dave Wielenga (who was present) reported that they glared at Councilmembers during the proceedings, then exited when the item was killed.
Perhaps by coincidence, on the same May 20, 2008 City Council agenda, city management is seeking annual Council approval of the upcoming year's (FY 09) request that the Port transfer its surplus funds (profits) to the Tidelands.
City management's memo states in part, "Staff has determined that without the requested [$16 million] transfer for FY 09, the Tidelands Operating Fund would close the fiscal year with a deficit, which would necessitate the closing of beaches and elimination of of safety services in the Tidelands area."
This year, the Port's annual audited financial statement shows $160,059,464 in Port net income (profit)...meaning a 10% transfer would bring LB's Tidelands just over $16 million for the Tidelands.
A 15% transfer (proposed by Gabelich) would (at current Port profit levels) mean $24 million for LB's Tidelands.
In January 08, City Attorney Shannon publicly indicated (without expressing a policy on the proposal one way or the other) that a Charter Amendment seeking voter approval to increase the share of Port profits allocable for use the Tidelands is legally possible.
Among public speakers independently testifying in support of such a measure was 3rd district resident/retired Deputy City Attorney Jim McCabe, who handled Tidelands related issues for City Hall...and called the Charter's current 10% figure basically arbitrary.
At the time, some LB officials, speaking not for attribution to LBReport.com, claimed pursuing Schipske's proposal might prompt Sacramento lawmakers (who ultimately control Tidelands uses) to raid LB Port revenue for Sac'to budget uses (now in multi-billion dollar deficit).
Councilwoman Gabelich's proposal also seeks discussion of "all other suggestions" presented at 2006 Charter Amendment community meetings. Among suggestions brought forward at that time but not pursued by a Council majority was giving LB voters the right to elect Harbor Commissioners...whose actions create major public impacts while they remain unelected and unrecallable, basically beyond real public control.
The current 1980's era City Charter gives the Mayor with Council approval the power to hand-pick Harbor Commissioners. By comparison, Harbor Commissioners are publicly elected in Seattle-Tacoma and CA's Port Hueneme (near Oxnard).
One of several Charter Amendments put on the May 2007 ballot and approved by LB voters gave the Mayor and Council the ability to remove Harbor Commissioners for any reason (not just for certain causes)...but several other Charter Amendments which were backed by Mayor Foster failed...including proposals to weaken term limits and create a "salary compensation" commission that could have raised Council pay.
The latter proposals were so poorly received by the public that as the election neared, Mayor Foster quietly recut pre-election TV ads to no longer mention them. Voters went on to approve a separate Charter Amendment that increased the Mayor's powers, including his ability to sustain a veto of Council actions.
Mayor Foster has indicated that he plans to ask the Council to put a measure on the November 2008 that would fund infrastructure...but its specifics -- including the funding mechanism -- remain undisclosed publicly for now.
Five Council votes are needed to put a Charter Amendment on the ballot. LB voters -- the consent of the governed -- ultimately decide whether proposed Charter Amendments become part of the way their city is governed.
