Sacramento City Council should let voters decide on Steinberg’s ‘strong mayor’ plan

In early June, a crowd of 2,000 activists staged a “die-in” in front of Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg’s home in the Greenhaven-Pocket neighborhood. The scene, one of the most powerful and poignant moments during the city’s Black Lives Matter protests, put pressure on Steinberg to pursue deeper changes to policing.

It also underscored the fact that most people overestimate the power of Sacramento’s mayor. In Sacramento’s “weak mayor” system, Steinberg’s title is mostly ceremonial. In reality, Sacramento’s mayor — though elected by a citywide vote — is just one vote on the Sacramento City Council. City Manager Howard Chan, a person completely unknown to most local voters, wields the real power in the city — including the power to hire and fire officials like the police chief.

Steinberg clearly doesn’t mind being the target of pressure, but his ability to respond to community demands is limited. That’s why he wants to let Sacramento vote to change the city charter and expand the power of the mayor’s office to include more executive functions, such as increased power over the city manager.

Today, the Sacramento City Council will vote on whether to put Steinberg’s new “strong mayor” proposal on the November ballot. Voters rejected a similar ballot proposal, Measure L, in 2014. Those were different times, however, and voters seemed to associate the proposal closely with then-Mayor Kevin Johnson.

The Sacramento Bee Editorial Board supported Measure L because it’s the better form of government for a city of Sacramento’s size. It makes the one person most visible to city voters — the mayor — accountable for a wider range of responsibilities. Other major California cities, like Los Angeles and San Francisco, have mayors with real power. In those cities, the mayor — rather than an unelected manager — is the most public face of city government and the person voters hold most accountable.

In Sacramento, as the die-in demonstrated, people tend to hold the mayor responsible even though the position lacks the executive powers necessary to respond to changes demanded by the community.

Steinberg’s proposal would allow voters to change the city charter to give the mayor more responsibility. In the reformed system, Sacramento’s mayor would propose the city budget, which would then need City Council approval. The mayor would no longer get a vote on the council, but he or she would have veto power over council decisions. The council could override the mayor’s veto with a two-thirds vote.

More importantly, the city manager would answer to the mayor, though the City Council would also get a say in the hiring and firing of city managers. The newly-empowered mayor would also be limited to two terms.

Steinberg has packed the proposal with progressive reforms designed to increase its appeal.

“This charter revision would respond to the demands for change by requiring that every major decision we make as a city analyze the impact on people of color, on women, on LGBTQ residents, and on any other disadvantaged population,” wrote Steinberg in a public letter. “It would require that we analyze the effect of our decisions on small businesses. It would introduce participatory budgeting to our city in a real way.”

Steinberg’s proposal would also require that “the city spend $40 million a year on inclusive economic development and youth.” In addition, it would make the city’s Sunshine Ordinance and Ethics Commission permanent.

It’s not clear whether Sacramento’s citizens will support Steinberg’s charter revision, but they deserve a chance to vote on it. Mayor Steinberg has shown a unique ability to achieve progress for Sacramento. For example, in 2018 he convinced voters to support a half-cent sales tax with Measure U. Anyone with a scintilla of political knowledge knows how hard it is to convince voters to raise their own taxes, but Steinberg did it.

Steinberg’s proposal has critics, but none can compete with his track record of progress. Rather than attack Steinberg’s every utterance, they would be wise to study his strategies and learn a thing or two about building consensus and getting things done.

The City Council should allow voters to decide the fate of Steinberg’s reform proposal.