Tag Cloud
Friday, February 10, 2012
Public invited to Charter Committee town hall meetings
by Kathleen Haley, published on September 21, 2009 at 8:28 PM
Storyline: Sacramento City Hall / Politics
Loading images
A committee recommending that the city maintain its current City Council/city manager system is taking its ideas to the public in a series of town hall meetings. The Charter Review Committee’s draft recommendations object to the “strong mayor” system that is being proposed in a 2010 ballot initiative.
The committee’s nine town hall meetings will be held at various locations from Sept. 23 to Oct. 15. Each meeting will be held from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. The locations are listed at the end of this story.
While the committee has been receiving public input, members now are reaching tentative decisions that they want to explore with the community, said Bill Edgar, Charter Review Committee chairman.
How much can the public influence the committee?
“Quite a bit,” Edgar said, noting that the committee wants to see if the public agrees with its ideas or Mayor Kevin Johnson’s strong mayor proposal.
Bill Burgua, chairman of the Marshall School/New Era Park Neighborhood Association, said he probably would attend one of the meetings. “I just want to remind [the committee] that they need to be doing what is best for the citizens,” he said.
Burgua said he does not oppose a strong mayor system for Sacramento. However, he said that he objects to Johnson’s move to become a strong mayor before that system had been established. “I don’t think the people who are advising Kevin Johnson have the best interests of the citizens at heart,” Burgua said.
The vice president of the Land Park Community Association said he is disappointed with the committee's draft recommendations. Craig Powell, who plans to attend one of the town hall meetings, said he wanted the committee to propose reforms that would differ from the strong mayor initiative and the current system. "I was looking forward to the committee putting up a proposal that would spark such a debate this spring on two competing visions for improving local government," he said. "Instead, they are headed towards an endorsement of the status quo."
The Charter Review Committee’s Town Hall Meetings Schedule:
Wednesday, Sept. 23: Natomas High School — 3301 Fong Ranch Road
Thursday, Sept. 24: Ben Ali Shrine Temple — 3262 Marysville Blvd.
Wednesday, Sept. 30: Elks Lodge — 6446 Riverside Blvd.
Thursday, Oct. 1: Christian Brothers High School — 4315 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
Monday, Oct. 5: Tahoe Park Elementary School — 3110 60th Street
Wednesday, Oct. 7: Sam Brannan Middle School — 5301 Elmer Way
Thursday, Oct. 8: Caleb Greenwood — 5457 Carlson Drive
Wednesday, Oct. 14: Sam Pannell Community Center — 2450 Meadowview Road
Thursday, Oct. 15: Sierra II — 2791 24th St.
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
I don't think the Strong Mayor crowd has done nearly enough to show why the current system is so insufficient--they never even mention Ray Kerridge, the current city manager, nor explain why Kerridge has done such a poor job that they want to remove his power and put it into the hands of a strong mayor instead. Whenever I ask folks like Steve Maviglio why they don't mention Kerridge, he seems to fall oddly...silent. Why is that?
Your statement makes no sense when compared to the existing level of focus on personalities and characterization of the existing government of Sacramento. Maviglio is perfectly willing to sling the mud in the interest of winning an election--he certainly did so in the Mayoral election, and has spent plenty of time slagging on opponents of his initiative. But when it comes to the one concrete example of why a city manager might be a bad idea, the legacy of Ray Kerridge, he is eerily silent.
Talking about the method of governing might be more beneficial. Changing to a "strong mayor" format, especially one that is so unusually strong, would switch the method of governing away from the public and bring it much more into the realm of influence-peddlers. If all power is focused on one elected official, big money interests can just pile money on one candidate instead of the complex juggling act of having to have a majority of the city council in their pocket. It means there is only one person to bribe, and everyone else is under that person's thumb.