STORYLINE Sacramento City Hall / Politics

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

Close timeline

Charter meeting: "Strong mayor" hiring powers discussed

by Kathleen Haley, published on September 23, 2009 at 10:58 PM

No high resolution image exists...

Progress bar

Loading images
Slideshow image

Residents and members of a city committee discussed on Wednesday night issues relating to the “strong mayor” initiative, including a statistic which says that a Sacramento strong mayor would have the power to hire a total of 800 city employees.

The city’s Charter Review Committee, which has tentatively recommended that the city maintain its existing City Council/city manager system, held the first of nine town hall meetings with 18 residents at the Natomas High School lunch room. The committee is accepting feedback from the public on its draft report. A separate strong mayor initiative -- which clashes with the charter committee’s draft recommendations -- will go before voters in June 2010.

A handout from the committee that was passed out to residents at the meeting says that the strong mayor initiative would give the mayor the power to hire about 800 non-union city employees.

Cecily Hastings, a member of the charter committee, discussed the issue with residents. “Under the strong mayor initiative — and this is a very controversial part of it — the mayor hires and fires those 800 people directly.”

The city currently has fewer than 800 non-union employees because of vacant positions and layoffs, Hastings said. However, the city could have 800 non-union employees if it is fully-staffed, she added.

Summarizing the committee’s view, she said that firing and hiring of these positions by the mayor would politicize the city staff “far too much.”

The city manager is responsible for hiring and firing non-union staff in the existing system. The committee is recommending in its draft report that the city manager maintain this duty.

Felicia Townsend, a resident who attended the meeting, told Hastings that if the mayor were in charge of hiring and firing the 800 people instead of the city manager, it would still be “just one person who has control over all those people.”

The committee felt that the mayor is a “political” job, while the city manager is a “professional” job, Hastings said, responding to Townsend.

Townsend said after the meeting that she is leaning toward supporting the strong mayor initiative. She said she attended the charter committee’s meeting because she wanted to hear the committee’s views.

The meeting also attracted supporters of the charter committee’s ideas. Brandon Ruiz, a volunteer with Support Accountability, Voice and Ethics in Sacramento, passed out print-outs opposing the strong mayor initiative. He also asked residents in attendance to sign petitions against the initiative after the meeting. The group is taking signatures on petitions in an effort to gather information and raise awareness of SAVE, he said.

Read this Sept. 21 story for the times, dates and locations of the charter committee's remaining town hall meetings.

Photo by Anthony Bento.

Kathleen Haley is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press.

Liked this article? Share it with your friends:

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.RSS Feed

September 23, 2009 | 11:52 PM
Why don't these articles about the Charter Committee show pictures of the Charter Committee?
1 1
REPLY
September 23, 2009 | 11:55 PM
Hi Bill, Thanks for the suggestion. I'll take your suggestion to my editors. Cheers, Kathleen
1 0
REPLY
September 24, 2009 | 12:44 AM
Come on, Bill. Whichever way this goes, it's ALL ABOUT KJ!!
3 1
REPLY
September 24, 2009 | 8:10 AM
Take your meds Marion
1 4
REPLY
edited on  September 24, 2009 | 2:55 PM
JK, your fixation on "meds" suggests you are more familiar with them than others are.


You weren't humbled at all by your gaffe on the Front Page, eh? In response to your mea culpa, someone suggested you "slow down" and you came back with even more arrogance "Slow down? For what?"

I had some supportive comments for you on that, without time to submit them. You'd be better off not elbowing everyone out of the picture you pretend you want to be a part of. Your habit in person is to talk over everyone. You probably have no idea how funny it was that the speaker at the Sustainability Forum replied to you after your "question," "You didn't ask a question."

Some of us could handle you if you can handle yourself. It's not a good idea to tromp in and claim nothing was happening before you arrived and everyone else should just piss off.

That's what the cronyistic developers do.


"I stated .. Don’t you have any responses to my questions? She offered nothing, I believe it was Richard Noss who stated…”You didn’t ask a question.” Well I believe I had, but regardless, I repeated my questions just to make sure she got it…"
2 1
REPLY
September 24, 2009 | 5:46 PM
Slow down Marion.... KJ KJ KJ KJ

KJ is not the problem with Sacramento
1 2
REPLY
September 24, 2009 | 10:53 PM
JK, We'll slow down so you can catch up.

You're right, KJ is just the tip of the iceberg. Only now, he wants to be Captain of the Titanic.
1 0
REPLY
September 24, 2009 | 3:48 PM
Mr. Knapp apparently seeks to emulate a morphing of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reilly -- all hat, no cattle...
1 1
REPLY
September 24, 2009 | 5:48 PM
Actually bbbbmer...I don't care for Hannity or O'Reilly...but I do like Glenn Beck...he is very entertaining and is actually non partisan; he attacks both the Right and the Left... I like that
1 1
REPLY
September 25, 2009 | 4:03 PM
Problem is, Beck attacks people on the right for not being far right enough for his tastes. Not quite the same as being non-partisan.
0 0
REPLY
September 24, 2009 | 4:23 PM
It is against our terms of use to personally attack another user on The Sacramento Press. Instead of directing comments towards one another, it is more constructive to direct comments towards the issues raised in Kathleen's story.
1 0
REPLY
September 24, 2009 | 4:59 PM
And who does this 'committee' think is hiring these 800 employees now?? CITY MANAGER.. So how is having 800 city employees beholden to the whims and good graces of the city manager any better than having them hired by a mayor who can be tossed out of office making the appointments??

I have issues with these so-called town hall meetings. Where was the discussions about the good that might occur with a strong mayor (no idea is totally bad)? Just another example of the city council using public funds and facilities to campaign against the initiative.
1 1
REPLY
September 24, 2009 | 5:06 PM
The city manager can be tossed out of office by the council. The point of a city manager is professional management by someone who knows how to run a large organization, rather than a mayor who may not have the skills needed to do so. The city manager works at the whim of the council and mayor, and under their instructions. Instead of having to pony up a few million to get a different mayor elected, he can be fired at any city council meeting with six votes.

The "Strong Mayor" initiative's proponents have plenty of time (and money) to talk about the pluses of their measure. The Charter Committee has been discussing the pros and cons of various city government options for the past few months--that is the whole point.
3 0
REPLY
September 24, 2009 | 11:00 PM
Rhys02, Good question:

"Where was the discussions about the good that might occur with a strong mayor (no idea is totally bad)?"

There has not been any open and honest discussion about it, intentionally, by the forces that are FOR the Strong Mayor. They have only provided bumpersticker nonsense and bogus platitudes. The latest SacPress piece up on this issue has KJ at a Land Park meeting spewing more of the same, totally meaningless. The mayor's spokesman shows up on SacPress only to divert and disinform -- when has he EVER provided actual information such as you are suggesting?

The Johnson campaign doesn't want a full and open process, has tried to kill it and doesn't want an informed public either. They are counting on an uninformed public voting for throwing the baby out with the bathwater in June 2010.
3 0
REPLY
Leave a Comment
User icon
Type your comment in the box below Edit your comment in the box below

Type tags into the box below.
Use commas to separate your tags.

Cancel Submit

Please Log in or Sign up

Existing Members

Sign In Progress bar Forgot Password?

New Users Create an Account Here
Progress bar
Verification email has been sent. To validate your account open the link provided in the message.
There was a problem sending your verification email. Please contact support@sacramentopress.com
Progress bar Login background Tag cloud top Tag cloud background Tag cloud bottom Login manager background