Tag Cloud
Friday, February 10, 2012
Union leaders back lawsuit against strong mayor
by Kathleen Haley, published on December 1, 2009 at 9:49 PM
Storyline: Sacramento City Hall / Politics
Loading images
In a sign that the opposing camp to the “strong mayor” initiative has significant union support, three local union leaders turned out for a Tuesday press conference to support a new lawsuit against the initiative.
The group SAVE Sacramento, which is chaired by local union leader Matt Kelly, is publicizing a lawsuit that aims to take the strong mayor initiative off the June 2010 ballot.
The plaintiff in the lawsuit is Bill Camp, the executive secretary of the Sacramento Central Labor Council. Camp filed the lawsuit as a private citizen — he is not representing the labor council in the legal battle. The defendants named in the lawsuit are the city of Sacramento, the Sacramento City Council and Thomas Hiltachk, the attorney who wrote the strong mayor initiative.
The lawsuit contends that the initiative would illegally make changes — not amendments — to the city’s charter.
“We believe this poorly conceived and badly written measure is not only bad public policy but it is an illegal power grab that exceeds the bounds of what is allowed under the California Constitution,” Kelly said at the press conference, held outside City Hall.
Mayor Kevin Johnson, who leads the initiative campaign, would have many new responsibilities if voters approve the initiative. In a strong mayor position, Johnson would attain the responsibilities of the city manager and create the city’s budget.
A divided City Council in August voted to place the initiative on the June 2010 ballot. The city currently uses a council/manager system. City Manager Ray Kerridge’s many powers include the ability to draft recommendations for the city’s budget and hire department directors.
Also appearing with Kelly and Camp at Tuesday’s press conference was Joan Bryant, director of public employees for Stationary Engineers Local 39. The union represents a wide variety of workers in numerous city departments, including code enforcement, parks and recreation, parking enforcement and the solid waste division.
Camp said before the press conference that it was clear the initiative would make changes to city government that are greater than what is allowed to be defined as an “amendment.” Amendments can legally be made through a ballot initiative, but changes cannot be made through that vehicle, Camp argues.
“I mean, this is a whole reorganization of the city government,” he said.
Lance Olson, Camp’s attorney, claimed that the initiative violates Article 11 of the California Constitution. Olson said the strong mayor initiative proponents did not follow the legal process for making changes to the city charter.
Since the Sacramento Central Labor Council had endorsed Johnson’s candidacy for mayor, Camp is now opposing the initiative of the mayor his group had once supported.
“There’s a difference between us supporting [Johnson] ... and taking this idea and saying, you know what, this is a bad idea,” Camp said.
The labor council still supports Johnson, Camp said, but disagrees with the initiative.
Reacting to the announcement of the lawsuit, Johnson said he was very disappointed. The lawsuit will take away scarce resources from the city and the taxpayers will have to pay the bill, he said.
“I do not think that’s in the best interest of the community,” he said.
Johnson also commented on the labor unions’ support of the lawsuit against the initiative. “I wish that wasn’t the case,” he said, adding that he thinks labor would “benefit immensely” as a result of changing the city’s governance structure.
Other supporters of the lawsuit who appeared at the press conference included Anna Molander, the chair of the Democratic Party of Sacramento County; Anne Rudin, former mayor of Sacramento; Bernard Bowler, former chair of the board of the Sacramento Metro Chamber of Commerce; and Joe Goeden, former West Sacramento City Manager.
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 *do* think Sacramento needs to have a serious public conversation about the current charter and what works/what doesn't, but this take-it-or-leave-it approach is absolutely repugnant.
This initiative does everything wrong. What about public input on its scope and development? None. What about the citizens in the "new" District 9 who will not have full representation on the council for an unspecified period of time?
Yes, the whole democracy thing is messy, time consuming, and inefficient, but I'd rather have that than an initiative written behind closed doors by a lobbyist--of any political stripe.
Hmm and were you aware that the City is ran by an unelected City Manager who is not accountable to the voters? Where is there democracy in that?
The fact of the matter is that the SMI improves democracy and accountability. The Citizens could vote to elect a Mayor who can actually lead this City - not just try to placate eight council members, each of whom have their own political agendas and aspirations.
There is NO downside to having a strong mayor - unless you suck as a City employee, then you might actually get fired.
I don't really care what the unions think or the people who just simply think a strong mayor is a bad idea. What I do care about is that--if we are going to change the city charter--it gets done right in a way that actually improves the way the city is run.
I'm a little surprised that you of all people are supportive of this measure. From your past comments here, I would have bet money that you'd be all over it.
We could elect a Mayor who is not controlled by the developers. One that is a strong environmentalist (which none on the current council are) A fiscal conservative, who would be willing to protect the tax payers. One that is willing to stand up to special interest groups. The possibilities are endless. It would open the door for many qualified business people who never may have thought about running, because it is merely a ceremonial and weak position.
I also support the measure because Sacramento politics needs a kick in the rear and dramatic change.
I do not care for Johnson, but he will be gone soon enough, the only people running against him, if he runs again, in the next election will be Rob Fong, maybe Fargo AGAIN and Debra Ortiz.... tired old has beens - we need new vibrant leadership the kind which we hoped for in Johnson but never got.
Unions and liberals don't want to shake up the power structure because they have a grasp on it... we need some kind of balance in our local government.
I am glad to learn of SAVE and the gentleman who brought on the lawsuit. Heck I hope it's a class action law suit-- I'd love to sign on!!!
Vibrant leadership--now that would be nice, wouldn't it? Although I agree with you in principle, if you can find me the political chimera who is not controlled by developers, is a good business person, is a great leader, is a strong enviro, is a fiscal conservative, and has the administrative skills to hold a strong mayor position, then I will be the first in line to congratulate you, immediately after voting for him/her.
Yes, Stella and when he's bad just whack him on the nose with a newspaper.
After so much pissing in the corners and chewing up the furnishtings, congratulations to you for bothering to read his barking,
Anne Rudin has more integrity in her little toe than all of KJ's tribe of suckups, sycophants, and siblings COMBINED!
And he's up for a new term, and very important endorsements hang in the balance -- and many of those endorsements are not fond of KJ these days...
Cohn is not stupid and I agree he's smart enough to detect a sinking ship, heck I surely wouldn't go out on a limb for someone who I KNOW in my heart would not return the favor or go out on a limb for me. KJ would not go out on a limb for ANY of the councilmembers and would throw them under a bus as quick as he could push them out the way for someone in his personal (hired or volunteer waiting to be hired) camp. Surely Cohn knows this and I can't see him jeapordizing his career, he appears comfortable in wanting to be a counselman, to go out on a limb for Johnson. Sacramento politics appears to be every man for himself and not a united front..... and we have a mayor creating further division and further separating the city charter (and he wants more power???) gheez
Meanwhile (and no one knows how long that could be), under the SMI, the Mayor will have that missing 9th member's VOTE, PLUS a vote as Mayor, PLUS Veto Power, ON TOP OF the unprecedented powers he aspires to control, including those of City Manager.
It's shocking that this crucial aspect is NOT addressed in the SMI. It will lead to a costly legal quagmire if the Strong Mayor Initiative passes; not to mention the uncertainty of Sacramentans as to which district they are in and who represents them. Where's the "accountability"?
We DON'T WANT AN EMPEROR, KEVIN.
"The labor council still supports Johnson, Camp said, but disagrees with the initiative."
Apparently, either do the Sacramento Central Labor Council and other KJ backers who are "jumping ship."
I don't know whether any reconsideration of that initial support has been made, but I doubt such a move would pass today, given all the water that has passed under that bridge...
Even if Fargo had been as awful a mayor as KJ aspires to be, the inexperience and temperment that Johnson displayed during the televised debates, ought to have been enough clue for voters to retain the candidate who was qualifited to do the job.
Not a wannabe whose first task is to rewrite his own job description, from a member of representative government to a Unitary Executive.