Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson's latest strong-mayor plan is still alive. Barely.

The City Council voted unanimously Tuesday night to ask city staff to explore the creation of an elected charter review commission that would look into changing the way the city is governed. Voters could be asked on the November ballot if they want that commission to be created.

At the same time - but with less council support - city attorneys were also asked by the council to tweak Johnson's proposal, including adding term limits for the mayor.

Both plans are scheduled to come back to the City Council in three weeks, at which point the council could chose to move forward with a charter commission, place Johnson's plan on the ballot - or neither.

A charter commission, proposed by Councilman Kevin McCarty, would be made up of 15 members.

While a ballot measure for a commission would explore the topic of revising the City Charter, the council direction fell short of fulfilling Johnson's request of placing his latest strong mayor plan on the June ballot. He said he "thought we had an opportunity to do something different and get beyond the normal petty politics and let the people vote."

The mayor had proposed to revamp how Sacramento is governed, most notably by enacting a strong mayor form of government that would transfer many of the duties currently held by an unelected city manager to the mayor.

Johnson called his plan "an historic opportunity to update our city as part of its natural growth."

While enacting a strong mayor form of government was the centerpiece of the proposal, the mayor and his supporters consider the plan a tempered version of two previous measures.

Johnson has called for his office to have the power to fire the city manager, who currently answers to the mayor and City Council and makes most daily decisions at City Hall. The mayor would be able to appoint a city manager, pending the approval of the City Council.

Johnson also seeks to propose the city budget and wield limited veto power over the City Council.

In addition to approving the city manager appointment, the City Council would finalize the budget and have override authority over the mayor. The council would also have authority over the city attorney, treasurer, clerk, auditor and independent budget analyst.

The plan would also create a citizens ethics committee and an independent redistricting commission. If passed, the measure would take effect Nov. 27.

Matt Ruyak, a supervising deputy city attorney, said there were no fatal legal flaws in the plan. However, he said some issues - including the creation of a ninth City Council district after the mayor is separated from the council - would need to be addressed.

Ruyak also said the plan represents a revision of the City Charter, likely prohibiting a signature drive to place the plan on the ballot.

The effort toward a strong-mayor system has been a three-year odyssey for the mayor, filled with more losses than victories.

A week after taking office in 2008, Johnson unveiled his first proposal, a Strong Mayor Initiative that would have granted his office vast authority over the city workforce and budget. His supporters gathered enough signatures to place that measure before the voters and a divided City Council voted to place the initiative on the June 2010 ballot.

That victory was short-lived, as a judge later wiped the initiative off the ballot, ruling it was the kind of revision to the City Charter that could be proposed only by an elected body.

Johnson came back with another proposal in 2010, only to see the City Council vote 7-2 against his request to have the city attorney draft language for the plan.

The issue re-emerged last month, when members of a political campaign supporting a new plan released the details of their proposal. The debate that has followed has involved familiar interests on both sides.

Public employee unions and the Democratic Party of Sacramento County both oppose the measure. Business interests, public safety unions and a small group of pastors favor the plan.

While large numbers of people on both sides of the debate filled the City Council Chambers on Tuesday, more spoke in favor of a June vote than those opposing that plan.

Supporters argued the change would make the city's elected officials more accountable, by transferring key decisions currently made by an unelected city manager to the mayor.

Those supporting placing the proposal on the June ballot also urged council members to set aside their feelings about the plan.

"We're not asking you to support this issue, we're just asking to give us voters the right to vote on this plan," said Stuart Eldridge, a small business owner from Oak Park.

Opponents said the plan had not been vetted thoroughly enough by the public and that the debate over the plan was serving as a distraction from more important issues, including budget deficits and needed repairs to the city's water and sewer systems.

"This is not what the time, resources and money of this city should be spent on," said Kerri Asbury, chairwoman of the Democratic Party of Sacramento County.

Other opponents said they were concerned the plan would open the door for deep-pocketed interests to wield greater control over City Hall.

"This proposal is designed to get rid of the city manager and put in somebody who is going to respond to big money," said Bill Camp, head of the Central Labor Council, the region's largest organized labor group and an opponent of the mayor's plan.

© Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved.