Long Beach residents could have a full ballot in November.

The City Council on Tuesday, June 12, will introduce five proposed amendments to Long Beach’s constitution that, if enacted, would reform government ethics, alter the electoral system and winnow the number of departments overseeing utilities. Taken together, the amendments are an ambitious plan to make the government “more effective, efficient, and ethical,” according to a letter of support penned by Mayor Robert Garcia and City Auditor Laura Doud.

“We believe these changes are good government measures,” the co-authored letter said, “and look forward to working with the City Council to put these measures before the voters of Long Beach to consider.”

The amendments must be approved by voters. But before they can make the ballot, the council must hold three public hearings – scheduled for Tuesday, July 17, and Aug. 17 – and call for an election. Having a single question placed on the November ballot will cost $470,000, with each additional question costing about $45,000, according to a city staff report.

If enacted, the five amendments would:

Many of these ideas have been bandied around City Hall for a while. The Water Commission, for example, started discussing taking over the Gas Department, currently under the authority of the City Council, last year, said commission President Robert Shannon. In March, the commission voted to recommend the consolidation to the Charter Amendment Committee, which is composed of the City Council.

And Councilwoman Stacy Mungo, who won a second term last week, has long talked about the need to reform City Hall, even making it a part of her campaign message. On Thursday, Mungo said she is looking forward to Tuesday’s discussion — and alluded to more possible reforms that could be considered.

“I’m excited to explore efficiencies that could help provide service to residents more effectively,” she said. “In reviewing the budget over the past several years, I’ve proposed some ideas that have been explored, and I hope we can review all ideas through a prism that includes not only cost savings, but economies of scale, effectiveness and ease of access for residents.”

In the first two amendments, the mayor would appoint and the council would confirm members of the redistricting and ethics commissions. Those appointed could not be elected officials or city employees; members of the ethics commission also couldn’t be registered as lobbyists.

The term limits amendment would fix a quirk in the electoral system. Under current law, the mayor and council members are theoretically limited to two terms. But the way the law is written only prevents council members from appearing on a primary ballot for two terms; they could still run as write-in candidates and serve more than two terms. If the amendment passes, council members could serve three terms – but the write-in loophole would be eliminated.

The amendment on the auditor’s authority would provide clarity about what she can oversee. The current job description, under the city charter, is relatively vague, saying the position is to act as the “general auditor of the city and of every department, commission and office thereof.”

If the amendment passes, the role would be officially expanded:

“The city auditor shall have the authority to conduct performance audits of city departments, boards, commissions and offices,” the proposed amendment says. “Performance audits are defined as independent assessments of programs, functions, operations, or management designed to enhance performance, cost savings, efficiency or service improvements.”

The auditor would also have access to all financial records.

City Auditor Laura Doud was not available for comment.

The consolidation of the water and gas utilities, meanwhile, bring both under the same regulatory body. Long Beach, according to city documents, is the only city in the state with two separate agencies for utilities.

Bringing water and gas together would allow for a more efficient use of resources, a staff report said. For example, there are 248 Water Department employees and 211 Gas Department employees, with 100 employees between the two departments sharing similar job descriptions. While the merger wouldn’t cost any jobs in the short term, a merger could cut expenses over the long-term.

“The consolidation is a good thing from a common sense perspective,” Shannon said. “I feel comfortable saying all the commissioners feel it’s a good idea.”