The City Council voted unanimously Tuesday against putting a strong mayor initiative on the June ballot – but they opened the door for some form of charter reform to appear on the November ballot.

Council members directed the city attorney to return to council in three weeks with a “matrix layout” detailing two options for the council to consider.

One, the creation of an elected charter commission initiative, and, two, a revision of the Checks and Balances Act based on comments heard at Tuesday’s council meeting.

The City Council will have the opportunity to vote for either action at the Feb. 7 council meeting – “or to do nothing at all,” said City Councilman Kevin McCarty when the meeting concluded.

After more than four hours of public comment and discussion among council members, the City Council still hadn’t arrived at a decision by 11:30 p.m. Tuesday about whether to put a strong mayor initiative on the June ballot.

Council members heard lengthy and detailed reports on the proposed Checks and Balances Act of 2012 from both Kunal Merchant, the mayor’s chief of staff, and Matt Ruyak, assistant city attorney.

“We have an obligation to hold a vigorous debate,” Merchant said, “and you can’t have a vigorous debate until it is actually on the ballot and is a real issue, not just a concept or a draft of an idea.”

Merchant went on to outline the Checks and Balances Act, including new powers that would be granted to the mayor, powers that the mayor would be giving up, and items built into the charter reform measure not found in earlier versions.

“Tonight is a historic night,” Merchant said. “The time is right for fundamental change in our city.”

Council chambers were full for the entire meeting, with more than 300 people in attendance. Ten speakers took the podium during public comment, and another 55 spoke on the strong mayor item specifically.

Faith leaders, business leaders and union representatives told council members that the expectation was not to decide the issue, rather to put the issue on the ballot for the voters to decide.

“We will respect you to the level you respect us,” said pastor Rick Cole. “Respect the people by allowing them to vote on this important issue.”

The majority of the speakers were in support of the strong mayor initiative, and called on council members to allow for a vote on the June ballot regardless of any personal opposition to the initiative.

Opponents of the measure expressed disappointment, saying charter reform is not what the City Council should be spending its time on.

Shawn Donohoe, a representative of the Democratic Party of Sacramento County, questioned the “vagueness” of the proposal, saying, “This isn’t the time to spend our resources on a window dressing like charter reform.”

Ruyak discussed some potential shortcomings of the proposal, including ambiguous sections regarding sunshine ordinances, a proposed redistricting commission and a potential ninth council district.

“We have some concerns about the ability to create (a ninth council district),” Ruyak said. “The drafters feels there is not a problem, but this is a novel legal issue, and we don’t have a definitive answer right now.”

City Councilman Jay McCarty opened the debate on the initiative for council members, saying he would like to see the council explore an elected charter reform commission to consider – and ultimately, decide – the strong mayor issue.

“This (Checks and Balances Act) version is cleaner than the previous versions,” McCarty said, “but we can’t go about this willy-nilly. This is something we have to get right.”

City Councilwoman Angelique Ashby said she would like to see the issue resolved – one way or another – so the city can move on to other business.

“I don’t think we should just keep rehashing this,” Ashby said.

“I say, don’t make it about the person of the mayor,” Ashby said. “Make it about the issue. Let’s settle on some language and get it to a vote and put all this behind us.”

City Councilman Jay Schenirer said he agreed with Ashby and wanted to move the issue along.

“Lets take the personalities out of this,” Schenirer said, “Let’s look at the policy and decide if it works, no matter who the mayor may or may not be in the future.”

“Whats the rush?” asked City Councilman Darrell Fong. “I don’t think this should go to the ballot in June. The public needs more time to vet this out.”

City Councilwoman Bonnie Pannell agreed with Fong.

“This is not ready for prime time – yet,” Pannell said. “We need to tweak this for November, not June. Let the people vote on it, but let’s make sure they know what they are voting on.”

The city attorney will present a report on a possible elected charter commission and a further analysis of a revised Checks and Balances Act for consideration on the November ballot at the Feb. 7 City Council meeting.

Melissa Corker is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press. Follow her on Twitter @MelissaCorker.