Charter Amendment Resident Advisory Committee Presentation

Rene Lopez, Committee Chair
Ryan Peters, Deputy City Manager
 
City Charter Amendment 
Resident Advisory Committee 
Council Presentation
February 2, 2026

Background
The City Charter Amendment Resident Advisory Committee was 
established by City Council in June 2025 to make recommendations on 
potential charter amendments to be considered for referral to the 
voters.  
Members of the committee include:
• Chair Rene Lopez
• Pastor Brad Davis
• Heather Anguiano
• Ursula Gordwin
• Sherida McMullan
• Lisa Askey
• Jim Jurnak
• Jennifer Pawlik
• Allison Stewart

Committee Review and Recommendation Process
Committee Reviewed Charter
&
Identified Opportunities to Revise
Committee Consensus on 
Proposed Charter Revisions 
Committee Directed Staff to Prepare 
Draft Charter Amendment Language 
for Consideration by Committee
Committee Makes Recommendations 
to Council on Proposed Charter 
Amendments

Recommendation No. 1 – Gender Neutrality, 
Grammar, Punctuation, Capitalization, & 
Elimination of Legalese
Description:
Non-substantive changes to modernize and ensure consistency throughout 
the Charter.
Key Changes:
Applies across Articles II–X (e.g., gender neutrality, grammar/punctuation 
fixes, removal of legalese, consistent capitalization). Adds words like “city” 
before “manager” or “council”.
Committee Vote: 
Unanimous recommendation.
Visual: 
Green highlights from original summary.

Other Charter City Comparisons
City
Approach to Gender Neutrality in Charters
Scottsdale
Includes a specific "Gender" section (Article 15) stating: "Wherever 
the context requires, words used in the masculine gender include 
the feminine and neuter."
Tempe
Applies gender-neutral language throughout the charter (noted in 
amendment history for multiple sections).
Mesa/ Glendale/ 
Tucson
No explicit charter provisions found for broad gender neutrality; 
handled via modern drafting or ordinances where needed (e.g., 
anti-discrimination updates separately).
Phoenix
No specific charter-wide gender neutrality provision identified; 
relies on general interpretation rules (common in many charters).

Recommendation No. 2 – Clarifying 
Changes
Description:
Changes to clarify existing provisions, align with state law, and remove 
outdated initial-adoption language.
Key Changes:
Article I: Clarifies contract authority.
Article II: Clarifies reimbursement policies, city employment prohibition, 
petition rights, eliminates outdated utility rate references.
Article X: Strikes obsolete initial-adoption sections.
Committee Vote: 
Unanimous recommendation.
Visual: 
Blue highlights from original summary.

Recommendation No. 3 – “Resign to Run”
& Filling Council Vacancies 
(Sections 2.05 & 2.06)
Description: 
The proposed changes bring the charter’s “resign to run” provisions in line with 
Arizona state law (A.R.S. §38-296) by requiring the mayor or a councilmember 
intending to run for any other public office to resign upon filing nomination papers for 
that office.
 
Key Changes:
Resign to Run: Brings local rules in line with A.R.S. §38-296, which deems an 
incumbent to have offered themselves for nomination/election (triggering resignation) 
specifically on the "filing of a nomination paper" (per A.R.S. §38-296(B)).
Vacancy Filling: Provisions for filling vacancies in the office of mayor or councilmember 
are consolidated under Section 2.06. The council has 45 days to fill the vacancy; 
otherwise, it is filled at the forthcoming election or, if no election is forthcoming, at a 
special election held as soon as practicable.
Committee Vote: 
Unanimous recommendation.

City
Resign-to-Run Requirement
Vacancy Filling Method / Time Limit
Scottsdale
Must resign upon filing nomination paper 
or formal declaration or 90 days prior to 
primary election, whichever occurs first
Council appointment within 31 days
Tempe
Resign at least 90 days prior to primary 
election
Council appointment within 30 days
Mesa
Similar to Tempe (at least 90 days prior 
to primary election)
Council appointment within 30 days
Tucson
No specific "resign-to-run" provision in 
charter (follows state law A.R.S. §38-296 
where applicable)
Council appointment within 30 days
Glendale
No specific "resign-to-run" provision in 
charter (follows state law A.R.S. §38-296 
where applicable)
Council appointment by majority 
vote of remaining members (no 
specific time limit stated in charter 
summaries
Phoenix
Follows state law (A.R.S. §38-296); 
automatic resignation upon filing 
nomination papers for another office if 
>1 year left in current term (or if term 
overlap)
Special election if ≥365 days remain 
in term; council appointment if <365 
days (or <90 days before regular 
election, may leave vacant)
Other Charter City Comparisons

Recommendation No. 4 – Authorization to 
Reorganize City Departments with Council 
Approval (Sections 2.08 & 2.13)
Description: 
Authorizes the city manager to establish and organize the offices and 
departments of the city subject to the review and approval of the city 
council.
Key Changes:
Eliminates ordinance requirement for establishing or altering city 
departments and provides for council review and approval of city 
manager's proposed changes by resolution.
Committee Vote: 
5-2 recommendation.

City
Authority to 
Establish/Organize/Alter 
Departments
Required Method
Scottsdale
Requires ordinance
Ordinance
Tempe
No ordinance required
Not by ordinance
Mesa
Requires ordinance
Ordinance
Glendale
Requires ordinance
Ordinance
Phoenix
Requires ordinance
Ordinance
Other Charter City Comparisons

Recommendation No. 5 – Elimination of the 
“Two-Readings” Requirement for Ordinances 
(Section 2.15)
Description: 
Eliminates the requirement that the city council consider an ordinance 
twice – as introduced and as adopted.
Key Changes:
Removes the requirement for ordinances to be considered twice by the 
City Council.
Committee Vote: 
Unanimous recommendation.

Other Charter City Comparisons
City
Ordinance Reading 
Requirement
Notes
Scottsdale
Typically two readings 
(introduction and 
adoption)
Standard council procedure; charter 
allows flexibility but practice is two.
Tempe
Two readings required 
unless emergency
Charter Section similar to many; can waive 
for urgency.
Mesa
Two readings standard
Common in council rules.
Glendale
Two readings typically 
required
Follows standard municipal practice.
Phoenix
Two readings (first and 
second)
Charter and rules require separate 
introduction and adoption readings.
Tucson
Two readings required for 
most ordinances
Charter mandates unless waived.

Recommendation No. 6 – Add “gender” and 
“other protected status” as bases for prohibited 
discrimination (Section 9.02)
Description: 
Expands prohibited discrimination grounds.
Key Changes:
Adds “gender” and “other protected status” to existing list.
Committee Vote: 
Unanimous recommendation.

Other Charter City Comparisons
Scottsdale None.
Tempe
Prohibits discrimination in city employment based on race, color, gender, gender identity, 
sexual orientation, religion, national origin, familial status, age, political affiliation, 
disability, or veteran status.
Mesa
None.
Glendale
None.
Phoenix
Prohibits discrimination in city employment based on race, color, ancestry, national 
origin, sex, political or religious opinions or affiliations.
Tucson
Prohibits discrimination in city employment based on religious or political affiliation.

Recommendation No. 7 – Residency 
requirement for department directors 
(Section 9.03).
Description: 
Eliminates requirement that department heads establish residency in 
the city within six months of appointment; continues residency 
requirement for city manager; authorizes council to require residency as 
a condition for any other position council appoints.
Key Changes:
Removes automatic residency requirement for department directors.
Committee Vote: 
5-2 recommendation.

Other Charter City Comparisons
City
Residency Requirement 
for Department 
Directors / Heads
Residency 
Requirement for City 
Manager
Notes / Other Positions
Scottsdale
Officers of the City 
(including city manager, 
treasurer, clerk, attorney, 
auditor) within 6 months
Yes – within 6 
months (for specified 
officers)
Council may provide residency 
requirements for all city employees by 
ordinance
Tempe
Not required for 
department heads
Yes – within 6 
months
Limited to city manager
Mesa
Not required
Yes – within 60 days
Limited to city manager
Glendale
Not required
Yes – during tenure
Limited to city manager
Tucson
Almost all department 
heads are required to be 
residents
Yes – within 6 
months
Applies to city manager, 
deputy/assistant managers, chiefs 
(police/fire), and listed department 
directors
Phoenix
Required within 24 
months of appointment
Yes- time not 
specified
Applies to City Manager, Deputies, Dept 
Heads, Asst Heads, and designated 
executives (HR policy).

Recommendation No. 8 Staff 
Recommendation for Additional Clarity 
(Section 2.03)
Description: 
Provides additional clarity regarding the timing of the selection of the 
vice-mayor by codifying a long-standing past practice of the City 
Council.
Key Changes:
Clarifies that the vice-mayor is selected at the first regular City 
Council meeting in January of each year, rather than within a 
specified number of days (31 days).
Committee Vote: 
Not applicable – staff recommendation.

Other Charter City Comparisons
City
Vice-Mayor / Deputy Mayor 
Selection Timing
Method / Notes
Scottsdale
Annually, often at first 
meeting in January or 
organizational meeting
Council selects; timing per council 
rules, commonly early year.
Tempe
Annually in January (first or 
organizational meeting)
Codified or by practice; aligns with new 
council terms.
Mesa
Annually, typically January
Council election at start of year.
Glendale
Annually in January
Standard practice at first regular 
meeting post-election cycle.
Phoenix
Vice-Mayor selected 
annually, often in January
Council chooses; timing flexible but 
commonly early year.
Tucson
Mayor Pro Tempore selected 
annually, typically January
At first council meeting of calendar 
year or as needed.

•
Informational Pamphlet: 
•
Varies by page count, arguments submitted, & postage
•
No pamphlet cost if no ballot measures on General Election
•
Additional Election Costs:
•
(~$9,000): translation, security, legal notices, etc.
•
Note: special election costs are higher because the costs are not shared unless other 
jurisdictions have ballot measures.
Current Estimated Election Costs
Election 
Types
County Costs
Pamphlet Costs
Additional 
Election Costs
Total Estimated 
Cost
Primary
$111,000
$190,000 
(+$10,000 if 
added Charter 
Amendments)
$9,000
$310,000 (or 
$320,000 w/ 
Charter)
General
$111,000
$150,000 (if ballot 
measures are 
added)
$9,000
$120,000 (or 
$270,000 w/ 
ballot 
measures)
Special
$392,200
$150,000
$9,000
$551,200

2026 Election Timelines
Action Step
Primary/ Special 
Election Date(s)
General/ 
Special Election 
Date(s)
Notes
Council Call of Election & Notify County (180 
days prior to election)
Ballot Language Due (Deadline: 150 days prior to 
election)
Feb 5, 2026
(Jan 29, 2026)
Mar 7, 2026
(Feb 28, 2026)
May 7, 2026
Jun 6, 2026
Can be same 
resolution/meeting.
Publish Call of Election (Deadline: 120 days prior 
to election – suggested)
Apr 6, 2026
(Mar 30, 2026)
Jul 6, 2026
After council approval.
First Day to Accept Pro/Con Arguments 
(Deadline: 120 days prior to election: suggested)
Apr 6, 2026
(Mar 30, 2026)
Jul 6, 2026
Date flexible after ballot 
language adopted.
Deadline to File Pro/Con Arguments for Publicity 
Pamphlet (Deadline: 90 days prior to election)
May 6, 2026
(Apr 29, 2026)
Aug 5, 2026
Begin Mailing Informational Pamphlet (42 days 
prior to election)
Jun 23, 2026
(Jun 16, 2026)
Sep 22, 2026
Must precede ballot 
mailing.
Last Day for Voter Registration ( Deadline: 29 
days prior to election)
Jul 6, 2026
(Jun 29, 2026)
Oct 5, 2026
First Day to Mail Ballots (Deadline: 27 days prior 
to election)
Jul 8, 2026
(Jul 1, 2026)
Oct 7, 2026
Election Day
Aug 4, 2026*
(Jul 28, 2026)
Nov 3, 2026
*It is anticipated that the 
August 4 Primary date will 
be moved to July 28 by the 
legislature within the next 
month or so. 
Deadline for Council to Canvass (≤20 days after 
the election )
Aug 24, 2026
(Aug 17, 2026)
Nov 23, 2026

2027 Election Timelines
Action Step
March 9, 2027 
Special Election 
Date(s)
May 18, 2027 
Special Election 
Date(s)
Notes
Council Call of Election & Notify 
County of adding ballot measures 
(180 days prior)
Ballot Language Due to the County 
(150 days prior)
Sep 10, 2026
Oct 10, 2026
Nov 19, 2026
Dec 19, 2026
The resolution calling the 
election, and the adoption 
of the ballot language can 
be done at the same 
Council meeting on the 
same Resolution.
Call of Election Published (120 days 
prior – suggested)
Nov 9, 2026
Jan 18, 2027
After council approval.
First Day to Accept Pro/Con 
Arguments for Publicity Pamphlet 
(120 days prior – suggested)
Nov 9, 2026
Jan 18, 2027
Date flexible after ballot 
language adopted.
Deadline to File Pro/Con Arguments 
(90 days prior)
Dec 9, 2026
Feb 17, 2027
Begin Mailing Publicity Pamphlet 
(42 days prior)
Jan 26, 2027
Apr 6, 2027
Must precede ballot 
mailing.
Last Day for Voter Registration (29 
days prior)
Feb 8, 2027
Apr 19, 2027
First Day to Mail Ballots (27 days 
prior)
Feb 10, 2027
Apr 21, 2027
Election Day
Mar 9, 2027
May 18, 2027
Deadline for Council to Canvass (≤20 
days after)
Mar 29, 2027
Jun 7, 2027

Questions?
Thank you!