City of Porterville

Shall Ordinance No. 1875 be enacted, imposing a local general tax on cannabis businesses at a rate not exceeding $25 per square foot (annually adjusted by CPI) or 10% of gross receipts, to maintain public safety and general City services for Porterville residents; generating undetermined revenue until repealed?

To provide funding that cannot be taken away by the State of California for general fund infrastructure and City services such as economic development, the promotion of tourism, and the Mighty 190 campaign, shall a City Ordinance be adopted to increase the hotel/motel tax by four percent, update language and confirm equal treatment of traditional and online bookings?

Shall an ordinance be adopted to maintain police, fire, emergency response times; prevent property crimes like thefts and burglaries; maintain/increase neighborhood and school police patrols; maintain anti-gang, senior, youth services; increase after-school and library programs; address homelessness; repair potholes and streets; and other services by establishing a one cent sales tax providing approximately $6,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring independent audits, citizen’s oversight and all funds used for Porterville?

Should the Charter be amended to make certain technical, non-substantive revisions which do not materially alter, increase or decrease the home rule powers of the City of Porterville?

Should the Charter be amended to change the election date for Council seats to be the same as the date for the Federal General election for federal officers in the State of California?

Should the Charter be amended to allow City Council meetings to be held at publicly-owned facilities in addition to City Hall?

Should the Charter be amended to provide that a council member seat becomes vacant if, without permission from the Council, a council member removes or absents himself/herself from the City for more than forty-five (45) days, fails to attend five (5) consecutive regular meetings, unless prevented from attending by sickness, and in that event after ninety (90) days?

Should the Charter be amended to provide that any severance pay to the City Manager is limited to the equivalent of a maximum of 12 months salary, subject to any other restrictions set forth by State law and further limitations as authorized by the City Council?

Should the Charter be amended to require majority vote approval of expenditures, allow the City Council to set, by majority vote and resolution after each Council election, the maximum amount of expenditure of City funds allowed without prior Council approval; require a 4/5 majority vote approval for indebtedness, and allow the Council to set, by 4/5 majority vote and resolution after each Council election, the maximum amount of indebtedness allowed without prior Council approval?

Should the Charter be amended to provide that the City has the power to perform public projects, improvements, and repairs using its own forces, regardless of cost, and to provide that the City Council may, only in cases of emergency including circumstances resulting in imminent threat to public health and/or safety, by 4/5 majority vote, proceed without otherwise adhering to competitive bidding requirements?

Should the Charter be amended to raise the bid limit to $50,000.00, concerning public projects subject to competitive bidding, with further restrictions considered by the Council annually?

Should the Charter be amended to provide that a violation of this section (interference with the performance of duties of the City Manager) is a misdemeanor and subject to additional consequences, including forfeiture of office if convicted, and that the portion of this Charter section pertaining to officer and employee political activities be moved to and restated in a new Charter section?

Should the Charter be amended to require that leases of City property may be terminated by the City upon advance notice equivalent to either 30 days or a maximum of 5% of the total lease term period but not including option periods, and upon paying the lessee market value of improvements as set forth, and clarifying that these requirements shall not apply to month-to-month, or State or Federal, leases?

Should the Charter be amended to add a new Charter section establishing penalties and remedies for violations of the Charter, where no other penalty or remedy is otherwise specified, and providing for penalties and remedies as generally provided for in the City’s Municipal Code?

Should the Charter be amended to provide that council members shall receive compensation equivalent to the hourly California State Minimum Wage, as from time-to-time may be adjusted by State law and then by ordinance, for all meetings attended by the members as approved by the City Council, with compensation only becoming effective upon commencement of each council-member’s new term and subject to any other applicable statutory or constitutional restrictions?

Should the Charter be amended to provide that the ordinance publication requirements shall be set by City ordinance?

Should the Charter be amended to provide that the City employee retirement, pension, or disability/death benefits shall not be terminated except as may be permitted by the California Constitution and applicable law, and to clarify that the City retains its full power to create, modify or eliminate its pensions and retiree healthcare benefits subject to the California Constitution?