By admin 
Placer County voters will decide two ballot measures in November that could change how the county’s top administrator is removed from office and how vacancies on the Board of Supervisors are filled.
Read more Tyreek Hill found liable of two counts of battery against estranged wife in Miami
Voters in Roseville will also consider a separate measure that would increase City Council salaries from $600 to $2,550 a month and allow annual adjustments tied to inflation.
All three measures would amend local government charters, which establish the structure, powers and responsibilities of local officials.
Measures H and G would apply to Placer County government, while Measure A would affect only the city of Roseville.
Each measure would require a simple majority of votes cast to pass in the Nov. 3 general election.
Here’s what voters should know.
What would Placer County Measure H change?
Measure H would give the Placer County Board of Supervisors greater flexibility in negotiating employment contracts with the county’s chief executive officer, including how that official could be removed from office.
The chief executive officer oversees county government operations and is appointed by the five-member Board of Supervisors based on executive and administrative qualifications and experience.
Under the existing Placer County Charter, the chief executive officer served at the pleasure of the board and could be removed with a vote of at least three supervisors.
Measure H would preserve that three-vote requirement unless the board and chief executive officer agreed to different removal provisions in an employment contract.
The proposal would not establish a specific alternative removal process or require the board to negotiate different terms. Instead, it would allow those provisions to be included in a contract if both parties agreed.
According to the county’s impartial analysis, the change was intended to provide flexibility in employment agreements while preserving the Board of Supervisors’ oversight responsibilities.
The chief executive officer would continue to be appointed by the board, oversee county operations and undergo performance evaluations by supervisors.
The Board of Supervisors placed Measure H on the ballot through Ordinance 6382-B.
A yes vote would allow employment contracts between the Board of Supervisors and the chief executive officer to establish removal procedures different from the existing three-vote requirement.
A no vote would maintain the current charter provision requiring at least three supervisors to vote to remove the chief executive officer.
No official arguments supporting or opposing Measure H were submitted.
What would Placer County Measure G change?
Measure G would give the Placer County Board of Supervisors more time to fill vacant seats and establish new election requirements for some vacancies.
Under the existing Placer County Charter, a vacancy on the five-member Board of Supervisors must be filled by a unanimous vote of the remaining supervisors.
If the board fails to appoint someone within 30 days, the authority to fill the vacancy transfers to California’s governor.
Measure G would extend that deadline from 30 days to 60 days, giving supervisors an additional month to agree on a replacement before the governor could make the appointment.
The measure would also change how long an appointed supervisor could serve before voters selected a replacement.
If a vacancy occurred at least 130 days before the next statewide direct primary election, an appointee would serve temporarily, and voters would choose a supervisor at that election to complete the remainder of the term.
If a vacancy occurred less than 130 days before the next statewide direct primary election, the appointed supervisor would serve the rest of the unexpired term.
The proposal would retain the requirement that the remaining supervisors unanimously agree on an appointment. Appointees would also be required to have lived in the affected supervisorial district for at least 30 days before their appointment.
Read more Chiefs’ Travis Kelce praised for supporting wife, Taylor Swift, at her workplace
The Board of Supervisors placed Measure G on the ballot through Ordinance 6381-B.
A yes vote would extend the appointment deadline from 30 to 60 days and establish an election process for filling the remainder of certain unexpired supervisor terms.
A no vote would leave the existing 30-day deadline and appointment procedures unchanged.
No official arguments supporting or opposing Measure G were submitted.
What would Roseville Measure A change about City Council salaries?
Measure A would increase the maximum monthly salary for Roseville City Council members from $600 to $2,550 and allow annual adjustments based on inflation.
The proposed increase would bring council compensation to $30,600 a year, compared with the current $7,200 annually.
Roseville voters last approved a change to council compensation in 2000. Under the existing charter, council members receive $600 a month, while the mayor receives an additional $50 monthly.
Measure A would eliminate the mayor’s additional payment and establish the same salary limit for all five council members.
The proposal would also allow annual salary adjustments based on the California Consumer Price Index, with increases capped at 5% per year.
According to the city’s impartial analysis, Roseville’s population has grown to more than 165,000 residents. State law allows cities of Roseville’s size to establish council salaries of $2,550 per month, although the city’s charter must be amended by voters before the new compensation rules can take effect.
The measure would not provide council members with medical, dental, vision or deferred compensation benefits. Council members would remain eligible for reimbursement of reasonable expenses incurred while performing city duties.
Any future changes to the charter provision governing council compensation would still require voter approval.
Supporters argued that the increase would reflect the growing responsibilities of overseeing Roseville, which operates its own utilities, police and fire departments and other municipal services.
The official ballot argument in favor was signed by Roseville Area Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Ananda Rochita, former Roseville city official David A. Breninger and former Mayor Carol C. Garcia.
They argued that higher compensation could make serving on the City Council more accessible to working professionals, parents and other residents who might otherwise struggle to balance public service with their employment.
Former Roseville Mayor Richard Roccucci submitted the official argument opposing Measure A.
Roccucci said he supported increasing council salaries but opposed combining the proposed raise with automatic annual inflation adjustments.
He argued that voters should have the opportunity to consider the salary increase and future adjustments separately. Roccucci also questioned why the proposal was being considered ahead of Roseville’s next regular charter review in 2030.
Supporters countered that inflation adjustments would prevent the city from having to return to voters repeatedly to update salaries and that the annual 5% cap would limit future increases.
The Roseville City Council voted 4-1 in February to place the proposal on the November ballot, with Roccucci casting the dissenting vote.
A yes vote would authorize City Council salaries of up to $2,550 per month, eliminate the mayor’s additional $50 payment and allow annual inflation adjustments capped at 5%.
A no vote would preserve the existing compensation structure of $600 per month for council members and an additional $50 for the mayor, without automatic inflation adjustments.
Read more Should wolves lose endangered species status? Trump administration says in court, ‘yes’