Council to Seek Judge's Opinion on Murrieta Measures

The Murrieta City Council has agreed that only a judge can say for sure whether the salary-capping measures approved by a majority of Murrieta voters are legal.

The consensus comes four months after the measures were approved by voters, and follows several closed and public meetings about their legality--the question being whether voters can legally set salaries of Council and administrators.

Council gave their final blessing Tuesday on Measure C, which limits Council members to two consecutive four-year terms. They took a different approach on Measures D and E, however.

D limits Council pay including benefits and club memberships to 15 percent of the median family income. E seeks to limit the City Manager's pay to 2.5 times the median family income.

The vote was 3-2 on both, with Councilman Rick Gibbs and Councilwoman Kelly Bennett voting no. Bennett, an attorney, said the measures were an improper delegation and so was the City trying to change them to be more legal.

"Either it's a yes or it's a no," Bennett said. "I don't think we have an ethical right to come close [to what the measures say]...we need court direction. I think we have kind of made a mess out of it trying to make a compromise, which is admirable."

While Mayor Randon Lane, along with Council members Doug McAllister and Alan Long, approved of the slightly changed measures, Lane said the effort they made will show if they do go before a judge.

Gibbs said his opinion hasn't changed since the initiatives were first introduced in 2008.

"I don’t believe in the measure," Gibbs said about limiting the City Manager's pay. "I think it will harm the City and until such time that a judge has ruled that is OK to go with the will of the people, I just can’t do it."

Both D and E were up for a second reading on Tuesday, which would have brought them into law within 30 days.

In an attempt to further avoid breaking what City attorneys say is against state law, more changes were made to the measures. D and E will come back again for first readings at the next City Council meeting.

In the meantime, at the direction of City Council, City attorneys will likely start seeking judicial review in the matter.

The residents who wrote the measures, got enough signatures to get them on the ballot and were successful in getting them passed were not pleased with the City's final drafts of measures. Previously, one of the main proponents, Murrieta resident Bob Kowell, said he would likely take the City to court over them.

He directed his distaste at Councilwoman Kelly Bennett, who was absent at a previous City Council meeting when the amended measures were initially approved. With Bennett absent, that vote was 3-1, Gibbs opposing.

"She is so wrong on this...she should be recalled. She is against the will of the people. We deserve to have our initiatives put in place as they are," Kowell said, adding that he planned to sue. 

Bennett said she would prefer a judge rule on the constitutionality of the measures as they were originally written.

Until then, according to City attorneys Leslie Devaney and Jeff Morris, the major changes to Measure D include adding benefits into the 15 percent salary limit on Council members; and giving more power to the voters to change compensation by allowing fluctuations to pass by majority rather than super majority.

Also, the compensation limits under D would not come into play until the next full terms of current Council members. That part was changed from the last ordinance up for approval, which would have made the changes effective immediately. But Council members voted it may be illegal to change compensation mid-term.

The proposed Measure E still allows City Council to set the City Manager's pay, but it would be based on the salaries of similar positions in similar cities, as well as be limited to 2.5 times the median family income in Murrieta. The limit would not affect City Manager Rick Dudley's current contract.

Resident Edward Faunce, who spoke during public comments, disagreed with Measure E being implemented at all.

"Measure E is irrational. We don’t live in a country where there is mob rule, " Faunce said. "Murrieta is a general law city...the general law of this City is that the City Council sets the salary, that’s who does it.

"We need a tie breaker; we need a judge. Kowell doesn’t care about the negative consequences on the City of Murrieta."

Murrieta resident Diana Serafin supports the measures as written.

"We do not want changes or additions to the measures...we the citizens are asking to implement Measure E because we voted for it," Serafin said.

Council members further discussed putting clarifying measures on a future ballot, giving residents a chance to vote on City-drafted ordinances without what they say are the illegal premises of the original measures. No decision was made to do that, but it could be brought back for further discussion. The soonest election that could take place in would be this November.