‘Strong mayor’ will be on the Sacramento ballot again. How this campaign is different from 2014
In three months, Sacramento voters will decide whether to overhaul the city’s government structure to make the mayor the most powerful position in the city.
For many Sacramentans, the question will look familiar.
Sacramento voters in 2014 easily rejected a similar “strong mayor” proposal. At least three other attempts died before reaching the ballot.
Both the 2014 and 2020 versions give the mayor the power to create the budget and impose term limits on the mayor position. They would also both remove the mayor as a voting member of the council, but would give the mayor veto power, with the City Council having the ability to override vetoes.
But in addition to the one big obvious change — Darrell Steinberg is mayor instead of Kevin Johnson — there are several other differences from last time around.
More difficult for mayor to fire city manager
2014 measure: The mayor could unilaterally fire the city manager, with or without cause. Then-City Manager John Shirey said he would step down if voters approved “strong mayor.”
2020 measure: Mayor can fire the city manager, but if the firing is without cause, the council has an option to override it with at two-thirds vote
Currently, the council has the ability terminate the city manager, but it requires six votes. Steinberg has said he has no intention of firing City Manager Howard Chan. Unlike Shirey, Chan has not said he will step down if voters approve it.
A more distant “sunset” date
2014 measure: Sunset in 2020 to let voters reconsider the measure after six years
2020 measure: Sunset in 2030 to let voters reconsider the measure after ten years. The council could vote to place a reconsideration on the ballot before that date, however.
Different branding
2014 measure: Called the “2014 Checks and Balances Act”
2020 measure: Called the “Mayoral Accountability and Community Equity Act”
Less time to decide
2014 measure: Council voted 5-4 to place it on the ballot in November 2013, about a year before the vote. That was partly because the original plan was to place it on the June 2014 ballot, but a new rule required it to go on a general election ballot.
2020 measure: Council voted 6-3 to place it on the ballot Aug. 4, about three months before the vote.
Term limits
2014 measure: Limited to three terms in office for mayor.
2020 measure: Limited to two terms in office. (Steinberg’s first term would count, which would mean he’d be termed out in 2024.)
Other items in the package
2014 measure: An ethics committee and a “sunshine ordinance” promoting open government were part of the measure. The council ended up creating versions of those after the measure failed.
2020 measure: The sunshine ordinance and ethics commission would become part of the city charter. The ethics commission would get additional staffing. An equity analysis would be done on the budget and major policy decisions. There would be more public input in the budget process called “participatory budgeting.” The city would be required by charter to set aside $40 million each year for youth and inclusive economic development.
When voters approved the Measure U sales tax increase in 2018, Steinberg promised most of the new estimated $40 million in annual revenue would be used for inclusive economic development to uplift disadvantaged neighborhoods. But technically the money flows to the general fund. When the coronavirus pandemic hit this year, the money was used to maintain core city services instead, including police and fire. The measure appears to be an attempt to safeguard the Measure U money in the future, though the language does not include a reference to Measure U.
The council plans to vote on the equity components of the measure within 30 days, so they would not have to wait until November to go into effect, though a charter change would make them permanent, Steinberg said.
This story was originally published August 6, 2020 at 5:00 AM.
CORRECTION: This story has been updated to clarify the term limit requirements in both initiatives. A 2013 staff report showed the mayor would have been limited to two terms, but the final 2014 initiative put a three-term limit on mayors.
