Santa Clara council approves 13-member charter review committee after months of discussion

The Santa Clara City Council voted 6–1 to form a Charter Review Committee tasked with conducting a comprehensive, operations-focused review of the city charter and producing proposed amendments for possible voter consideration. The panel will total 13 members: each councilmember will appoint one representative (appointments must be qualified electors in the appointee’s district or at-large as specified) and six additional members will be selected by lottery (one from each district). The council also directed staff to begin outreach and a work plan so the committee can begin work this fall.

City Attorney (title provided in meeting) framed the review as a “top-to-bottom operations oriented review” intended to modernize and clarify sections of the charter that guide municipal affairs, procurement, budget practices and department roles. He told the council the goal is to align the charter with current state law and best practices and to eliminate ambiguities that require repeated legal interpretation.

Why this matters: the charter functions as the city’s constitution and controls foundational matters—elections, fiscal procedures, structure of city government and many procurement and personnel rules. The city attorney told council members that a comprehensive review would help reduce costly staff time spent interpreting older language and could identify changes that improve operational efficiency. Staff said starting by September 2025 would be needed to produce any proposed charter amendment in time for a November 2026 ballot if the council desires that schedule.

Debate and outcome: Council members debated committee size and selection method at length. Several members supported a larger committee and a hybrid method (some council appointments plus lottery picks) to combine political representation and a depoliticized lottery. Vice Mayor Kelly Cox and council members argued for enough members to sustain subcommittees and ensure representation; others warned large committees are harder to schedule and manage. The final motion — read back by staff and adopted — requires that appointed members be residents and qualified electors of their district, that lottery members be qualified electors in the district they represent, and that existing commissioners not be barred from applying. The motion passed 6–1, with Council Member Park voting no. The council did not set final rules for committee terms, staffing levels, or detailed workplan; instead it asked staff to return with a formation process and recruitment materials.

What the committee will consider: staff and the city attorney provided an illustrative list of sections that commonly warrant clarification, including: residency timing rules for elected officials; thresholds and notice requirements for city real estate sales; what constitutes a disposition or change of use of parkland under existing Measure R (charter sec. 7.14.5); roles and duties for the elected city clerk and board of library trustees; budget provisions and possibility of a two-year budget cycle; procurement limits (the charter currently limits city-forced public works at low dollar thresholds) and whether to add design-build procurement authority to the charter; and general reorganization and plain-language edits. Staff emphasized the intent is technical and operational modernization, not to package controversial structural changes (for example, changing the form of government or the city’s voting system) into this single review.

Process and timing: the city attorney described two formation alternatives: (1) councilmembers each recommend a member from their district (and the mayor an at-large member), to be confirmed by council; or (2) a lottery process similar to the Measure I bond oversight committee. The council’s final motion blends those ideas: appointments by councilmembers plus district lottery seats. Staff advised that to meet a potential 2026 ballot timeline the review should begin no later than September 2025 to allow draft amendments and voter materials to be finalized by the registrar’s submittal deadline in July–August 2026.

Public comment: members of the public urged transparency and a broad outreach process. Brian Darby said the charter underpins city government and asked the council to preserve a democratic, inclusive process. Several public speakers later in the meeting also asked staff to release an RFP for downtown blocks A and B; council members noted that is a separate agenda item that will be considered later.

Next steps: staff was directed to return with a formation plan, recruitment and outreach materials, and a draft work plan for the council’s approval. The council will later confirm the committee roster and the committee’s charter and scope of work before substantive review begins.