October 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes

Meeting Minutes 
City Charter Amendment 
Resident Advisory Committee  
Regular Meeting 
 
October 15, 2025 | 5:00 p.m. 
Council Chambers Conference Room 
88 E. Chicago St., Chandler, AZ 
 
 
Call to Order 
The meeting was called to order by Chair Lopez at 5:00 p.m. 
 
Roll Call 
Commission Attendance  
 
 
 
Staff Attendance 
Chair René Lopez  
 
 
 
 
Ryan Peters, Deputy City Manager 
Committee Member Brad Davis  
 
 
Jen Winkler, Assistant City Attorney  
Committee Member Heather Anguiano 
 
Dana DeLong, City Clerk  
Committee Member Ursula Gordwin 
Committee Member Sherida McMullan 
Committee Member Lisa Askey  
Committee Member Jim Jurnak 
Committee Member Jennifer Pawlik 
Committee Member Allison Stewart 
 
Consent Agenda and Discussion 
1.  
September 2025 City Charter Amendment Resident Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes 
Move City Charter Amendment Resident Advisory Committee approve the meeting minutes 
of the September 11, 2025, Regular Meeting 
 
Consent Agenda Motion and Vote 
Committee Member McMullan moved to approve the Consent Agenda of the October 15, 2025, 
City Charter Amendment Resident Advisory Committee Meeting; Seconded by Committee 
Member Anguiano.

Page 2 of 6 
 
Motion carried unanimously (9-0).  
 
Public Comment 
TERRI KIMBLE, Chandler Chamber of Commerce, provided comments regarding suggestions for 
the charter amendments considered by the committee. The Chandler Chamber supports an at-
large rather than a districted Council structure. Business leaders supported adding an ethics 
committee to ensure a high standard of conduct for appointed and elected members of Chandler 
public bodies. Business leaders supported the two meetings a month to support the speed of 
business. The Chamber supports Council retaining oversight of creating, changing, or eliminating 
city departments. She mentioned the Chamber supports the residency requirements for 
appointed officers of the city and department directors. She thanked the committee for 
considering these recommendations. 
 
Discussion 
2.  
Discussion and consideration of proposed revisions to Charter Articles III - X developed 
from prior discussion 
  
RYAN PETERS, Deputy City Manager, presented the following presentation.  
• City Charter Amendment Resident Advisory Committee 
• Agenda 
• Article III. City Manager 
• Article IV. Administrative Departments 
• Article V. Finance and Taxation 
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER STEWART asked if the definition of “publish” was added in the charter 
amendments and why “published electronically” is specified in section 2.15(b).  
 
MR. PETERS explained there was a lot of prior conversation around the requirements of 
publication in the charter.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER STEWART suggested removing “electronically” from this specific section to 
keep the definition of publication as what was defined earlier in the charter. This is required for 
state statute, and the city goes above the minimum requirement set in the charter anyways.  
 
MR. PETERS noted the word “electronically” would be removed from the sections where 
publications are mentioned.  
 
MR. PETERS continued the presentation.  
• Article VI. Boards and Commissions 
• Article VII. Nominations and Elections 
• Article VIII. Initiative, Referendum, and Recall

Page 3 of 6 
 
• Article IX. General Provisions 
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER PAWLIK noted that she is against the proposed change regarding residency 
requirements for the city manager only.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER ASKEY asked when the committee could discuss the comments submitted 
by the Chandler Chamber of Commerce, as they provided feedback on this change.   
 
CHAIR LOPEZ said discussion on this subject could be reopened and reconsidered. 
 
Mr. Peters summarized that the current state of the clause in the charter requires the City 
Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk, City Magistrate, and all department directors to reside within 
the city within six months of employment. The proposed change, discussed previously by the 
committee, aims to eliminate department directors from this requirement, so that only the City 
Manager would be required to reside within city limits.  
 
CHAIR LOPEZ asked if they had decided this requirement would also apply to the appointed city 
officials. 
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER STEWART said they had decided to leave it up to the discretion of City 
Council, if they wanted to negotiate residency in contracts with the appointed officers.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER ASKEY asked if it has to be stated in the charter that the Council has 
discretion to require residency in contracts with the appointed officials. 
 
MR. PETERS said no.  
 
MS. WINKLER explained that this reflects earlier consideration regarding contract law versus the 
city charter. It is not required to put in language that Council has discretion through ordinary 
contract principles.  
 
CHAIR LOPEZ said the committee agrees that the City Manager should remain as a residency 
requirement position. The question for consideration is should this apply to the other three 
appointed officials, and / or the department directors.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER PAWLIK said she would prefer to leave the language as it is currently in that 
section.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER GORDWIN said she supports the Council determining residency through 
contracts on an individual basis rather than have this set by the charter.

Page 4 of 6 
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER ASKEY suggested adding language that certain items such as residency are 
at the discretion of Council into the charter.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER STEWART said this change could impact the city budget.  
 
MR. PETERS explained that trends for city manager positions have been for cities to offer a 
significant relocation package.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER JURNAK said he would prefer to leave the language as it is currently in that 
section. 
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER ANGUIANO supported the change as written.  
 
CHAIR LOPEZ said he agreed with the change as written and mentioned added the clarifying 
language of residency requirements in other employment contracts. 
 
MR. PETERS said the City Manager is the hiring authority for department directors, so if any 
additional department director positions are wished to live in Chandler, they must be named in 
the charter specifically.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER ASKEY noted that she would like to see appointed officials in the language 
to have the residency as set by Council contractual discretion.  
 
CHAIR LOPEZ asked if this would apply to the City Manager, and the three other appointed 
officials: City Attorney, City Clerk, and City Magistrate.  
 
MS. WINKLER said the Council does not have any involvement in the hiring of department heads. 
They can enter into contract negotiations with the appointed officers.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER GORDWIN suggested a broader term than naming the three positions, as 
additional appointed positions may be created in the future.  
 
MR. PETERS summarized that the suggested change by the committee was for City Manager must 
establish residency within the city within six months of appointment, and Council shall have 
discretion to negotiate with contracts the residency of all appointed officials.  
 
MR. PETERS continued the presentation. 
• Article X. Succession in Government 
• Committee Review and Recommendation Process 
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER STEWART asked if the committee would see how the package is presented 
to Council, or how it is presented on the ballot.

Page 5 of 6 
 
 
MR. PETERS said he would like to get feedback primarily on how it will be presented to the 
committee for a formal vote.  
 
CHAIR LOPEZ said it would likely be easiest for it to be presented to each in a similar way.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER JURNAK said there are quite a few recommendations made by the 
committee, beyond language and grammatical changes. He suggested separate voting items for 
each unique proposed change.  
 
CHAIR LOPEZ suggested that all sections be highlighted with every change and then coded to show 
what kind of change it is.  
 
MR. PETERS asked when these items are brought forward to the committee, what format should 
they be in. He asked how the items should be separated out so that committee members can vote 
how they would like to.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER JURNAK requested an opinion on what items were significant to be 
considered as separate ballot questions.  
 
MS. WINKLER explained that all charter amendments must be voted on.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER JURNAK said yes but suggested that grammar changes could be grouped 
together for convenience, while keeping significant changes grouped together to capture how the 
committee looked at these items.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER MCMULLAN asked if context is provided to Council about the changes 
suggested. 
 
CHAIR LOPEZ said that when the committee is done, his responsibility is to present the package 
to Council.  
 
DANA DELONG, City Clerk, explained that most of the item would have to be separate ballot 
measures because citizens cannot decide two issues on one ballot measure.  
 
MR. PETERS suggested that grammatical changes and gender-neutral language changes will be 
considered grouped. Substantive policy proposals will return to the committee separately.  
 
3.  
Discussion and consideration of potential Charter revisions proposed by individual 
committee members 
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER JURNAK presented the following presentation.

Page 6 of 6 
 
• Committee Member Jurnak Proposed Changes to Article 2 
• Chandler Population by Year Chart 
• Background 
• Rationale 
• Rationale Continued 
• Proposed System 
• Proposed System Continued 
• Proposed Update to City Council Districts 
• Thank You 
 
MR. PETERS asked for the committee to determine if there was any interest in pursuing the idea 
presented.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER MCMULLAN asked why it matters how expensive it is to run as a candidate. 
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER JURNAK explained that it is easier for incumbents to raise funds than it is a 
non-incumbent.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER STEWART asked if there is any comparative data for the candidate spending 
in districted cities.  
 
COMMITTEE MEMBER JURNAK explained that the population across cities in districts is not 
comparable to each other. Census data is used to establish districts, not registered voter data.  
 
Committee consensus determined this proposal will not be pursued.   
 
Calendar 
4.  
The next Regular Meeting date, time, and location will be determined at the meeting. 
 
Committee consensus was to meet on Monday, November 17 at 4:30 p.m. in the Council 
Chambers Conference Room, pending location availability.  
 
Adjourn 
The meeting was adjourned at 6:27 p.m. 
 
______________________________ 
 
 
 
______________________________ 
Ryan Peters, Staff Liaison                                                René Lopez, Chair

City Charter Amendment 
Resident Advisory Committee 
October 15, 2025
Public Comment