2,445 / 54.2% Yes votes ...... 2,067 / 45.8% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

If a majority of those voting on this proposed measure approve it, the new Charter will become effective on July 1, 2006, or the date accepted and filed by the California Secretary of State, whichever is later. If not approved by a majority, the existing Charter will remain in effect. The substantive changes proposed are:

1. The form of the city's administration would change from the existing Council-Chief Administrative Officer form to a Council-City Manager form of government. Currently, the Chief Administrative Officer exercises direction and control over the City's administration, subject to City Council direction. Under the proposed Charter, the City Manager would be directly responsible for day-to-day management of the City, with limited Council interference.

Currently, the Council appoints all department heads. The proposed Charter gives the City Manager authority to hire and terminate all City employees, including department heads, except the City Attorney, Fire Chief and Police Chief whose positions would continue to be hired and terminated by the Council.

2. Currently, the Charter provides the City Clerk and City Treasurer are elected offices, with duties outlined in the Charter. Effective April 8, 2008, the proposed Charter would authorize the City Manager to appoint the City Clerk and City Treasurer, with duties established by ordinance.

3. A Preamble is added to the Charter, setting forth the goals and purpose of City government.

4. Under the proposed Charter, the department head positions of Community Development Director; Fire Chief; Parks, Recreation and Community Services Director; Police Chief; and Transportation Director would be removed from the civil service system. The City Attorney, City Clerk, City Treasurer and Public Works Director positions would remain outside the civil service system, as would the City Manager.

5. A section is added prohibiting the Council from interfering in some City operations, including performance of duties of City employees. The Council could continue to give advisory information to assist the City Manager and to contact employees for information, to make inquiries and to advise about citizen complaints.

6. Operational aspects and policies for City government would be set by ordinance, instead of by Charter. These policies include public works contracting, purchasing products and services, and creating and abolishing commissions, boards and committees.

7. The proposed Charter would give the Council discretion to adopt an ordinance authorizing municipal elections conducted wholly by mail, cast in the same manner as absentee ballots.

8. The proposed Charter would allow the City's fiscal year to be established by ordinance of the Council, instead of by Charter.

9. The proposed Charter also simplifies archaic and ambiguous language, adds definitions and reorganizes various sections.

City of Culver City

City Charter as Approved in 1979, with proposed changes ('strike-out version'; pdf file; 49 pages)

City Council Candidate Positions

Culver City Star/L.A. Independent

• New Charter Draws Fire Over City Manager (2/8/06)

• Fulwood Responds to Pay Hike Claim (2/15/06)

The new charter makes government more responsive. efficient. flexible and accountable. Currently, department heads are appointed by and accountable to the City Council. The problem for the dedicated employees who keep our city running is having five part-time bosses instead of one full-time manager. It is easy to see why no other charter city in the state operates this way.

The new charter places policy making authority where it belongs. with the City Council. and day to day management where it belongs. with a professional city manager. This is the foundation of the new charter, from which all other elements flow. The city manager will appoint and remove most department heads, including the clerk and treasurer. The council will have greater flexibility to meet the changing needs of city residents.

The new charter will provide a clear chain of command and accountability. It will enable the City Council to focus on policy, which is what we elect them to do. It will make the city more competitive in attracting and hiring the top management talent. The new charter is also clearer and more accessible for the public.

Culver City is at a crossroads. We can do better. This new charter for the 21st century will ensure the best possible government for all of Culver City's residents.

Vote yes on Measure V!

Alan Corlin, Member, Culver City City Council

Steven J. Rose, Member, Culver City City Council

Crystal Alexander, City Treasurer, City of Culver City

Jessica Beagles-Roos, Member, Culver City Board of Education

Andrew N. Weissman, Chairman, Charter Review Committee

Current organizational thought centers around a "flatter" organization with emphasis on interactive teamwork and creativity. Likewise, our current CAO form of government empowers our Department Heads with more responsibility and authority along with more autonomy and accountability. This is efficient and effective government, rather than managers hired and fired at the individual whim of a City Manager without input from your elected Council Members. Even the Police and Fire Chiefs would no longer have Civil Service protection.

The code of ethics prevents Department Heads from being active in political or electoral matters. Privately, they have definite opinions regarding the City Charter and how it impacts their ability to best meet the needs of the City's residents. Do not mistake their silence on this subject as support for a change. Some may agree, others may not, but you, the voters, should consider this: One bad or marginal Department Head, or even a poor City Council Member will not ruin a City. A bad or marginal City Manager can. We have seen it in other cities.

You elected the City Council to run our city. If you vote for this Charter Reform, you've assigned that responsibility to an employee you did not choose!

Vote "No" on Measure "V"!

Albert Vera, Mayor

Carol Gross, Council Member

Alice Barricello, Commissioner

Susan Deen, Commissioner

John Montanio, Retired Police Chief

What's wrong with our city that we need to re-do its foundation? Our city is the envy of most other cities. Why change it? Once done, a new charter cannot be un-done without again re-writing the "constitution" of the city!

The people of Culver City have the right to make choices. If this proposed new charter would be good for the city, they would give you a chance to select what you want. It is "all or nothing" because there are things in it that they know you won't like. For that reason alone, vote "No" on the proposed new charter.

This new charter will increase costs and will add a whole new level of bureaucracy between the people and those doing the city's work. It will require more staff. It will also slow things down a lot, and will make it harder for people to get answers from this new "top heavy" government. Who wants that?

Why put all the business of the city through one individual called the city manager? The city should be run by the five council members you select, not just one person. Why have the council if you have a City Manager?

The City Clerk and the City Treasurer would be appointed by the City Manager, NOT the people. You lose that right. The writers of this new charter have wrapped everything up in one package so you don't get the chance to choose.

So, you have the choice to buy the whole costly bureaucracy, or keep our great city running like it is. Just do what we all are doing and vote "No" on charter reform. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

Albert Vera, Mayor

Carol Gross, Council Member

Alice Barricello, Commissioner

Barbara J. Silverstein

"What is the problem?"

It's the difficulty of attracting and retaining quality management Professionals don't want to be micromanaged by five bosses (would you?). They want a clear chain of command as in any organization: Board of Directors (City Council), CEO (City Manager), managers and staff. Our unprecedented executive staff turnover in the last four years says something is "broke." The new charter will fix it.

"It is all or nothing."

Yes, and the "all" was refined by the charter review committee - your friends and neighbors - from the input you gave over the course of a year, in 20 public meetings and 2 council hearings. Your choices are what went into this charier, where all the pieces fit together as a comprehensive whole.

"A whole new level of bureaucracy."

Nonsense! A City Manager replaces the current CAO. It's that simple. There is nothing "top heavy" about it. In fact, there are huge gains in efficiency, productivity and responsiveness.

“Why have the council if you have a City Manager?"

We elect our part-time council members to make policy. We need their time and energy focused on that. The City Manager's full-time job is to implement those policies.

"The City Treasurer would be appointed bv the City Manager."

And our City Treasurer believes it should be that way! It's a job requiring sophisticated financial knowledge. Why keep this management position as a popularity contest?

Vote yes on Measure V!

Gary Silbiger, Member, Culver City City Council

Edward M. Wolkowitz, Former Member, Culver City City Council

Steven Gourley, Former Member, Culver City City Council

Paul Jacobs, Former Member, Culver City City Council

Edward C. Little, Former Member, Culver City City Council