Sacramento City Council to consider placing ‘strong mayor’ measure on Nov. 3 ballot
Another “strong mayor” debate is about to hit Sacramento.
The City Council will consider placing a measure on the Nov. 3 ballot to give the mayor more power and overhaul the city government structure – a move Mayor Darrell Steinberg supports. The council plans to discuss the idea Tuesday and could vote to place it on the ballot on Aug. 4. The measure would need a simple majority to pass during the Nov. 3 local election.
Under the so-called “strong mayor” proposal, which voters rejected in 2014, the mayor would permanently become the most powerful office in the city.
The proposal, which community leaders unveiled Thursday, calling it the “Mayor Accountability and Community Equity Act,” also includes a slew of other changes aimed at uplifting communities of color and improving transparency.
They include:
▪ A guarantee that $40 million a year will be spent on inclusive economic development and youth.
This appears to be a way to safeguard the Measure U sales tax revenue from being used for core city services, as it was this year when the coronavirus hit, but the ballot language will not include a reference to Measure U.
▪ Participatory budgeting
This is an idea to increase public input in the budgeting process, modeled after programs in Vallejo and San Francisco. The Measure U Citizens Advisory Committee has been pushing for this.
▪ Strengthening the Ethics Commission
The city Ethics Commission would get a full-time staff member and its existence would be included in the city charter. In addition, the city sunshine laws would also be included in the charter.
▪ Gender and equity evaluations
Each time the council passes an ordinance or amends the budget, it would have to consider gender and equity data on the impact of that change.
A group of about a dozen business and community leaders held a press conference Thursday morning to announce the ballot measure and share their support for it.
Cassandra Jennings, of the Greater Sacramento Urban League, said the change would increase accountability because it would make it so the person with the most power in the city is elected by the people.
“We are no longer a small town. We are a big city to be recognized and we should do things big cities do,” said Jennings, a former assistant city manager. “It’s a huge next step that we have to take and we have to take it now.”
Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland and Fresno have “strong mayors.” San Jose has a “weak mayor.”
Jim Gonzalez of the Latino Economic Council of Sacramento, said the measure will also increase the council’s power.
“This proposal is not only a strong mayor proposal but it’s a stronger City Council proposal,” Gonzalez said. “We’ll be on the path to building a better city in a much more expedited way.”
Opposition forming
Before the press conference even started Thursday, a group opposing the measure, called “Neighborhoods Against Strong Mayor” had formed. The measure will actually significantly weaken the power of the council, they argue.
“’Strong Mayor’ means a weak city council,” former Mayor Heather Fargo said in a news release. “A weak city council means less input from neighborhoods they represent. This governance structure has been rejected before, because it doesn’t fit Sacramento’s tradition of strong neighborhoods and public input on city decisions. Think about who benefits from a concentration of power.”
Other members of the opposition group include Councilwoman-Elect Katie Valenzuela and Michelle Pariset of Organize Sacramento, who is pushing for a stronger version of rent control to be on the November ballot, and is being sued by the city.
Valenzuela said her main issue with the proposal is the veto power, which she says puts too much authority in the hands of one person, regardless of who the mayor is.
“It’s selfish to say we’re going to fundamentally change the governance of the city so that I can do good,”said Valenzuela, who will represent the central city starting in December. “It leaves us vulnerable to future mayors who will not do good.”
She also opposes the way the package includes other changes that communities of color have been demanding, as one all-or-nothing item on the ballot.
“It’s obvious they’re trying to put in enough language to overcome opposition to the core component of the measure, which is changing the governance of Sacramento,” Valenzuela said.
Measure U committee chairwoman Flojaune Cofer, who’s been criticizing the mayor for allowing Measure U money to go toward police, said she is undecided on the measure, but agreed it should be two separate items. If she hears the same concern from the public, she will urge council to separate it, she said.
“People are going to be asked to do something they really fully agree with but then along with that take some things they have concerns around,” Cofer said.
Steinberg said he included the items as a package on purpose, in response to the community outcry demanding real and meaningful change on several levels.
“To me, they’re not separate,” Steinberg said. “They go together. I think those elements strengthen the measure quite a bit and I’m proud of it and it also shows we’ve been listening to the people.”
Cofer also said she wishes the package included an item to remove binding arbitration from police and fire unions, which would give the council more power over decisions about pay, benefits and working conditions for public safety personnel.
“That is something that not only your own paid contractor came out with as a recommendation, but lots of people have been pushing for it,” Cofer said.
What would change?
If the council agrees to place the measure on the ballot and the voters approve it, the change would go into effect Jan. 1. The mayor would take on many of the city manager’s responsibilities, including creating the proposed budget each year.
Here’s what else would change:
▪ Unlike the 2014 ballot measure, the measure would not have a sunset date. It also would not instate term limits onto the mayor position.
▪ The mayor would no longer sit at the dais and run the meetings – instead the council president would do that. The mayor would not have a vote on the council, but would have the ability to veto measures the council passes. The council would have the ability to overturn the veto with a two-thirds vote.
▪ The city would need to create a ninth council seat in order to maintain an odd number of voting members. The city is currently going through a redistricting process tied to the 2020 Census, so the ninth seat would be created in that process. In the interim, before the ninth member is added, tie votes would mean a measure fails.
▪ The council would have full control over land use decisions, the Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency, and charter amendments. The mayor would no longer have a vote in those decisions, as he does now.
▪ The mayor would have the authority to fire the city manager, but the city manager would remain the only person who can fire employees, including police officers.
Not the first time
It will be at least the fifth time the council will discuss the strong mayor idea, but the first since Steinberg was elected in 2016. Voters rejected the “strong mayor” initiative in 2014, when Kevin Johnson was mayor.
About a year ago, Steinberg conducted polling about the idea, but did not end up pursuing it. That was during a time when the Measure U sales tax revenue was starting to flow in, and Steinberg was trying to find ways to “safeguard” the money for neighborhoods so it would not all go toward rising pension payments and core city services.
The council ended up voting to set aside $40 million for equity projects at Steinberg’s request but that vote has to get reauthroized each year. When the coronavirus pandemic hit this year, the city manager’s budget, approved by the council, allocated Measure U money on core services, including a controversial $45.7 million to the police, from both the 2012 and 2018 ballot measures.
Through that experience of trying to create what he called a “workaround” to safeguard the Measure U money, Steinberg was thinking about how the budget process would be easier if he was a “strong mayor.” He was also thinking about it while he has pushed for tiny homes for the homeless and large shelters to open much faster than they have.
But it was the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police, sparking large city protests against police brutality, including several outside his home, that caused the mayor to decide that now is the time, he said.
“It was around that period of time I really began thinking about it,” Steinberg said. “During this period, it has crystallized for me that the mayor of the city is accountable but doesn’t have the tools to match the demands of the people.”
Although Steinberg has been driving the city agenda, almost always getting the five council votes needed to adopt his proposals – including his recent police reform proposals – the position is not much more than a figurehead.
“I came back here not to bang a gavel, not to have the ceremonial title, but to work and to actually continue to move this city forward,” Steinberg said, referring to his time as president of the State Senate and City Council prior to becoming mayor.
The Sacramento News & Review reported earlier this month Steinberg discussed the plan with the influential Sacramento Central Labor Council.
Fabrizio Sasso, the executive director of the labor council, confirmed to The Bee Thursday that Steinberg pitched the idea to the organization, but said it has not made a decision on whether to endorse it.
“People are trying to find out how are their members going to be heard and where the power lies,” Sasso said. “They’re being very thoughtful about this.”
The council will not likely make a decision on an endorsement until after the City Council votes to place it on the ballot, Sasso said. In 2014, the council, which represents more than 100 unions, took a neutral position on the measure.
At least two unions have so far endorsed the idea on their own. Yvonne Walker of SEIU Local 1000 and the Kevin Ferreira of the Sacramento Sierra Building and Construction Trades Council spoke at the press conference in support of the idea.
Other community leaders who attended the press conference in support of the idea included: Chet P. Hewitt of The Center at Sierra Health Foundation; Rachel Rios of La Familia Counseling Center; Amanda Blackwood of the Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce; Pat Fong Kushida of the Sacramento Asian Pacific Chamber of Commerce; Barry Broome of the Greater Sacramento Economic Council; developer Nicky Mohanna; Tecoy Porter of National Action Network and Genesis Church; Natalia Chavez, a local government consultant; and Debra Oto-Kent of the Measure U Citizens Advisory Committee.
“I did not twist a bunch of arms here,” Steinberg said in reference to that group.
It’s unclear how the council vote will go. Councilmen Jay Schenirer, Eric Guerra, Larry Carr and Allen Warren said they were undecided until they see the language and learn more details. The remaining council members did not immediately return calls seeking comment.
Guerra said he will be looking to see how the measure would impact the day-to-day life of Sacramentans, and whether it makes constituent services occur faster, especially in disadvantaged communities.
If the council places it on the ballot, a three-month public discourse will likely follow.
“This is really going to be a good debate,” Steinberg said. “I welcome it all.”
This story was originally published July 23, 2020 at 10:06 AM.
