The mayors of California's larger cities have enjoyed – or at least experienced – marked increases in their authority in recent decades.

It's happened, most notably, in Los Angeles, San Diego, Oakland, San Jose and Fresno as their voters came to understand that while diffusion of power appears to be democratic, in practice it more often leads to policy gridlock, narrow interest dominance and buck-passing that ill serve the larger public interest.

Part-time city councils, ceremonial mayors and professional city managers still make sense for small and medium-size cities, but there is a tipping point, both of size and cultural complexity, at which they don't work for a city any more – when someone must be popularly elected to run a city government and be held accountable for outcomes. Or as Harry Truman's famous desk placard put it, "The buck stops here."

As the newly empowered mayors have gained more clout over budgets and thus such services as police and fire protection, they've expanded their reach into previously out-of-bounds issues such as education reform, arguing that schools are just as important to a community's success.

It's a mixed political blessing. A mayor who acquires more power gains more public stature, but also becomes a bigger political target because he raises performance expectations.

One large California city where it hasn't happened is, ironically enough, the state capital, Sacramento, which has the worst of all municipal worlds.

It has an ostensibly full-time mayor, but the office has almost no real authority, which is diffused in a City Council of semiprofessional politicians who pursue their parochial interests while a city manager chosen by the council wields day-to-day operational power.

One must assume that Sacramento's City Hall embraces this unwieldy mélange because it wants to emulate the equally dysfunctional state Capitol a few blocks away.

Sacramento's current mayor, Kevin Johnson, wants to change to a strong-mayor system, but of course he's getting flak from the council, which would lose some power, and interests, such as some city unions, that prefer the status quo.

Johnson's first reform plan was tossed by the courts, and now he's back with a different version, hoping to place it on the June ballot. But he needs five council votes to reach the ballot, and he doesn't have them lined up yet.

It's analogous to former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's "year of reform" ballot measures in 2005 that would have strengthened the governorship, but were defeated by Democratic legislators and unions.

Johnson's right on the issue; Sacramento does need a strong-mayor system. But he is a polarizing figure – not unlike Schwarzenegger – whose reform plan could be characterized by foes as a personal power grab.

© Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved.

Call The Bee's Dan Walters, (916) 321-1195. Back columns, www.sacbee.com/ walters. Follow him on Twitter @WaltersBee.

• Read more articles by Dan Walters