Measure RC, Rosemead

The stakes

A general law city, which Rosemead is today, has only the powers the Legislature gives it; a charter city governs its own “municipal affairs,” though state law still applies to matters of “statewide concern,” such as open meetings, public records, bargaining with employee associations, and “certain housing and zoning matters,” and courts decide what counts.^{Note 1} A charter is the city’s “constitution,” and once adopted it can be changed only by a majority of Rosemead voters voting on the question.^{Note 7}

If Measure RC passes, the council-manager government stays, the Council keeps five members, and current terms and election dates stay the same.^{Note 8} Several charter powers take effect only if the Council later adopts an ordinance to use them.^{Note 9}

If it fails, Rosemead stays a general law city, as it has been since 1959.^{Note 10}

In 2008, Rosemead voters rejected Measure CC, a charter with a limit of three four-year terms, 62.5 percent to 37.5 percent, according to Ballotpedia, whose page labels the ballot question “MEASURE Q”; no county-certified result is in our record.^{Note 11}

What changes

Term limits. Rosemead has none today.^{Note 12} The charter would bar anyone from running after serving five four-year terms, but its copies disagree on which five: the county’s electronic text says “five consecutive or non-consecutive four-year terms,” while the City’s posted copy says “five consecutive four-year terms”.^{Note 2} Only future terms count: neither a sitting member’s current term nor any earlier term counts, and a partial term counts as a full one.^{Note 2}

City Prosecutor. Under general law, a city enforces its own ordinances but needs the District Attorney’s consent to prosecute state misdemeanors.^{Note 3} The charter would let the Council establish a City Prosecutor’s office by ordinance, directing “the City Attorney or another qualified attorney” to prosecute violations of city law and “such state misdemeanors as the City has the power to prosecute”.^{Note 3}

Economic development. The charter lets the City spend general-fund money on economic development, naming jobs, “market rate and affordable housing options,” retail, dining and the tax base, and declares all of it a municipal affair.^{Note 4} The City Attorney’s impartial analysis says general law cities have “limited authority” here.^{Note 4}

Contracts. The impartial analysis says the charter would let the City adopt its own purchasing and contracting procedures by ordinance, “rather than following State requirements,” including a preference for veterans and disabled veterans; general law cities can prefer only disabled veterans.^{Note 5} The documents do not settle whether that reaches the state’s competitive-bidding rules.^{Note 5} The charter sets no bidding threshold.^{Note 5}

How it works

The charter says its language “is intended to be permissive rather than exclusive or limiting” and should be read broadly in favor of the City’s power over any municipal affair.^{Note 13} Where the charter is silent on a municipal affair, general state law applies until the Council passes an ordinance; where the two conflict, the charter says it controls, though state law still governs matters of statewide concern.^{Note 1,Note 13}

Section 3.3 says revenue the City raises is not subject to “any other form of involuntary reduction by any other level of government”; Section 3.4 says no one acting for the City must perform a function another level of government mandates until that authority provides funds sufficient for it.^{Note 14} The analysis does not mention either.^{Note 14} A city charter can say a great deal about Sacramento; whether Sacramento has to listen is for the courts.

What it costs, or the tradeoff

Measure RC is not a tax.^{Note 15} The City reimburses the county for the election, which the county estimated at about $105,790 to consolidate, before the cost of printing the full charter, which the Council’s resolution orders printed.^{Note 15,Note 16} No ballot document estimates the cost of a City Prosecutor or an economic development program.^{Note 17}

State law generally bars a charter city whose charter or an ordinance lets contractors skip the state’s prevailing wage on public works from receiving state funding for its construction projects, with exceptions for small projects and some awards made before 2015.^{Note 18} Rosemead’s charter has no prevailing-wage clause.^{Note 18}

The strongest complication

Of the ten measures on the county’s list we track for our five cities, two of them countywide, Measure RC is the only one whose entry names opponents.^{Note 19} Mayor Sandra Armenta and Councilman Steven Ly, whom the Council chose to write the argument for it, signed that argument; three opponents signed the argument against.^{Note 20} The county’s electronic ballot content carried no rebuttals as of October 28, and the City’s elections page links none; whether either side filed one is not confirmed.^{Note 21}

The opponents write that “The proposed term limits, 5-4 years terms, are not term limits”; a 20-year limit “is more than a generation”.^{Note 22} Because the new limit counts no current or past term, a member now in office could finish the current term and then serve five more.^{Note 2}

For the prosecutor, the opponents say a city prosecutor could only prosecute misdemeanors, and the City Attorney is a partner in a large law firm with prosecutors who could serve if needed.^{Note 22} The City’s FY2026-27 budget funds its City Attorney division at $350,000, of which $345,000 is legal services, under its existing City Attorney contract, whose described duties include acting “as City Prosecutor”.^{Note 23} The argument for says that without the District Attorney’s permission “many crimes are not prosecuted”.^{Note 24} Neither side gives a count of crimes left unprosecuted.^{Note 22,Note 24}

The opponents call the veterans’ preference “honorable” but say the City should also consider other qualified businesses, such as those owned by Rosemead residents, women, minorities or people with disabilities who are not veterans, and note that state law requires awards to the “lowest responsible and most qualified bidder”.^{Note 22} They also write: “All of these items can be addressed through city ordinances”.^{Note 22}

The argument for also says the charter “limits compensation for your local elected officials”.^{Note 24} The ballot question itself reads “continuing following California law for limiting compensation for Councilmembers,” where the staff report’s draft had read “compensating”; the charter pays members “in accordance with the provisions of State law,” and the City Attorney writes that it “would not affect Councilmember compensation or elections”.^{Note 25}

Where I land

This is my opinion, and I have not decided how to vote. My standard is that a charter is a constitution, so it should put its limits in writing rather than leave them to later ordinances.

Measure RC would give Rosemead powers the City Attorney says general law cities lack or hold only in part: a City Prosecutor’s office that could bring “such state misdemeanors as the City has the power to prosecute,” general-fund spending on economic development, and a veterans’ preference that reaches beyond disabled veterans.^{Note 3,Note 4,Note 5} But the prosecutor and the contracting rules wait on ordinances the Council would adopt later, and the term limit counts only terms that begin after the charter takes effect.^{Note 2,Note 9}

Drafts of the ordinances the Council intends to adopt, before November 3, would move me to yes, starting with the prosecutor’s cost and the contracting rules. Nothing in writing by then would move me to no, since the charter can be amended only by another vote.^{Note 7}

What I will watch

Which wording prints in the mailed guide: the Council’s resolution and the county’s electronic ballot say “City funds for economic development,” while the county’s final measure list prints “or”.^{Note 26} Whether the term-limit text prints with or without “or non-consecutive”.^{Note 2,Note 26} Whether either side filed a rebuttal.^{Note 21} Registration closed October 19; conditional registration, with a provisional ballot, runs through Election Day.^{Note 27}