Tag Cloud
Sunday, May 26, 2013
Editorial: The end of the strong mayor
by David Watts Barton, published on June 24, 2010 at 5:39 PM
Storyline: DWB: The View from Downtown
Sometimes you can want something so much, and push for it so hard, that you end up creating the opposite of what you wanted.
Which is perhaps how we've ended up with such a weak mayor.
That was never more clear than on Tuesday night, when Mayor Kevin Johnson's dogged pursuit of a "strong mayor" remake of the city charter went down - spectacularly - at the hands of a city council united against him.
Smart, driven, confident and somewhat charismatic, Johnson came into office on a tide of support that gave him what pundits like to call political capital. But he also came in at a difficult time, with a city government at its most stressed and dysfunctional, and with questions about his character hovering in the background. He had his work cut out for him.
But which issue to address first? Crippling budget deficits? All-powerful fire and police unions? A controversial city manager? A corrupted building department? The crushing local effects of a failing state government? Homelessness?
Johnson gave all of these issues his attention, with initiatives launched to great fanfare. And he has made progress in some areas. But his famous focus has been most consistently brought to bear on something he seems to care about more than anything else: the so-called "strong mayor" initiative. In his administration's collective mind, this issue became the cure-all for all the other problems he and this city face. Corruption in the development department? A strong mayor would have accountability for that. Police chief leaving town? A strong mayor could talk him into staying. Problems with the former city manager? Make the mayor accountable.
Over the last year, nearly everything became an opportunity to push the strong mayor agenda. But in the process, Johnson and his smart, well-credentialed but perhaps slightly tone-deaf advisers seem to have misunderstood what real strength is.
Tuesday night, the Sacramento City Council gave Johnson a lesson in language. In a 7-2 vote against instructing the city attorney to draw up language to put the initiative on the ballot in November - one of the two "for" votes being Johnson's own - the council showed the would-be strong mayor who really had the strength: the people's elected representatives. All nine of them.
When all but one of the people you're working with on a daily basis tell you they don't want to give you even a CHANCE of getting what you want - and the one person who voted with you is a lame duck whose own constituents recently rebuked him at the ballot box in nearly the same proportion - you aren't even in the game.
So what did the mayor do? First he spent time at the council meeting criticizing every member of the council who didn't do what he wanted in a rambling, often-personal diatribe that must have felt good to him but again undermined the statesman-like image he has wanted to create. Then he told The Sacramento Press: "The agents of status quo — a small group of people — are still dictating what happens in our community."
Then he went to a fundraiser...for the strong mayor initiative.
This is not strength. This is obsession, or plain old bull-headedness. This is repeating what you've been doing and expecting a different result. And it has most likely set his fellow council members against him even more adamantly.
The council should have let the process go forward so we could actually see what the mayor is proposing, and the people could vote on it. On the other hand, the mayor's office has resisted releasing any explicit proposal. And they have rebuffed requests by Sacramento Press reporter Kathleen Haley to see a copy of an earlier draft of the proposal. So much for transparency.
Perhaps the city charter does need to be rewritten. Sacramento may well need a stronger executive, a modernized city government structure that reflects our growing community. Certainly, what we're doing now isn't working, as Johnson has long pointed out. And a city council that spends time voting for boycotts of other states when they can't even get their own city in order needs to get a grip and get to work. Johnson's adversaries on the council aren't using their power very well, either.
But Kevin Johnson has not proved himself worthy of increased power. He is, in fact, showing that he doesn't know how to use the power he already has, which is considerable. Had he come into office armed with the power of persuasion, if he had shown that he knew how to work with the people who preceded him onto the council, some by many years and with much greater political and civil experience, if he had shown them the respect he himself is seeking through the strong mayor initiative, if he had shown a little humility along with his drive and focus, well...who knows what he might have accomplished?
We still would not have a strong mayor system (yet), but we would have a much stronger mayor. We might have a mayor who recognizes that he is one of nine people who need to put aside their differences and work together for the sake of this city.
The great shame of this is that Johnson has in some respects proven himself a first-among-equals with his initiatives in the arts, in homelessness and, above all, in using his basketball fame to promote Sacramento outside of town and even amongst its own citizenry. He has pushed long-dormant projects such as the Riverfront Promenade and the Railyards to move ahead. His heart seems to be in the right place, and he has a sharp group of advisers that has taken a can-do approach that is widely-admired among city staff and other people in city government who want to get things done. He aims high.
But he has overshot on the strong mayor initiative. His apparent inability to use persuasion to get what he wants has brought his administration to a crushing defeat. I say this with disappointment. I have been a defender of the mayor on more occasions than I expected. I find the constant, mean-spirited references to old controversies and salacious rumors distasteful and not in the best interests of getting things done. He has faced a lot of haters, and done so with a smile. I admire his can-do attitude and focus on the positive. He has chosen to take on a difficult job in his hometown when he could be a commentator on ESPN, working in New York and relaxing in Vegas. And Johnson is up against some entrenched, intransigent interests -- both on and off the council -- which must be frustrating.
But our mayor now needs to stop obsessing about getting more strength and start using the strength he already has. Had he done that from the start, we might now see a council that was prepared to give him more leeway to pursue even more successful initiatives. He might have seven allies on the council, not seven adversaries.
As it is, we are now looking at a council that is even more broken than it was when he was elected, and a city government that is shrinking by the week, and along with it, the services that are more desperately needed than ever by a rightly-cynical citizenry.
Indeed, our mayor has succeeded in achieving one thing this dysfunctional city council has not seen in many years: He has united it. Unfortunately for him, and for all of us, he has united it against himself.
Flag Article As:
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
Leave a Comment
Sadly Johnson doesn't get it. As Rhonda said, he is like a movie villain who keeps coming back over and over and over no matter how many times you think he's done. Man the money and resources that6 have been WASTED on this thing. Man. Can you imagine if he had put this same amount of energy and passion and money into youth development?? Wowowowwo
Thanks, David
I agree with all of the above and if he had just been honest he could have accomplished so much towards getting more power... Heck, the only thing transparent about him as been too many of us could see through him, through his obssession for power. The definition of insanity is to continously do the same thing over and over and expect different results-- and he keeps doing it the same way..... it's sad.
I appreciate the article- and agree and thank you
What the Councils vote on the SMI did was illuminate that public employee unions like controlling the City Council - that’s it, end of story - the vote had very little to with Johnson. The Council vote was over ONE ISSUE - To NOT ALLOW citizens to have a voice in how our city is governed. The City Council has proven that they dont trust you with a vote.
We live in an ultra liberal town - similar to San Francisco and Berkeley - controlled by union thugs and powerful fat cat Democrat developers who have gotten very wealthy off of our tax dollars, it's that simple.
Democrats, in this town, are similar to the ones in Washington - they love power and control at all costs. They lie in bed with union thugs and corporate welfare recipients - They are willing to sell out democracy, give away your tax dollars, spit on our communities values and sell their votes on the council to retain power at all costs.
America was harmed by the councils vote.
THE LEFTIES ARE DESTROYING AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"America was harmed by the councils vote."
Nonsense. Absolute nonsense. You don't understand the process at all or you wouldn't endorse Johnson's repeated abuses of it.
Blaming this on Democrats is equally absurd, since Johnson is a DINO backed by Republicans.
I believe BOTH parties have failed America - If anyone is destroying America it is a team effort by both the far Left/Socialists and the Right Wing oil-loving-neo-conservative-PNAC-loving-New-World-Order-corporate-globalist-oligarchs (Say that in one breath) BOTH could care less about this country - BOTH sides support open borders and sending our jobs and manufacturing to third world countries BOTH sides are enemy's to hard working average Americans who are trapped between them. This is called the Hegelian Dialectic, or the Left - Right Paradigm, used to shut us up and keep us tuned out.
My response was focused on the power structure here in the CITY of Sacramento - which is completely controlled by unions and fat cat Democrat developers (Who in return give tens of millions to the Democratic Machine in campaign contributions at all levels of government - ala the Tsakopoulos' - Phil Angeledis etc...)
If you can point out how the Republicans have harmed this CITY in the last 20-30 years - please do so, I would love to hear it.
As always with Sacramento Press, anyone is able to post editorial comment on the site at any time, on any subject. As you have done many times.
Well according to NAGA he is backed by Republicans. I want more sources cited if I'm going to take anything serious from now since I don't believe anything anyone says pretty much.
This is a good rule for life in general.
All of the largest developers - who also back Johnson are DEMOCRATS. These same Democrats, who you may also call DINO's, have given TENS OF MILLIONS of dollars to the Democratic Party at all levels of government - I doubt that the DNC would describe them as DINO's.
Those on the Left always equate business with Republicans - this is simply absurd.
The Council did its job.
Mr. Johnson showed why he can't do the job he has AND why Sacramento eliminated the Boss Mayor system 80 years ago.
The Mayor of this town has no more power than the individual council members - that’s the point of the SMI - and I would say that our form of local government is THE CAUSE of most of the corruption in this town. - And yes, this town is corrupt - as corrupt as Chicago on their best day. But when the corruption is controlled by the unions and the Democrats apparently it's all good in the hood brotha -
The citizens of this town deserve the right to vote on the direction of the City and how we are governed - it is our inalienable birthright - Americans have fought and died for this right for over 200 years - but not according to the Democrat/union machine that benefits and profits from the status quo.
This was indeed a power struggle, no doubt about it.... the Leftist Council/unions want to retain the power so they can continue bleeding tax payers to pay for the far too many public employees that do very little and retire like kings.
Our city, county and state are broke - because of unfettered spending and INSANE public employee salaries and benefit packages- at some point the spending habits of our out of control government MUST be broken.
"Then he told The Sacramento Press: "The agents of status quo — a small group of people — are still dictating what happens in our community."
Union leadership is a small group of people -- but they have a lot of money and a lot of power. With the exception of Rob Fong, each of those staunchly opposed to the initiative is a union pawn. Do you think it was just a coincidence that in the final week of Ray Tretheway's bid for re-election, Tretheway received $50K from labor unions AND held a press conference accusing the Mayor and others of quid pro quo politics?
"Then he went to a fundraiser...for the strong mayor initiative."
The fundraiser was scheduled a month prior to the vote. The hosts wished to move forward because they believe in reform and agree Johnson and other proponents should push forward.
"On the other hand, the mayor's office has resisted releasing any explicit proposal."
That was the purpose of the motion, David. The Mayor needed five votes to direct the City Attorney to draft the language for the initiative. You don't have details because Council did not allow the City Attorney to move forward.
"And they have rebuffed requests by Sacramento Press reporter Kathleen Haley to see a copy of an earlier draft of the proposal. So much for transparency."
As was told to Bill Camp -- and then Kathleen Haley -- there is no earlier draft of the proposal.
"He is, in fact, showing that he doesn't know how to use the power he already has, which is considerable."
Your position requires further explanation. Do you "in fact" know what "power" he has? Consider the work he's done on homelessness, arts, green, volunteerism, the entertainment and sports complex task force, progress with Westfield, lobbying on behalf of the city for stimulus dollars and education, then reconsider your assertion.
"if he had shown a little humility along with his drive and focus, well...who knows what he might have accomplished?"
Council's opposition to the Accountability Plan of 2010 has nothing to do with Johnson, nothing to do with his pride or humility, and nothing to do with any other specious argument they've made publicly. Council is opposed to reform. They do not want accountability. And they do not want anyone putting their part-time, $60k/year jobs in jeopardy.
I suggest you change your expectation. Heather Fargo's campaign slogan was "Progress." A better fit would have been "Maintenance." If a Mayor's job is to maintain -- keep everything even kiel -- then this city should have re-elected Fargo. Things wouldn't be great and they wouldn't be terrible; they'd just be ok. And if that's good enough for everyone, in 2012, elect another Fargo.
But no progress -- real progress -- will ever be made without first shaking things up. Council dissension is a good thing. There needs to be a clear distinction between the status quo and those who support reform. It is just a matter of time before the "maintenance" people fade away.
To me, it seemed a lot like a vote of no confidence.
Johnson spokesman Joaquin McPeek said in a June 1 article in The Sacramento Press that there was an old draft of the proposal dated from three of four months ago.
Read the story here: http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/28658/Johnson_releases_more_info_on_Strong_Mayor
I asked for a copy of the old draft of the proposal in a June 2 e-mailed request to McPeek. I followed up on the request.
To date, McPeek has not sent me the draft.
He said he needs more time to respond to my request.
Kathleen
And why isn't there a draft of the plan? What is the hidden agenda? If the Strong Mayor Initiative isn't about Kevin Johnson, who is it about? If the plan isn't even written, how can we judge it on its merits? Are we simply expected to accept as a matter of faith that the men in the shadows have our best interests at heart?
First let me say that I approach the writing of such a column with humility. Though I have been a professional journalist my entire life, I have not written on politics very often before, and I am well aware of my shortcomings. So, it is offered in the spirit of inquiry. It is, as the "editorial" tag indicated, just my opinion.
On the other hand, as editor of Sacramento Press, a downtown resident and someone know knows most of the players to one degree or another, I have had a crash course in such things over the last couple of years.
But I do not pretend to know several things: I do not know the "true" intentions of all the players in this game, so I am careful not to cast aspersions on individuals, impugning their credentials or mis-characterizing their motives. Many of the commenters on SacPress in general, and on this subject in particular, have the certainly of true believers. As a journalist, I have been trained to distrust the true believer. And when you throw venom into it, I am as turned off as the next guy. I don't find it entertaining. It is poison to civil debate.
This whole thing may well boil down to the big business versus labor unions, a neat division that framed the Bee's story on Wednesday. But I, for one, don't think that it is, as one commenter said here, "As simple as that." I don't think ANY of this is particularly simple.
I don't think that every single member of the city council is beholden to special interests, as some seem to suggest. I think that there is more going on here than simply who got paid to vote which way. I think that we're dealing with a panel of egos, ideals, interests and emotions, and that Kevin Johnson has not shown the skill, or again, the humility, to deal with them. I'm not saying it's easy. I'm not saying it's pretty. And I'm not saying he should like it. I'm saying that it may well have worked better. Anything would have worked better.
On a more practical matter, and bringing the whole thing back to the vote that prompted by editorial, I have to question a mayor who thinks he's going to get eight votes and ends up with just one. That's either bad math or a sign that someone is not paying attention. Or it's that sense of entitlement or inevitability that he surrounds himself with that rubs people, including many on the city council, the wrong way.
It comes down to leadership. Johnson was elected mayor, and that, Mr. West, is the "power" to which I am referring. He has media attention that no other member of the council has. He has the bully pulpit. People like his inspiring story, his basketball fame, and his charisma.
But his attempt to get more power - which would, after all, come at the expense of ALL the other eight members of the council - before he had proven that he would know what to do with it, made people suspicious. Getting that power clearly required far more buy-in than he got. And that is HIS failing, not a function of campaign contributions or the inadequacies or evil intentions of others.
Mayor Johnson has a lot of good will on his side, including mine. I am in no way opposed to the strong mayor initiative, should we ever see it written down clearly and in a way that we can hold its authors, um, accountable. But that, too, has been handled poorly by the mayor and his staff, and we are seeing the fall out of that. (Continued in next comment.)
One way to do that would be to make the strong mayor initiative not take effect until the next mayoral term. That way, it is not seen as self serving. And if he is re-elected, he will benefit doubly: He will not be seen as self serving, and he will be entrusted as the first strong mayor because people think he will use such powers wisely.
Bottom line: The approach the mayor has taken - tackling a whole makeover of city government to advance his agenda, rather than spending his rookie year learning how to work with the people who preceded him on the council - has failed, and failed spectacularly. I think that much is clear to everyone.
There is plenty of blame to go around, and that includes the other council members themselves. All its members need to get real, get over themselves and get to work. There will always be entrenched interests, be they business or unions, and they will always push their agendas every way they can. And the rest of us get caught in the middle. The council need to rise above that and work for the benefit of the people who elected them.
And Mayor Johnson needs to take a weekend off, realize that his approach has failed, and focus on the initiatives that he has undertaken that will bring Sacramento the real relief it needs now, more than ever. He is a member of the city council but he has a special role, and he needs to work with what it IS rather than try to change it. He has made a good start.
In fact, I am optimistic. I think Mayor Johnson can get a lot of important things done, and once it is clear that he is going to work with his eight peers on the council on things that matter to Sacramentans, he could well end up a great mayor with a long list of accomplishments. Changing the city charter is not something most Sacramentans care about. While it may look to Johnson, his brother and his team like a crucial change, most people see it as just inside politics, even politics as usual.
Please: This town's government is in shambles on many levels. Mayor Johnson can do much to change that, but not if he is seen to be pursuing his own political benefit above the good of the city -- even if he equates the two. They are not the same, and Tuesday night's vote - which, whatever the result, was clearly democracy in action - proved that.
B: Johnson wants the ability to lay off or fire public employees - unions dont want ANYONE to have the power to fire public employee union members.
"Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate."
Sun Tzu
http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/snog/blogs/post?oid=1370763
About the recall thing...isn't the recall movement a response to the votes for the Arizona boycott, which Johnson voted for? How exactly does that work?
If her relates basketball to politics-he'll succeed
Maybe the mayor should host a big basketball tournament with kings players and get the kings players to stand behind him and announce his intention on getting them a new arena and then announce that he is going to need the city's support on writing their councilmen to reconsider on their vote.
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/04/29/2713880/kevin-johnson-urges-then-rejects.html
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/05/2727759/marcos-breton-arizona-law-sacramento.html
All of this is interesting: KJ is not know for changing his mind. One Sacbee commenter suggested that maybe his real estate portfolio in Arizona might have something to do with it?
On the other hand, if a recall effort against Johnson is started, he can start collecting campaign contributions to fight the recall effort--and unspent recall contributions can later be added to a re-election campaign. So maybe he is supporting his own recall effort to get a head start on re-election fundraising? I know that quite a few of the people who supported and contributed last time around will probably not be as interested on backing him in 2012...
thought is to protect his country and do good service for his sovereign, is the jewel of the kingdom.
http://www.artofwarsuntzu.com/SunTzuLeadership2.pdf
"Hallowed words for any leader"
Having watched and re-watched the Council members testimony and that of the Mayor, the true "jewels" of this community are the 8 CC members not the mayor.
None of them made a personal attack on the mayor. Explaining their reasons for support or non-support of a proposed charter revision was not a personal comment about the mayor...only the process or lack of process that had been employed by him and his supporters to date.
No matter to the mayor, he spent 30 or so minutes revealing the true persona of a "two year old"
politician who also must believe that the CC serves at his pleasure...given his continual reference to "his" city council followed by his personal attack on almost each and everyone of them.
Remember those training videos where a situation is depicted,,,followed by the right and wrong scenario for dealing with it? Johnson's action will become a classic display of how not to react to a loss at the dais.
It already has...In this city!
Also when he has written an actual article and not just a comment, that information was at the top of the article.
Is anyone else a bit embarrassed by out vast opportunities we never capitalize on? Rail Yard, River Front, K St. Pedestrian Mall… etc. It’s tough for me to consider Kevin Johnsons failure for “trying to hard” as anything but a failure for all of us.
The city council avoids these scathing Editorials; because unlike Kevin Johnson, they never even Try.
Bottom line: The approach the mayor has taken - tackling a whole makeover of city government to advance his agenda, rather than spending his rookie year learning how to work with the people who preceded him on the council - has failed, and failed spectacularly. I think that much is clear to everyone.