HomeMy WebLinkAbout20184200.tiffMEMO
TO: HRCC
FROM: JACKIE JOHNSON
RE: REPORT TO COUNTY COMMISSIONER
CC: BRUCE BARKER, COUNTY ATTORNEY
DATE: JULY 11, 2018
The purpose of this memo is to submit a draft report for review by the HRCC, prior to submission
thereof to the Weld County Board of Commissioners The purpose of the draft report is: 1) to summarize
the process adopted by the HRCC; 2) to advise the Bard of the HRCC's recommended amendments to
the Charter; 3) to identify issues considered by the HRCC, based on input by members, staff, elected
officials and citizens who attended the public meetings; and 4) to relay concerns raised at public hearings
which were not within the purview of the,HRRC, but whichrna hj beof interest to the Board.
Dear Weld County Commissioners:
Committee ("HRCC") conc
to determ
citizens i;WUeld County.
he Ad Hoc' Weld County Home Rule Charter Amendment Study
iults of its charge to review the Weld County Home Rule Charter
nts thereto would be beneficial to provide good government by and for the
PROCESS From the outset, the HRCC established its priority of giving broad opportunity for
public input into the Horhe Rule Charter review and with assuring "transparency" in the course of its
proceedings. To effect this gel, the HRCC: 1) scheduled six community meetings throughout the county,
each of which was publicized in local newspapers and on the county website; 2) established a page on the
website where interested citizens could review the minutes and listen to recordings of all HRCC meetings
and public hearings; 3) created an e-mail address for use by interested citizens; 4) invited elected officials
and department heads to address the committee; and 5) assured that all deliberations of the HRCC were
06600/3
open to the public, including a final public hearing to report on the changes being proposed. While the
response to these efforts was not overwhelming (fewer than 25 people provided input at the public
....) meetings), the HRCC made a good faith effort to address the charter -related issOfiraised in those
meetings and to take note of issues raised that were not in the HRCC's purview.
RECOMMENDATIONS: An exhibit of proposed amendments is attached hereto. Some were
designed to clarify ambiguous language, to correct grammatical errors, to reflect current usages and to
conform inconsistent terms. (See Exhibit items: Sec. 2-2, 3-4, 3-1., 5-3, 6-1, 6-3, 6-6, 13-2, 16-1, 16-7,
16-9 and18-6) Other recommendations are more substantive, and include the following:
- 3-8(4)(b) — Commissioner's Powers and Duties - This changv`arould eliminate the
requirement that the Board of County Commissioners act only by ordinance in matters of
contracts and disposition of real property.
- 16-6 — Public Notice - To promote public scrutiny in light of the above change, this
amendmen would require, approval of contracts of $2,500,000 or more to be notice by two
publications priorto approval.
-5(5) Qualifications The proposed new qualification for Elected Officers would prohibit
ny person convicted of a felony from being a candidate for or appointed to such office. (This
change was propose a 5-3 vote.)
17.3 — Amendments to Charter This addition to the Charter would permit the Board from
time to time to adopt an ordinance making "non -substantive revisions" to the Charter. In the
course of its review, the HRCC found many examples of errors, obsolete language and
inconsistencies, which are not practically addressed in a ballot, but which would improve the
ability to better apply the Charter.
ADDRESSED, BUT NOT RECOMMENDED: The HRCC considered a great many other issues
and after deliberation, chose not to recommend Charter Amendments related thereto. These
included the following:
- 2-3 -Cooperative Agreements Although the language doesn't mirror state statute, the HRCC
did not find a change was warranted.
3-3 — Qualifications of Members Some citizens suggested' a longer residency period, but the
HRCC felt the present requirement was sufficient. ( decision was based on a 5-3 vote.)
- 3-4(3) —Terms of Office Several citizens eed for strict limits, including a return to
a two -term limit and the prohibition a on -consecutive terms exceeding the limit. Upon the
advice of the County Attorney that certain li s wo e unconstitutional, the HRCC chose
not to propose changes to this provision.
3-6(2) — Commissioner Departments f
County Comr t ould be asS#gned
that each the Commtaloners other° h
coordinator ofthe major departments fui
44-2-Departmen
4
c
Board of
overturn the
e efficac'pfanon r
f the HRCC was i*t
4R)(8)(b) — Depar
oncern was expresse
nt Finan
this provision was whether every
sibility. (A motion to require
t serve as coordinator or assistant
d on a vote
ion The merits of a County Administrator and
r"were raised in public meetings. The consensus
present circumstances, no changes were warranted.
nts of County Government — Division of Human Resources Public
bout the decision of the Grievance Board being appealable to the
sinners. At issue was the propriety of the Board being able to
of another elected official. The appeal process is not a part of the
Charter, but rather is contained in the County personnel policies, rules and regulations. The
HRCC did not find a change was warranted.
5-1— County Attorney Appointment Some citizens suggested the County Attorney should
be elected. The HRCC determined that such a proposal was infeasible as there would be no
specific client represented I n such a circumstance.
VI -XI — Elected Officers Based in part upon input from current elected officers as well as
appointed officers, the HRCC determined no changes in the Charter were warranted with
respect to election/appointment, residency requirements or term limits.
XIII — County Council The HRCC discussed various aspects of the Charter provisions
concerning the County Council, including its role in ethical issues, recalls, cooperation with
other elected officers, the adequacy of its budget and whether it needed to operate under
formal by-law. No changes were proposed.
XIV-2 — Finance and Budget Some members of the public expressed concern about the
timing of public hearings prior to the adoption of the annual budget. The HRCC concluded
the existing provisions, including the opportunityfor comment early in the process as well as
the ability to make written comments, ail ed effective publlcinput.
Non -Charter Related Concerns:
1 would like to have some discussion on what to report udder this section.
Hello