|
Blog: Nestle water deal shows need for strong mayor |
|
If you don't like the way the Nestle water deal came down, you need a strong mayor in Sacramento.
The Nestle deal is an agreement between the City of Sacramento and the Nestle Company to build a bottled water facility. The purpose of this blog isn't to debate the merits. The deal is perfectly legal and legitimate under city rules.
But some people are questioning the method. They need a reality check.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Counter point to strong mayor falsehoods |
FALSE: Strong mayor reform hasn't worked anywhere (except Chicago).
TRUE: 31 of the 50 largest U.S. cities have strong mayor. They include: Denver,
San Diego, Seattle, Jacksonville, Milwaukee, Louisville, Atlanta, Honolulu, Miami,
Oakland and Fresno, plus New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia
and San Francisco.
FALSE: Strong mayor allows for the arbitrary sacking of hundreds (or thousands)
of city employees.
TRUE: Strong mayor has same hire-fire ability as current city manager. The
overwhelming majority of city workers are covered by civil service and/or collective
bargaining and cannot be arbitrarily fired.
FALSE: Strong mayor can veto city council legislation.
TRUE: Mayoral veto is an essential form of check-and-balances under strong mayor
reform. City Council can override veto.
FALSE: Strong mayor will impose city budget on city council.
TRUE: Strong mayor will prepare budget, subject to timely City Council
endorsement.
FALSE: Strong mayor has no ethics watchdog and can operate without regard to ethics.
TRUE: An ethics committee can be added at any time, and voters have ultimate say.
FALSE: Strong mayor takes over too quickly after election.
TRUE: Strong mayor begins one month after June 2010 election. Strong mayor issue
has been debated since early 2008 election cycle in Sacramento, more than two years.
FALSE: Strong mayor gains special power by hiring charter officers (city attorney, city clerk,
city treasurer, city manager).
TRUE: Strong mayor appoints senior staff and becomes responsible for actions of
senior staff.
FALSE: Strong mayor "blurs the lines of authority and accountability."
TRUE: Strong mayor clarifies and increases lines of authority and accountability.
Under current system, authority rests with four charter officers and nine city council
members -- 13 separate lines of authority and accountability.
FALSE: Strong mayor should have term limits.
TRUE: Strong mayor has term limits -- elections every four years (see reference:
Heather Fargo).
|
|
Letters to the Editor 7.28.09 |
This is a power shift
This is a power shift. The initiative to amend the city charter simply asks that the authority of the unelected City Manager be transferred to the elected Mayor.
In his campaign, Sacramentans overwhelmingly supported Kevin Johnson over the two-term incumbent in part because his theme of accountability resonated with an electorate that recognized its absence in local government.
The initiative also seeks to provide City Council with real responsibility, including override authority over mayoral vetoes, thus creating a system of checks and balances similar to that of the federal government’s executive and legislative branches.
This is a power shift. The initiative aims to empower Sacramentans to “hire and fire” the Mayor and Council through the election process, not based on their ability to act as ceremonial figureheads, but their capacity to carry out the vision for Sacramento.
Updating the city charter would place accountability on the shoulders of our elected officials and put the power where it belongs: in the hands of the voters. The mayor-council system would also provide the foundation for Sacramento to reach its potential by giving Mayor Johnson the necessary tools and responsibility to carry out the vision Sacramentans overwhelmingly supported when they voted for him.
- Christina Ngo, Sacramento
The real mystery
The Bee asserted that a mystery in the proposal to change the city charter is that supporters filed signatures in support. Specifically, 89,000 signatures were submitted. They’re representative of an electorate that’s grown weary of Sacramento’s “business as usual” syndrome – and voted Johnson mayor by a 15-point margin (25,000 votes), months after he revealed his plan to pursue a mayor-council governance structure.
The real mystery is local government’s failure to evolve in the midst of the city’s growing population, inflating budget and developing economy. Sacramento in 2009 bears little resemblance to Sacramento in 1921; the last time the city charter underwent a substantive change.
Mystery number two, according to The Bee, is that while supporters were collecting signatures, an appointed charter commission was constructing an alternative proposal.
The real mystery will be revealed in January, when Bill Edgar’s committee caps its year’s worth of cogitation with a presentation explaining that they’ve come up with nothing. Their scarcely attended charter meetings are no more than exercises in futility.
The final mystery is the Bee’s inability to recognize that the Executive Mayor Initiative merely assigns the elected Mayor the authority already possessed by the unelected City Manager. It’s that simple.
- Amy Alley, Sacramento
|
7.8.09
What if after raising nearly a quarter of a billion dollars, engaging an electorate that had been hibernating for four decades and winning by more than six million votes, you learned that Barack Obama would have no real responsibility? That an unelected government official would be charged with leading the country?
This implausible situation is a reality in Sacramento. Kevin Johnson outraised his opponent 3-to-1, brought national media attention to the Sacramento mayoral race and won by nearly 25,000 votes. Yet, the day he stepped into office he had little more authority than he had prior to being elected. In Sacramento, the unelected city manager calls the shots.
This is inconceivable. Sacramentans supported Kevin Johnson for mayor, and in that position, Johnson should have the opportunity to serve the people of Sacramento. The antiquated city charter that was written in 1921 needs to be changed to give elected officials the authority to do the jobs they were elected to do.
While paralleling the 2008 Sacramento mayoral race to the presidential election may be a bit of a stretch, a mayor-council system in Sacramento would mirror the presidential/congressional relationship with checks and balances.
Sacramentans’ votes should count. Empowering the mayor and council will enable Sacramento to hold them accountable.
|
1.16.09
You've seen them at Raley's, Target, and all around town: signature gatherers are nearing in on their target of getting the signatures required to qualify charter reforms proposed by Sacramentans for Accountable Government.
It's an incredible effort, seeing grassroots Sacramento working so hard for real reform in city government. The reason the petition drive is having such success is that our citizens know we can't afford the status quo any longer. We need Sacramento to move to the next level, to be the world-class city it can be.
Stay tuned for more news about the signature drive as we head into the weekend! |
|
|
|
|
Blog