Tag Cloud
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Council unlikely to address "strong mayor" issues raised by city attorney
by Kathleen Haley, published on September 15, 2009 at 10:30PM
Storyline: Sacramento City Government/Politics
No high resolution image exists...
Loading images
Several legal issues in the “strong mayor” initiative that were raised by Sacramento’s city attorney will likely not be addressed by the City Council. After listening to a Tuesday night presentation by City Attorney Eileen Teichert, councilmembers did not suggest taking any future actions to resolve the issues.
Instead of taking action on the legal issues that were raised by Teichert, some councilmembers said they look forward to analyzing the Charter Review Committee’s upcoming recommendations on the strong mayor system of city government. The committee’s ideas may be placed on a future ballot for citizens to decide.
The City Council had asked Teichert to prepare a report on the legal issues in the strong mayor initiative that will go before voters in June 2010. The initiative was the project of the Sacramentans for Accountable Government group, which Mayor Kevin Johnson backs. Johnson and Teichert have been clashing lately over their respective views of the legal soundness of the initiative, which would provide the mayor with more power.
The city’s 11-member Charter Review Committee is examining the strong mayor form of government and the city’s current council/manager system. The committee plans to deliver a report on governance and other related issues to the City Council Nov. 3.
Teichert’s report to the City Council Tuesday argued that the strong mayor initiative is legally flawed in several ways. In one of her key points, she asserted that the California Constitution does not allow voters to make “revisions” of city charters in a ballot initiative. She said the strong mayor initiative is asking voters to make “revisions” to the city’s charter, which is similar to a constitution.
While the state constitution allows voters to use initiatives to make “amendments” of city charters, the changes being suggested in the strong mayor initiative are actually “revisions,” Teichert argued. A revision would be a fundamental change to the charter, while an amendment would consist of changing details in the charter, she said.
Mayor Kevin Johnson did not make any public comments at the City Council meeting Tuesday. However, he told reporters earlier in the day that he wanted citizens to vote on the initiative, adding: “Let’s not play political games.”
Tom Hiltchak, the attorney who wrote the strong mayor proposal, disagreed with Teichert's analysis in comments to the City Council.
Following Teichert’s presentation, Councilmembers Steve Cohn and Lauren Hammond both said they look forward to hearing the recommendations from the city’s charter committee on the strong mayor form of government.
Councilwoman Bonnie Pannell blasted the strong mayor initiative in comments Tuesday, claiming that she thought the initiative was drafted in a “back-room” deal. “We really need to take a look at the initiative that was done in the back room,” Pannell charged. “I bet there were no people of color in that back room -- no women.”
Photo by Anthony Bento.
Kathleen Haley is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press.
Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.
Leave a Comment
How would you characterize Tom Hiltachk and the major financial backers of the Strong Mayor Initiative in terms of how "reflective of our city's diversity" they are?
As Rhonda says, "The only thing transparent about Mayor Johnson since he's been in office is the fact we can see right through you."
Steve M. I have seen you attack people personally on all kinds of websites. It's how you try to discredit your detractors. Unfortunately, it makes you look passive-aggresive and petty. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
In the case of the Mayor's spokesman, it is important enough to point out. Except for this direct attack and slander against me and my name, TomRunge, other abusers and their "weak arguments" are not worthy of comment.
Those who consider valid criticism of attitudes or behavior as "namecalling" -- even the Mayor's spokeman -- want to avoid responsibility, by blaming those who call them on their nonsense.
http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/13176/Sacramento_City_Police_Arrest_17_Homeless_Campers
Steve Maviglio: you wrote "If Ms. Pannell is concerned about diversity, she ought to look at the Charter Commission that she favored and voted for. Not exactly reflective of our city's diversity.
councilmember Pannell " Mr Maviglio, You have been a contributing factor to the division brewing within city hall. You have been a liability verses an asset to Mayor Johnson. Councilmember Pannell must of been concerned with diversity. She chose Grantland Johnson (former county supervisor, former councilmember) and happens to be black. She couldn't choose the entire panel (and no one person should be able to) Obviously she doesn't have a problem with the make up of the charter committee she voted for it and didn't complain so she must not have a problem with race. She has a problem, which goes beyond race, with the special interest make up of the Strong mayor proposal . Gheez.
Sacramento Press: I've read articles on this site and never posted a comment. Today I couldn't help myself. I apologize for the length of my posts but tonight this weighed heavy on my heart .. Thank you for the article and allowing me to post..
Rhonda Erwin
Will you continue to do this and convince more and more Sacramentans that the whole power grab stinks? That your ham handed attempt to deflect the "back room deal" discussion to one about race is cynical and hypocritical? That when the public on SacPress simply reflects and identifies your bag of dirty tricks, your only response is to attack them?
We can only hope.
I didn't raise the issue of race. The Councilmember did. Are you defending it? And if so, please let Sacpress readers know why you think the comment about race in a discussion about the initiative is relevant?
Those who identify your behavior and point out to you how damaging it is -- to the mayor, to his agenda, to the discussion -- are accused of bruising your ego and are personally attacked by you.
(Some of)Those who see through your games are not inclined to play them.
If you consider every accurate comment on your professional behavior as an attack on your personal character, perhaps you had better reconsider both. Thank you.
As Rhonda says, "The only thing transparent about Mayor Johnson since he's been in office is the fact we can see right through you."
Your point is?
And just so you'll know 2 wrongs don't make a right. I'm not dismissing what was said. I noticed you again avoided my questions and found a way to again elaborate on Pannel to again take the attention off the abusive Strong Mayor Proposal. Your fastest move will be my slowest. The only thing transparent about Mayor Johnson since he's been in office is the fact we can see right through you.
The person who brought up the issue was a city council member. The comment, in my view, is inappropriate.
So go ahead and attack me. The facts remain the same.
The Council has certainly been shocked into a reality check by Kevin's actions in Council Meetings.
"The only thing transparent about Mayor Johnson since he's been in office is the fact we can see right through you."
Absolutely brilliant.
The deceit and games are shameful. The game is to try to shame those who call them on it. Seems crazy? It is. That's how politics are "done" these days. That's how Kevin got elected -- misleading people. Slogans, not substance. Find a weak spot, hand them their hats, as you have in your excellent posts, and they'll try to turn it around, use it in their next propaganda item. Or, like Steve, resort to false accusations and strawmen arguments.
Your comments are much appreciated. SacPress doesn't mind long comments (Lucky for me!!) You can also Edit you posts with the blue Edit button. The time of the comment will be updated to when you Edited.
It's good when people trust their own judgement enough to recognize trickery and get "caught up in the moment" enough to say, "Oh Hell no!"
Hell no, we won't Maviglio.
Again, I do not know her reason. I have had no discussions with her. My focus at this time is the strong mayor proposal. Perhaps if Mayor Johnson would spend more time speaking with his colleagues informing them when they'll be transferred out a committee instead of blindsiding them with it -- to get a reaction, blindsided them with the strong mayor proposal... perhaps we'd have less confusion and outbursts... in city hall. I know I'd hate to be a team member and work blind-folded and blind-sided as the Mayor works closer with advisors, assistants, personal lawyers... If the CITY Mayor worked with the CITY counsel, CITY attorney, CITY manager and stopped working with you to conquer and divide.. perhaps things would settle. Again, it all goes back to you and Mayor Johnson.... With every councilmember what you see is what you get. Only with Mayor Johnson do you have to look, search, dig for truth and agenda's... I can't speak for Councilmember Pannell. I've attended city hall for several years and never have I seen so much division.... until Johnson (both when a candidate and now as mayor) Perhaps if councilmembers had so many spokespersons, "special" assistants, "special" volunteers... as Mayor Johnson words would be guarded as you appear to guard Mayor Johnson's... Maviglio I could give you several lists of "perhaps" this or that but the fact remains you have yet to answer my question on why you divide CITY representatives? And here's another question, if Johnson can cause so much division, confusion, anger, mistrust... in city hall with a weak mayor structure what will it be like with a strong mayor structure? (oh I have lots of questions) FYI, I've stood up to more deceitful folks than you (yeah, shocking as it may seem- but true) I can recognize a wolf in sheeps clothing miles away not to mention I can spot a fox entering and leaving a foxhole (city hall). Have a good day. Don't you have some city business for the Mayor to tend to or is your job now a "special assistant" to monitor sites and do damage control?
If there is a particular comment you find offensive, please feel free to use our flagging system and we will review the comment in question.