A meeting held in the Riverside Boulevard Elks Lodge at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday marked another in a series held by the City of Sacramento City Charter Review Committee (CRC).

Moderated by CRC vice chair JoAnn Fuller, the two-hour discourse between the roughly 25 citizens of District Seven and members of the council addressed issues involving the strong mayor initiative and the tentative decisions surrounding it.

Each proposal was presented on a separate page in a packet handed to everyone. A dry erase board was set up that had charts for all to read.

The first question posed was if the mayor should sit and vote as a member of the City Council. The committee felt that it might be important for the mayor to sit at the meetings in order for him to be more connected with the rest of his council.

When a citizen asked what would happen to the city manager, CRC member Alan LoFaso responded that he would continue to be a charter officer.

The subject of the mayor having veto power was also raised.

“So would it then take a super-majority to respond to a strong mayor’s veto?” asked citizen Warren Burns.

LoFaso responded in the affirmative.

Burns pointed out that if the strong mayor initiative is voted into action, the mayor can not only veto a law, but he can also use his spot on the council to vote against it again if the other members wish to overturn his veto.

The most controversial subject during the meeting was the question of who should appoint and remove certain members of government.

“A strong mayor would be able to appoint anyone he wanted to the role of city manager, which could cause a split among the members of the City Council,” warned CRC member Chester Newland.

This subject brought LoFaso back to the microphone to explain the three most common catalysts for political change in city government:

1. There is a scandal or major event in the city’s government, which prompted San Diego’s conversion five years ago.

2. A dynamic elected official enacts the change.

3. Cities get larger.

“There has been no compelling problem with Sacramento’s government that has given us the need to change the whole thing,” said LoFaso.

Burns expressed further skepticism at the ability of the strong mayor to hire and fire government employees, especially a city manager.

“If the mayor can appoint anyone he wants to city manager, he will be able to put a crony in the place of a perfectly competent person to further his agenda,” argued Burns. “I moved to Sacramento in 1968, and I’m afraid the strong mayor initiative could cause turmoil among many citizens, forcing them to move.”

As for other city employees, non-union workers would not be protected by a civil service support system, according to Fuller.

Sacramento’s budget was the last major topic discussed.

Under a strong mayor, the budget would be proposed by him or her. The council can make changes, which the mayor can then veto. If the council does not override the mayor’s veto by the new fiscal year, the budget goes into effect.

Fuller posed the last question of the evening, taking a poll of the citizens present who would be in favor of adding term limits to the mayor’s stay in office, and only a few were.