Tag Cloud
Saturday, May 18, 2013
Charter reform goes to November ballot – but not as 'strong mayor'
by Melissa Corker, published on February 7, 2012 at 11:03 PM
Storyline: Politics
Loading images
Charter reform will be an item on the November ballot, but not in the form of a strong mayor initiative. Instead, voters will be asked if they want to elect a 15-member commission to review the city charter.
After more than 20 people spoke on the topic during public comment, the City Council voted 5-4 Tuesday to reject putting the Checks and Balances Act of 2012 – the strong mayor initiative – to a public vote in November.
Council members Sandy Sheedy, Rob Fong, Kevin McCarty, Darrell Fong and Bonnie Pannell were the majority votes.
Council members Angelique Ashby, Steve Cohn, Jay Schenirer and Mayor Kevin Johnson each voted in favor of the measure
no
.
Two governance-related considerations were on the agenda Tuesday night: a charter reform commission and the Checks and Balances Act, which had been revised from the last council discussion.
After the motion to put the strong mayor initiative on the ballot failed, the council voted in favor of a ballot measure to elect a 15-member charter commission.
McCarty suggested the charter reform commission as an option to the strong mayor initiative at the Jan. 17. council meeting.
The measure would be twofold: first asking voters if they want an elected charter commission, and second, asking voters to select whom they want to serve on that commission.
“I don’t like a charter commission because I don’t like how much it will cost,” Ashby said. “Between staffing and meetings and the elections – It’s too expensive.”
According to the City Clerk’s office, the county is currently unable to give a cost estimate for the “candidate” portion of the issue – the cost would depend largely on how many candidates were on the ballot.
The “question” portion of the issue, however, is estimated at $127,100 according to the City Clerk’s office.
Supporters of an elected charter commission told council members that it would be worth the time and expense.
“Democracy is messy, and a commission can be time-consuming,” Sacramento resident and former City Council candidate Henry Harry said, “but it will allow us to get it right.”
Many who opposed an elected commission, however, expressed concern that opening the city charter for review is akin to opening Pandora’s Box.
“(A charter commission) opens up doors to other issues that we’d rather not see open up,” said Mark Tyndale, president of the Sacramento Police Officers Association.
Roger Niello, current CEO of the Sacramento Metro Chamber and former State Assemblyman, said he believes an elected charter commission would pit competing city interests against each if the city charter is reviewed in its entirety.
“You would be creating the political equivalent of a food fight,” Niello said.
After the final vote, Johnson voiced his disappointment, saying simply, “I think a charter commission is a bad idea.”
Ashby said of the charter commission, “This seems like déjà vu. It looks like redistricting, and we all know how that turned out. I promise you that a year from now we will get hammered on this.”
If a charter commission is elected in November, the members will have two years to submit any proposal for charter reform to voters.
The City Council also considered creating a ballot measure Tuesday asking voters to weigh in on a potential lease of the city's parking assets to help finance a new sports and entertainment complex. The Sacramento Press will have the update on that story Wednesday.
Melissa Corker is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press. Follow her on Twitter @MelissaCorker.
Editorial Note: A correction was made to this article after it was published. The incorrect information was struck out and the correction information added.
Flag Article As:
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
Leave a Comment
My question to Ashby is does she know how much it will cost to change the charter? hire additional personnel for the Mayor? perhaps fire and search for another city manager that will brown nose to the mayor? etc... She's a bright chick she could of thought of another excuse to state why she is standing by the man (johnson) who endorsed her and the union (SPOA) who endorsed her-- What the heck??? Give me a break
For some of us changing the charter opens up doors to other issues (such as corruption) that we'd rather not see open up-- Heck many of us see the charter change as opening Pandora's Power box-- where Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely
Some of us see an elected charter commission as actually creating Food for Thought.
Heck the food fight began as soon as Johnson took office trying to spoon feed us a bowl of crap he masqueraded as transparency and accountability as nourishment to change. Many of us keep throwing that spoiled rotten food lacking transparency and accountability right back at him and he keeps throwing this self absorbed power hungry charter change back at us. Niello, come on now give us a break, the food fight has already begun and Johnson threw the first self-absorbed spoiled helping.
I apologize for the error.
And i hold Johnson responsible for this treadmill we're on since he continuously fails to focus on the budget deficit (and he wants to control the budget!) crime...and other issues he'll put in the backseat to drive his ego driven power driven charter change. But the heck with accountability when many will blame the council instead of placing blame where it needs to be-- on a self absorbed ego driven mayor. who will never get around to addressing the pain many of us are experiencing in this city because it does not affect him directly
I agree, The November election results should either kill the initiative or create the means for thouroughly vetted charter reform. But our mayor doesn't strive to be a public servant but strives to control the city--our mayor is like freddie krueger, michael myers, norman bates, jason vorhees, jigsaw, chucky, leprechaun, pennywise the clown...and will attempt again to bring the issue back from the dead
That's not a bad thing at all.
I'm surprised that KJ voted against this, though. First, the Council rejected the idea of placing this on the November ballot, which was KJ's best chance of seeing these changes take effect in his lifetime. When that got rejected, I was sure he'd favor the second-best chance of seeing these changes take effect.
It makes me wonder what is up his sleeve. Is he now going to keep trying? Will he bring this before the Council on a monthly basis until they finally wear down and vote 5-4 to put it on some ballot? He only needs to make a deal with one more Council member.
The wildcard now is the charter commission vote. If the voters vote against it, especially in light of what has transpired now for over three years, all of the mayor's arguments for revising the charter go out the window, his or anybody else's version.
Will that stop him, especially if he were to gain a majority of support on council? Propably not, his pursuit for the "ring of power" is too great.
Meet Mayor Gollum, seeking "his precious".
For the second straight year (2011 & 2012), Forbes has ranked Sacramento 5th out of the 10 most miserable U.S. cities. Not only is this unacceptatble, it’s an embarrassment. And once again this city council has added to this miserable index. Hopefully new brooms will sweep clean with the up coming city council elections.
The same way some can say the council refuse to acknowledge or have confidence in the strength of its citizens some can argue some citizens don't have knowledge or confidence in the strength of the council opposing it. I believe they can oppose it due to lack of merit, wanting the public more informed and not due to personal vendettas. It's easy to say they dislike or have vengeance towards the mayor and Mayor Johnson can know without a doubt that is not true and he will sit in silence and not inform people that personal vendettas is not the reason for them opposing it. Just like Johnson sat in silence when a Black man stated the council was opposing it because Mayor Johnson was black. Mayor Johnson knew that was not true yet he did not raise his voice to say race was not the issue.
I, personally don't dislike the mayor, I dislike his deceit. I don't have vengeance towards him I feel sorry for him one day he will have to pay the piper (and not the pied piper of city hall - SPOA)
Yes it is unacceptable and an embarrassment that Sac is ranked 5th of the 10 most miserable U.S. cities I'd like to know how changing the charter will change that. And Johnson has aided in many of us being miserable. But then again, he said he’d put us on the map and for many of us our levy (hearts) are broken and we are drowning in a city of neglect as Johnson searches for money to feed his leprechaun SPOA for endorsement of this charter change. While the new brooms are sweeping hopefully they won't sweep under the rug the voices of many of us and hopefully we won‘t have to sit and look at a council, manager… appearing to be stepford wives married to Johnson
http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mli45hdlg/5-sacramento-calif/
"#5 Sacramento, Calif.
Sacramento’s lone pro sports team is flirting with a move to Anaheim unless the city delivers financing for a new arena. Sac-Town might not miss them. The team has lost 73% of its games since the start of the 2008-09 season. Foreclosures in California's capital were among the 10 highest last year. "
Here's how the SBJ described the ranking system
"Sacramento, which also came in at No. 5 in 2011, ranks as one of the most miserable cities in part because of its high foreclosure rates, but also because of the uncertainty of the future of the Sacramento Kings , as well as their performance, according to Forbes."
Get rid of the Kings and we will be less miserable? Worth a shot!