The city’s Charter Committee, which is studying the “strong mayor” issue and other topics, has a new schedule. The 11-member committee is examining the rules laid out in the city’s charter, which is similar to a constitution. The new schedule was drafted after the City Council's Aug. 6 request that the committee move up its deadlines on the strong mayor issue. The issue is timely because voters will be asked to vote in June 2010 on a separate strong mayor proposal created by the Sacramentans ... KathleenHaley JoesacramentoDotCom comment-13252 2009-09-04T04:30:26Z 2009-09-04T04:30:26Z Izzy said "Joesac..isn't the strong mayor initiative a lot like the cart before the horse? " Absolutely. This is a unique city and IMO calls for a unique charter, not one crafted by a lawyer in a vacuum to the exacting specifications of the incumbent mayor. JoesacramentoDotCom 2009-09-04T04:30:26Z William Burg comment-13208 2009-09-03T18:47:33Z 2009-09-03T18:47:33Z "William, do you think Steve is going to continue to say "it's the same" as other cities, knowing full well that it's not? Maybe a primer on how the different city power structures are balanced could be linked every time he drops that meme." Steve Maviglio is a professional liar. He is paid to tell people things that are not true, repeatedly and with great conviction, until he convinces the easily bullied and irritates the less-easily bullied into ceding the field just to get rid of him. If he tells you the sky is blue, go outside and check. He's basically Johnson's Karl Rove. William Burg 2009-09-03T18:47:33Z William Burg comment-13195 2009-09-03T20:46:28Z 2009-09-03T20:46:28Z Utter will and force of justice is nice, but back it up with a loud voice. Start writing articles here, you are certainly prolific enough. At least in this forum we're on something like a level playing field with the highly-paid "volunteers." Oh yeah, did you see this? http://www.kcra.com/politics/20697005/detail.html Apparently the Mayor has decided his loan to the "strong mayor" campaign is now a contribution, which supposedly resolves his conflict of interest regarding the initiative issue. Another appearance of the magic checkbook to make problems go away? William Burg 2009-09-03T20:46:28Z bbbbmer comment-13127 2009-09-03T00:32:45Z 2009-09-03T00:32:45Z The problem is that 'we' are sanctioned more rigorously than 'them', and 'we' are not organized and have no backing to speak of, certainly not to the extent that the old guard and largely Republican (including the DINO's) real estate developers and other corporate interests who are sponsoring this naked belligerence upon our very democratic city governance. We are not 'equal' except in the few rag tag voices who stand against the indecency of this mayor and his tribe of suckups and sycophants who are very well paid 'volunteers', and I fear no matter how armed we are with FACTS, something 'they' seem to disregard at will, or challenging chutzpah against these horrible people, they will prevail because their tactics of blinding otherwise stupid people with bright shiny objects worked last November. I pray by utter will and force of justice that Sacramentans will wise up somehow and stop this adventure before it ends up utterly ruining our city.... bbbbmer 2009-09-03T00:32:45Z William Burg comment-13082 2009-09-03T20:46:35Z 2009-09-03T20:46:35Z The plus side is that here, we can post our own articles, use this place as a soapbox, rip the mask off and tell the truth. I urge you to do exactly that. Having read stories by, and done interviews with, people who grew up in Sacramento in the 1920s and 1930s, Plaza Park (now Cesar Chavez Plaza) used to be a hotbed of politically-oriented public speaking: every popular and unpopular political opinion could be heard, typically shouted by a solitary orator with a stack of pamphlets, at the people passing through the park, while people played chess and ate lunch on the park benches. Now that the benches are held to a minimum to avoid their use by the homeless, public places don't get the kind of foot traffic needed for a juicy political dialogue, but we have the Internet for that--and a place like Sacramento Press is very good for just that sort of thing. If Maviglio & Co. can shout here, so can we, on something resembling a level playing field. William Burg 2009-09-03T20:46:35Z Paul Cox comment-13077 2009-09-02T18:29:10Z 2009-09-02T18:29:10Z Marion, I believe the rule of political posturing is, "If you say the same thing enough times, it magically becomes true, regardless of it's actual truth." e.g. -The Strong Mayor proposal is the same as most CA cities have, when it's not like any of the other Strong Mayor charters. -That you don't value the voters if you criticize the process in which their signatures were gathered, or if you think that a longer consideration time should be given, to allow them to fully understand what is happening and voice their opinion. -That the current charter doesn't give you any vote on what happens with the city manager, even though he can be removed by the city council that voters elected. -That it's "business-as-usual" if you don't give the Mayor all the power he wants. Cuz that's "progressive", and you wouldn't want to be seen as being against "progress" would you? (feel free to let me know if I forgot any others that need repeating in order to make them true) Paul Cox 2009-09-02T18:29:10Z thsas comment-13074 2009-09-02T18:01:17Z 2009-09-02T18:01:17Z three cheers for complete transparancy: mind-blowing record-setting spending, deadliest war yet, the end of democracy, and government bankruptcy. Good luck with that heathcare deal, that even the team with the most players won't vote for! thsas 2009-09-02T18:01:17Z bbbbmer comment-13049 2009-09-02T10:24:09Z 2009-09-02T10:24:09Z It's sad to see another local press outlet morphed into just another 'KJ & MavigLIAR' propaganda tool, with these two inarticulate and politically primitive boobs stuffing the net with P.R. derived pablum rather than any serious consideration of that which they've actually brought to the table, corruption and deception masked as 'reform' or 'change' in a new super-Orwellian dialogue with a less than discerning public, and having any pointed opposition silenced via the editor. Yep, yep, that's 'accountability', all right... modeled no doubt after eight years of Bush/Cheney lies, well studied by the law firm that wrote the 'strong mayor' proposal, and now wants the City to finance its negligent errors and omissions to the proposal. This incumbent beats all for utter nerve and puts Rod Blogojevich in the shade in terms of brazenness and lies in trotting this turkey out proclaiming its manna when in reality it's plain old bald faced corruption as usual... bbbbmer 2009-09-02T10:24:09Z Marion Millin comment-13045 2009-09-02T08:12:00Z 2009-09-02T08:12:00Z "profoundly unfit" -- that sums it up concisely. Marion Millin 2009-09-02T08:12:00Z Marion Millin comment-13044 2009-09-02T08:18:17Z 2009-09-02T08:18:17Z William, do you think Steve is going to continue to say "it's the same" as other cities, knowing full well that it's not? Maybe a primer on how the different city power structures are balanced could be linked every time he drops that meme. And perhaps a history lesson for Mr. M. on why the Charter was changed to "the way it was created in the 1920s." (Of course the Charter is older, he probably knows that......) "September 1, 2009 | 10:26 PM Joe, actually it is BECAUSE of strong mayor/council initiative the charter commission was formed in the first place (and the Mayor voted for it). The business-as-usual crowd had no plans whatsoever to change the current form of government from the way it was created in the 1920s." Marion Millin 2009-09-02T08:18:17Z Marion Millin comment-13043 2009-09-02T08:46:30Z 2009-09-02T08:46:30Z Steve, as you well know: It was not a landslide. I do not "devalue the citizens of this city." The only "blatant display of misinformed, unqualified, emotionally immature and arrogant behavior" on the televised debates was Kevin Johnson's. The spin doesn't change the facts. An example: Your candidate demanding implementation of "his" ideas for creating community forums that already existed. Mayor Fargo had to point out each time that such a forum existed and that she was deeply engaged with it. Johnson had no idea and his team had not bothered to research. Any experienced, dedicated public official, who had to sit next to and debate such a petulant and unqualified pretender, would have felt like having a "meltdown." Few could have managed the professionalism Mayor Fargo showed during the debate; including the respectful treatment she gave Johnson while he glared, pouted and displayed his complete lack of preparation. (Unless by preparation you mean stringing slogans together as if they are meaningful). "Business as usual"? Kevin Johnson had never attended a City Council meeting before being elected and after being elected told City staff he didn't need to learn how the meetings functioned. When he was "knocking on doors," riling people up about unresponsive local government, Kevin and many of his fans may not actually have put much effort into contacting the City at all. . The sight of your candidate glowering like a spoiled child at the mayor and angrily grabbing at his water bottle was enough to show the temperament -- since he has no experience -- for policy making KJ has. "... the same type of strong mayor/council system that most cities of our size have here in California and throughout the United States." And Steve, as you also know, it's not "the same type of strong mayor" system at all. Each city's system is structured differently. That is one aspect of the current City Charter Review Committee process. http://www.cityofsacramento.org/charter/ The Strong Mayor Initiative as written would give Sacramento's mayor more unchecked power than the mayor's in those other cities. (Again with the apples and oranges...) And clearly, the vote on the Strong Mayor Initiative and the vote on whether Kevin Johnson would be that Strong Mayor are two separate things, which should be two separate ballot items. If Kevin's people were really confident that this is what "the voters of Sacramento" want, there would be two separate votes. If Kevin really cared about the future of Sacramento, there would be two separate votes. Your misrepresentations are unwelcome, although they will backfire, which is good. Having to address them and your attempts to "shame" the public you pretend to care about, is a nuisance. Marion Millin 2009-09-02T08:46:30Z William Burg comment-13041 2009-09-02T06:03:59Z 2009-09-02T06:03:59Z The only "checks" are the ones developers are writing to get this put into place...and the ones you're cashing, Steve. And the city manager can be removed at any City Council meeting by a vote of six council members...a mayor can only be removed from office by election...or a recall. Oh yeah, and our national government has an Executive/Legislative/Judicial setup--a three-way transaction. The "wrong mayor" proposal doesn't have oversight or accountability, it's all about concentrating power, and requiring supermajorities (you know, the kind that works so well when CA tries to pass a state budget) to override mayoral decisions--except for the many things that the council members won't be able to override at all anymore (like, say, removing the city manager once they are hired.) William Burg 2009-09-02T06:03:59Z Steven Maviglio comment-13040 2009-09-02T05:26:45Z 2009-09-02T05:26:45Z Joe, actually it is BECAUSE of strong mayor/council initiative the charter commission was formed in the first place (and the Mayor voted for it). The business-as-usual crowd had no plans whatsoever to change the current form of government from the way it was created in the 1920s. Steven Maviglio 2009-09-02T05:26:45Z Steven Maviglio comment-13039 2009-09-02T05:24:36Z 2009-09-02T05:24:36Z It's the same type of system most CA cities have, and it's a strong mayor/council system with plenty of checks and balances. The same type of Executive/Legislative set-up as our national and state governments as well. Right now, the city is run by the city manager instead of the folks you vote into office. Steven Maviglio 2009-09-02T05:24:36Z Steven Maviglio comment-13038 2009-09-02T05:23:18Z 2009-09-02T05:23:18Z Actually there was only one debate at CSUS, Marion. And it's a shame you so devalue the citizens of this city, who by a landslide margin elected him Mayor. And are you talking about Heather Fargo being "misinformed, unqualified, emotionally immature and arrogant"? Because that's generally the consensus of her performance in the debate, including her post-debate meltdown at CSUS. Like it or not, your candidate lost the election. The question now is whether we want the same business-as-usual government that the voters of Sacramento rejected last November, or the same type of strong mayor/council system that most cities of our size have here in California and throughout the United States. If you don't think Kevin is doing a good job (and he could probably do nothing that would ever let that happen in your mind), then you'll have the opportunity to hold him accountable at the next election. Steven Maviglio 2009-09-02T05:23:18Z Marion Millin comment-13037 2009-09-02T05:15:10Z 2009-09-02T05:15:10Z bbbbmer, anyone who watched the two televised mayoral debates at CSUS witnessed a blatant display of misinformed, unqualified, emotionally immature and arrogant behavior. That he was elected anyway is frightening. "Shame on those who didn't view this deceptive clown's record any deeper than spit on a hot rock to see how he could harm this city if left unchecked, and campaigned and voted for him anyway." Marion Millin 2009-09-02T05:15:10Z bbbbmer comment-13033 2009-09-02T04:50:58Z 2009-09-02T04:50:58Z I like your analysis, and it seems a local adaptation of the great documentary film 'The Corporation' which examines the pathological side of corporate behaviours, many times with the cover of P.R. guided public personae and messages, such as the likes of Chevron posing as a 'friend to the environment'... It seems those seeking greater authority have met diagnosable thresholds in their contemptuous and cynical pursuit of more and more of whatever dysfunctional need it is they're seeking... But the bottom line is that it's just not good for most of us when such unfit individuals pretend to lead, for when they seek benefit for the elite few at the expense of the rest, an injury results that can take decades to heal. bbbbmer 2009-09-02T04:50:58Z bbbbmer comment-13032 2009-09-02T04:45:16Z 2009-09-02T04:45:16Z As usual your 'analysis' lacks context, which is everything in considering such a measure. We are the sum of our actions in life, and the sum of this mayor's actions do not merit the reward of unprecedented authority over 500+ employees, the city's budget, with a construction that has fatal legal flaws (even KJ's SAG got ripped off by the Hiltchak lack of expertise in this arena) that Johnson and his band of whatevers now seek the City to pay for... The ONLY Sacramentans who would support this are mindless depthless replicants who, like you, brought this mayoral nincompoop shill into office to front for the pent up greed of real estate development interests who were held at bay prior to last November's darkest day. Shame on those who didn't view this deceptive clown's record any deeper than spit on a hot rock to see how he could harm this city if left unchecked, and campaigned and voted for him anyway.... Contextual collective memory seems in short supply around these parts, especially when favoring specious pretenders to a throne never intended for the likes of its current occupant.... bbbbmer 2009-09-02T04:45:16Z TAB comment-13031 2009-09-02T04:41:40Z 2009-09-02T04:41:40Z Strong mayor sounds like a dictatorship to me which is a bunch of crap TAB 2009-09-02T04:41:40Z Marion Millin comment-13030 2009-09-02T05:08:10Z 2009-09-02T05:08:10Z Kevin would have some credibility if the Strong Mayor Initiative -- and community study/discussion about changing the City Charter -- and the vote for who that proposed Strong Mayor would be, were two separate votes. The public has "learned something from this" "unilateral approach." It's the same one he takes in every matter that's earned him criminal investigations, teacher/staff defections, ineligibility for Federal funds and legal payoffs/fines. Might as well call this the Unilateral Mayor Initiative. This is a snow job and a power grab. Nothing to do with "modernization" or "accountability." It's a blatant power grab for an unqualified mayor and his power broker backers. Marion Millin 2009-09-02T05:08:10Z izzy comment-13022 2009-09-02T02:26:39Z 2009-09-02T02:26:39Z Joesac..isn't the strong mayor initiative a lot like the cart before the horse? In my opinion, that doesn't usually work very well. Much like the strong mayor initiative. izzy 2009-09-02T02:26:39Z JoesacramentoDotCom comment-13011 2009-09-01T22:35:57Z 2009-09-01T22:35:57Z Steve, sounds like you approve of the committee. Glad to hear that. Had KJ been the one to suggest its formation in the first place, and awaited its findings to write his proposal, I think he would have gained a lot of credibility with Sacramentans. Instead he chose a unilateral approach and it had the exact opposite effect. Hope he learned something from this. JoesacramentoDotCom 2009-09-01T22:35:57Z tdramer comment-13002 2009-09-01T21:00:01Z 2009-09-01T21:00:01Z Covert-Aggression= When you’re out to “win”, dominate or control, but are subtle, underhanded or deceptive enough to hide your true intentions. Avoiding any overt display of aggression while simultaneously intimidating others into giving you what you want is a powerfully manipulative maneuver. tdramer 2009-09-01T21:00:01Z bbbbmer comment-12978 2009-09-01T19:40:12Z 2009-09-01T19:40:12Z The Charter Review Committee's schedule was truncated because of a push by KJ's backers to slate their 'strong mayor' election for a date which attracts the least number of voters, specifically a June date, when only a very few, and usually very conservative, voters show up to the polls. This had nothing to do with 'democracy' and everything to do with railroading the SAG proposal, engineered by a right wing law firm at the behest of old guard real estate development and other corporate interests to circumvent the very democratic system of governance now in place. It does NOTHING to make ANYONE more 'accountable', rather it concentrates authority in the current profoundly unfit incumbent, and uses some of the most juvenile and cynical and Orwellian tactics in its use of language EVER seen locally, on the belief that Sacramentans are too stupid not to be motivated by a bright shiny object on voting day, no matter how deleterious the effect of their proposal truly is. Calling this measure one of 'accountability' does NOT change its dishonorable intent, its flawed construction, and thoughtlessly calculated entre. bbbbmer 2009-09-01T19:40:12Z Steven Maviglio comment-12973 2009-09-01T18:49:41Z 2009-09-01T18:49:41Z If Obama and Congress can get thru national health care in six months, I'm optimistic the Charter Reform Commission can get its job done in more time. I'm looking forward to its recommendations on modernizing city government and making our elected officials more accountable. Steven Maviglio 2009-09-01T18:49:41Z William Burg comment-12966 2009-09-01T17:10:59Z 2009-09-01T17:10:59Z Here's the agenda for the charter review committee meeting this Thursday: http://sacramento.granicus.com/AgendaViewer.php?view_id=8&event_id=89 The public can show up and make comments directly to the charter review commission. Or you can submit comments to them here: http://www.cityofsacramento.org/charter/contact.html William Burg 2009-09-01T17:10:59Z Paul Cox comment-12961 2009-09-01T16:47:10Z 2009-09-01T16:47:10Z I noticed October 1st the committee will review public comments. Am I to assume that the draft is already out somewhere. A link would be helpful. Thanks! Paul Cox 2009-09-01T16:47:10Z Marion Millin comment-12955 2009-09-01T07:54:05Z 2009-09-01T07:54:05Z "The new schedule was drafted after the City Council's Aug. 6 request that the committee move up its deadlines on the strong mayor issue. The issue is timely because voters will be asked to vote in June 2010 on a separate strong mayor proposal created by the Sacramentans for Accountable Government group." Well, yeah, "the issue is timely," because the Council voted to push the Strong Mayor Initiative onto the June 2010 ballot, which necessitates a truncated schedule for the Sacramento Charter Review Committee. Marion Millin 2009-09-01T07:54:05Z