Sacramento City Council to place ‘strong mayor’ measure on November ballot
Sacramento voters will decide in November whether the city should overhaul its system of government to make the mayor the most powerful position.
The Sacramento City Council voted 6-3 Tuesday to place the measure on the Nov. 3 ballot, with Councilmen Jeff Harris, Larry Carr and Allen Warren voting against it. Those council members said placing the measure on the ballot with little advanced notice during a pandemic prevented the public input needed for such a big decision.
“This strong mayor measure is not going to solve our pandemic, it’s not going to solve our economic woes,” Harris said. “In fact, it adds to them.”
Mayor Darrell Steinberg disagreed.
“I absolutely reject that we as a city cannot have this debate and at the same time work to address all of the other crucial issues that are going on in our community,” Steinberg said.
The council discussed the controversial idea after listening to nearly three hours of public comments. About half of the callers blasted the measure as a rushed-through “power grab” by Steinberg, disguised as a way to uplift communities of color. The other half said Sacramento should give the mayor the tools to quickly enact measures to help those communities, including those promised with the Measure U sales tax revenue.
A slew of community and business leaders spoke in favor of placing the measure on the ballot, including developer Nikki Mohanna; Cassandra Jennings of the Greater Sacramento Urban League; Tecoy Porter Sr. of Genesis Church in south Sacramento; and Chet Hewitt of The Center at Sierra Health Foundation.
Councilwoman-elect Katie Valenzuela; Sacramento City Unified School Board member and council candidate Mai Vang; and Measure U Community Advisory Committee Chairwoman Flojaune Cofer spoke against putting the measure on the ballot in its current form. In addition, there were more than 130 written comments submitted before the meeting, with all but a handful in opposition.
If the voters approve the measure on Nov. 3, the mayor would create the budget each year. He or she would no longer have a vote on the council, but could veto council actions and budget line items. The council, which would gain a ninth member, would be able to override mayoral vetoes with a two-thirds vote.
After hearing council concerns during last week’s meeting, city officials made several changes to the proposal, including a two-term limit for mayors, meaning Steinberg’s term would end in 2024. It also includes a sunset provision, meaning the measure would go back on the ballot in 2030. Those two changes make the measure more similar to the one voters rejected in 2014, when Kevin Johnson was mayor.
The new proposal also said that of the $40 million set aside each year, at least 25% would go toward youth programs and services. Councilman Jay Schenirer, who made that suggestion, said he would like that 25% to go toward new youth programs and services, not existing ones.
The council also added language requiring the mayor to attend at least one meeting per quarter when invited by the council. That’s different than requiring him to attend two “town hall” meetings per year, as the measure originally proposed.
“I want to be with the public, including the City Council, as much as you will have me and as much as the public will have me,” Steinberg said.
The so-called “Mayoral Accountability and Community Equity Act,” would also include several changes to the charter aimed at uplifting disadvantaged neighborhoods and improving transparency. Those include setting aside $40 million a year for youth and inclusive economic development, strengthening the city’s ethics commission and increasing public participation in the budget process.
More than 300 people signed a letter urging the council to separate the equity pieces from the “strong mayor” measure as two separate ballot items. The items remained as a package, which partly caused Warren to vote against placing it on the ballot, even though he voted in favor of doing so in 2014.
Warren said he still believes the mayor needs “enhanced authority,” but the timing is not right.
“I believe the timing for this is very troubling,” Warren said. “We have people fighting for their very lives and the priority is survival for them.”
Warren is the only incumbent up for re-election in November. He will face challenger grocery store owner Sean Loloee in the runoff election for the north Sacramento seat.
Steinberg defended his decision to bring forth the item now. The next opportunity would be in 2022.
“In my opinion, it is never the wrong time to do the right thing,” Steinberg said.
Some residents accused the mayor of holding the equity items “hostage” by grouping them together with an item that would increase the mayor’s power.
“You’re using a pandemic to usurp power for people of Sacramento and hiding it behind nonbinding equity reforms you have no intent of actually fighting for,” Eddie Franco said.
Steinberg defended his decision to group them as one package.
“Name one other city that has put social equity so deeply into its charter,” Steinberg said. “Do not underestimate that and its significance of Sacramento being a statewide leader on this battle to change our city and to change our country.”
At the end of the five-hour meeting, Steinberg said he wanted the council to vote on the equity pieces within 30 days, so they would not have to wait until November to be implemented if the package passes.
Warren was not the only member who voted differently than he did in 2014.
Councilman Steve Hansen, who led the opposition against the Measure L “strong mayor” campaign in 2014, voted in favor of putting the measure on the ballot this time, saying this version contains “significant differences.”
“While I don’t particularly favor the mayor-council (strong mayor) form of government, I think you, mayor, deserve a chance to make your case to the voters as the only citywide elected official,” Hansen said.
Valenzuela, who’s a leader of the opposition this time around with the “Neighborhoods Against Strong Mayor” campaign, will replace Hansen on the council representing the central city in December.
The proposal was first revealed to the public on July 23, about two weeks before the Friday deadline for the council to place measures on the Nov. 3 ballot. Carr asked the city attorney to investigate whether the mayor violated the Brown Act in crafting his ballot measure proposal, which the city attorney’s office helped draft.
‘Defund the police’ movement is backdrop for debate
Steinberg said he decided to pursue the ballot measure following the national protests against police brutality following the fatal police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, including a large demonstration outside his Greenhaven home, which moved him.
Soon after, the council approved his proposals to hire an inspector general for police oversight and overhaul the city 911 system, which he called “the most fundamental redistribution of police resources that has actually been put forward by an elected official in this city.”
But Black community leaders and activists, including Cofer, said they were disappointed with the way Steinberg has responded to the movement, saying those changes were not what they asked for. Their loudest outcries have been for the city to reduce police funding and fire officers who have shot unarmed Black people.
In the fiscal year that began July 1, the police department’s budget is an all-time-high $157 million.
“If you want to be a strong mayor, you need to be strong enough to say ‘defund the police’ and defend Black bodies,” said Sonia Lewis of the Liberation Collective for Black Sacramento during Tuesday’s meeting.
Steinberg has said he does not support the “defund” movement, but has said that his plan to end police response to some noncriminal calls will indeed remove some police funding over the course of two years.
Activists have also been calling for the city to fire the officers who have fatally shot unarmed Black men, including Stephon Clark and Darell Richards in 2018. They have also been calling for the council to terminate City Manager Howard Chan because they say he has not fired enough officers. Chan has defended himself, saying he has fired six officers since he became city manager in 2016 and has disciplined dozens more.
If voters approve the “strong mayor” proposal, the power to fire officers would remain with the city manager, but the mayor would have the ability to fire the city manager. Steinberg has said he does not plan to fire Chan. If a mayor does choose to fire a city manager without cause, the council could overturn the decision with a two-thirds vote, under the proposal.
“I think that will move our city forward in a real, effective way,” Steinberg said after the council voted. “A way that responds to the hurt out there and a way for healing.”
This story was originally published August 4, 2020 at 9:38 PM.
