City of Sacramento "Strong Mayor" Mayor-Council Form of Government Charter Amendment, Measure L (November 2014)

Voting on Administration of Government
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Local City County Term limits Charter amendments Others

A City of Sacramento "Strong Mayor" Mayor-Council Form of Government Charter Amendment, Measure L ballot question - also called the Sacramento Checks and Balances Act of 2014 by supporters - was on the November 4, 2014 election ballot for voters in the city of Sacramento in Sacramento County, California. It was defeated.

If approved, Measure L would have reformed and drastically altered the city's charter in the ways detailed below in the impartial analysis. Some of the most notable changes would have included the new role Measure L would give to the mayor, who would act as the chief executive officer of the city, with veto power, additional firing and hiring authority - including power to hire and fire the city manager - and many of the responsibilities and powers usually given to the city manager. Since Measure L was defeated, the mayor remained what is essentially just another city council member with slightly more duties and authorities.

If Measure L was approved, the city manager would have become the chief administrative officer of the city, rather than the executive officer.

Measure L would have required an election in 2020 where voters would have determined if they wanted to continue under Measure L provisions or return to the previous form of government.

Supporters claimed Measure L would streamline the city government process and allow greater productivity and more efficiently completed projects by eliminating bureaucratic and political roadblocks, while retaining and creating new checks and balances to preserve a fair and democratic city government. Supporters also pointed to the proposed term limits, independent budget analyst and independent redistricting commission as ways Measure L would make city government more accountable.

Opponents said this measure would have handed far too much authority to the mayor by allowing him to veto council votes and council budgets, but not requiring him to attend council meetings - making it easier for him to ignore the public. They also argued that Measure L would have given the mayor too much control over the city's governance by giving him hiring and firing authority over the city manager. Critics said these things would have resulted in voters having much less power in the city, with more power in the hands of a single person. They argued that the proposed checks and balances in Measure L would not be enough to prevent the mayor from essentially controlling the city and city projects under the strong mayor form of government.

Mayor Kevin Johnson supported four previous attempts to change Sacramento over to a strong mayor government model, including an initiative measure that qualified for the ballot in 2010. The 2010 initiative was removed from the ballot through a lawsuit and the resulting judicial ruling.

Election results

City of Sacramento, Measure L
Result		Votes	Percentage
d No		53,252	56.25%
Yes		41,252	43.75%

Election results via: Sacramento County Voter Registration and Elections

Text of measure

Ballot question

The question on the ballot appeared as:

“

Shall the City of Sacramento Charter be revised, on a trial basis, to establish: a mayor-council governance structure wherein the elected mayor oversees city operations and a budget subject to Council approval and override; an Ethics Committee; Code of Ethics and Sunshine Ordinances; an Independent Budget Analyst Office; a Neighborhood Advisory Committee; an Independent Redistricting Commission; and a three-term limit for mayors; with most provisions subject to voter reapproval by 11/03/2020?

”

Impartial analysis

The following impartial analysis was prepared for Measure L:

“

The Sacramento City Council has placed Measure L, the "Sacramento Checks and Balances Act of 2014," on the ballot. Measure L, if passed by a majority of the voters, revises the Sacramento City Charter, the voter-approved "constitution" that establishes the framework for city government. This measure changes the city's current "council-manager" form of government to a "mayor-council" form. The chart below summarizes the revisions: (quote)

”

Current Charter:	Measure L:
Mayor is one of nine councilmembers	Mayor is no longer a councilmember, but may attend and be heard at council meetings. Eight-member council with president and vice-president
City manager is city's chief executive officer	Mayor is chief executive officer. City Manager is chief administrative officer
Council appoints city manager	Mayor appoints city manager with council concurrence. Mayor must hold a public meeting regarding candidate qualifications before appointment
Vote of six councilmembers required to remove city manager	Mayor removes city manager
No mayoral veto	Mayor can veto ordinance with exceptions, subject to council supermajority override (six votes). Mayor can veto council's approved budget (includes line-item veto), subject to council supermajority override (six votes)
No term limits	Mayor has three-term limit; current terms grandfathered
City manager presents budget to council at least 60 days before fiscal year	Mayor presents budget to council at least 90 days before fiscal year
Council establishes district boundaries	New redistricting commission establishes district boundaries
Council must meet weekly with up to four weeks off yearly	At least two regular council meetings each calendar month. Two meetings annually held outside council chambers
Council must hold at least one public budget hearing	Council must hold at least two public budget hearings
Council appoints City Clerk, City Attorney, City Treasurer	Council must hold public meeting regarding candidate qualifications before appointment
Councilmembers must deal with the city manager regarding city government under manager's control	Councilmembers may deal with city manager and department heads

“	Measure L provides for new bodies and a new office: An independent citizens' redistricting commission responsible for modifying council district boundaries after the census An Ethics Committee responsible for reviewing and monitoring a new ethics ordinance A Neighborhood Advisory Committee to consider city neighborhoods' interests An Office of Independent Budget Analyst (appointed by council) Measure L requires the council to pass ordinances: Establishing redistricting commission member qualifications and providing for their appointment Adopting a Code of Ethics and Conduct for elected officials and appointed board and commission members Adopting sunshine provisions for accessing city meetings, documents, and records Establishing an Ethics Committee Establishing a Neighborhood Advisory Committee Establishing the independent budget analyst's qualifications and duties Measure L makes other charter changes consistent with the revisions described above. If Measure L passes, all changes except those regarding establishment of district boundaries are subject to voter reapproval at an election no later than 11/3/2020. If not reapproved, the changes are automatically repealed on 1/1/2021. A "yes" vote is in favor of revising the charter. A "no" vote is against revising the charter	”
—James C. Sanchez, Sacramento City Attorney

Full text

The full text of the proposed charter amendments is available here.

Support

Vote Yes on L campaign logo

Supporters

A committee called Vote Yes on L was created to campaign in favor of Measure L.

The following individuals signed the official arguments in favor of Measure L:

Vote Yes on L, "Big City Mayors Endorse Measure L During Sacramento Visit," September 30, 2014

• Kevin Johnson, mayor of Sacramento
• Barbara O’Connor, Emeritus Professor of Communications & Director at the Institute for the Study of Politics and Media CSU
• Kevin Ferreira, member of the Sacramento-Sierra’s Building & Construction Trades Council
• Christi Black-Davis, 1st Vice Chair of the Sacramento Metro Chamber of Commerce
• Dustin Smith, president of the Sacramento Police Officers Association

According to the Vote Yes on L website, the following individuals and organizations endorsed a "yes" vote on Measure L:

• Sacramento Taxicab Union
• Sacramento Bee

Public safety

• Sacramento Police Officers Association
• Firefighters, Local 522
• Rick Braziel – Sacramento Chief of Police (retired)
• Former Sacramento Police Chief Arturo Venegas
• District Attorneys Office, Dan Schiele
• Chief Kearn
• Sheriff Scott R. Jones
• Former Sheriff John McGinness
• Former Sheriff Lou Blanas
• Former Sheriff Robbie Waters
• Former Sheriff Glen Craig

Vote Yes on L, "Small Businesses Support Measure L," September 24, 2014

Labor groups

• Laborers, Local 185
• Iron Workers, Local 118
• Painters, District Council 16 (DC 16)
• Bricklayers, Local 3
• Sacramento-Sierra Building Trades Council
• Sheet Metal Workers, Local 104
• International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), Local 340

Elected officials

• Councilmember Allen Warren
• Councilmember Angelique Ashby
• Councilmember Steve Cohn
• Councilmember Jay Schenirer
• Councilmember elect Rick Jennings
• Senator Darrell Steinberg (D-6)
• Former Mayor & County Supervisor Jimmie Yee
• Assemblymember Richard Pan
• Former Mayor Phil Isenberg
• Former Councilmember Josh Pane
• Former Assemblymember Lloyd Levine
• Dan Skogland – Mayor, Rancho Cordova
• Phil Isenberg – Mayor of Sacramento (former)
• Sandy Smoley – Sacramento County Board of Supervisors (former)
• Michael Nutter – Mayor of Philadelphia
• Michael Coleman – Mayor of Columbus
• Greg Ballard – Mayor of Indianapolis

Business & Chambers

• Region Builders
• Sacramento Metro Chamber of Commerce
• Sacramento Asian Chamber of Commerce
• Sacramento Black Chamber of Commerce
• Slavic American Chamber of Sacramento
• Sacramento Association of Realtors
• Rental Housing Authority
• Sacramento Business Coalition
• National Electrical Contractors Association of Sacramento (NECA Sacramento)
• Associated Plumbing & Mechanical Contractors of Sacramento (APMC)

Vote Yes on L, "Steinberg & Smoley: Vote Yes on L," September 23, 2014

Arguments in favor

The following was submitted as the official arguments in favor of Measure L:

“	Vote Yes on Measure L to Make City Hall: More accountable voters; More responsive to neighborhoods; More ethical and transparent; More independent from politics as usual. Measure L culminates years of public dialogue on how best to modernize City government. It draws ideas from broad and bipartisan supporters that include current and former Mayors, City Managers, Council Members, and key public safety, business, labor, faith, and neighborhood leaders. Direct Accountability to Voters - Currently, Sacramento's chief executive is a City Manager not elected by voters, despite making critical decisions about taxpayer dollars and how the City is run. Measure L makes the chief executive an elected position, the Mayor, directly accountable to you and your neighbors for providing superior police and fire protection, budgeting decisions, park maintenance, street repairs, and other essential services. Real Checks and Balances for Neighborhoods - Measure L establishes new checks and balances on elected officials, including term limits for the Mayor, and Independent Budget Analyst, City Council approval of budget and hiring of City Manager, City Council override of Mayoral vetoes, and a new Advisory Council focused on protecting and strengthening neighborhoods. Higher Standards for Ethics and Transparency - Measure L mandates a new Code of Ethics, Open Government Ordinance and Ethics Committee to ensure City officials uphold high ethical standards and avoid waste, fraud and abuse. More integrity in the Democratic Process - Measure L ends the practice of politicians picking their voters through redistricting. Instead an Independent Commission will determine Council district boundaries in the best interests of the public, not the politicians. As an additional safeguard, voters will have the choice in 2020 to make Measure L permanent, or return to the old system. It's time to put our future where it belongs: in the hands of the voters. Vote Yes on Measure L.	”
—Kevin Johnson, Barbara O’Connor, Kevin Ferreira, Christi Black-Davis and Dustin Smith

Opposition

No on L campaign logo

Opponents

The official anti-Measure L campaign was called Stop The Power Grab. The following individuals signed the official arguments in opposition to Measure L:

• Paula Lee, president of the League of Women Voters Sacramento
• Grantland Johnson, former Sacramento City Councilmember
• Daisy Mah, retired city employee
• Anne Rudin, former mayor of Sacramento
• Illa Collin, former Sacramento County Supervisor

The Stop the Power Grab website listed the following individuals and organizations as opponents of Measure L:

Elected Officials

• Darrell Fong, Sacramento City Councilmember
• Steve Hansen, Sacramento City Councilmember
• Kevin McCarty, Sacramento City Councilmember
• Bonnie Pannell, Former Sacramento City Councilmember
• Anne Rudin, Former Mayor of Sacramento
• Heather Fargo, Former Mayor of Sacramento
• Burnett Miller, Former Mayor of Sacramento
• Ray Tretheway, Former Sacramento City Councilmember
• Sandy Sheedy, Former Sacramento City Councilmember
• Lyla Ferris Hanson, Former Sacramento City Councilmember
• Illa Collin, Former County Supervisor
• Grantland Johnson, Former County Supervisor
• Ted Sheedy, Former County Supervisor
• Genevieve Shiroma, SMUD Board President
• Susan Patterson, Former SMUD Board Member
• Deborah Ortiz, Former State Senator and Board member, Los Rios Community College District
• Bruce Pomer, Former Trustee, Los Rios Community College District
• Harold Fong, Trustee, Sacramento County Board of Education
• Karolyn. W. Simon, Trustee, American River Flood Control District
• Gene Inderkum, Former Trustee, Natomas School Board

Recall City Hall, "Measure L Boss mayor initiative," August 14, 2014

Labor groups

• United Brotherhood of Carpenters, Local 46
• AFSCME, Local 146 and District Council 57
• Los Rios Federation of Teachers
• IUOE, Stationary Engineers, Local 39
• California Nursing Association

Neighborhood Associations

• Southside Park Neighborhood Association
• Marshall School/New Era Park Neighborhood Association
• Midtown Neighborhood Association
• Newton Booth Neighborhood Association
• Sierra Curtis Neighborhood Association

Clubs and Organizations

• League of Women Voters
• Common Cause of Greater Sacramento
• Sierra Club of Sacramento County
• Capitol Older Women’s League
• Progressive Alliance
• Ridership for the Masses
• Democratic Party of Sacramento County
• Feminist Democratic Club, Sacramento County
• Sacramento County Young Democrats
• Green Democratic Club, Sacramento County
• Latino Democratic Club, Sacramento County
• Stonewall Democratic Club, Sacramento County
• Veterans Democratic Club, Sacramento County
• Women Democratic Club, Sacramento County
• Wellstone Democratic Club, Sacramento County

Arguments against

Recall City Hall, "Stop the Power Grab Measure L 091614 0001," September 16, 2014

The following was submitted as the official arguments in opposition to Measure L:

“	Simply put, Measure L is a power grab and we urge you to vote No. It will do nothing to create jobs, fix our schools, or keep us safe. Big money donors argue that we need to give the mayor a lot more power so we can be a "big city." This means the public is pushed aside to give big donors more influence. This power grab means that the mayor doesn't have to listen to you or your neighbors, because he or she will no longer have to attend city council meetings. Important decisions can be made in back rooms, which makes it easier to favor big contributors. It weakens the ability of council members to help you and your neighborhood. Without public input, the mayor can veto any budget item or ordinance approved by the council. Only an extreme majority of 75% could overturn a veto, more power than a Governor or U.S. President. Measure L would make it easier for special interests to use their money and political power to influence just one elected official, rather than a majority of the city council, or the public. This proposal lets the mayor fire the city manager at will, without cause, virtually controlling all department managers, by controlling the city manager. This allows professional and independent city management to be replaced by the politics of whims and favoritism. Measure L does not create accountability or transparency. It reduces it. Measure L doesn't create checks and balances. It erases them. Measure L is not what it seems. It is not necessary. You can like the mayor and oppose this measure. Protect Sacramento by voting No on this extreme attempt to grab power from the many, for the few. That's why we say "L-No."	”
—Paula Lee, Grantland Johnson, Daisy Mah, Anne Rudin and Illa Collin

Related measures

• Sacramento Strong Mayor Initiative, June 2010

See also

• City governance on the ballot
• Sacramento County, California ballot measures
• November 4, 2014 ballot measures in California

External links

Suggest a link

• Sacramento County Elections Office website

Support

• Vote Yes on L website, accessed October 6, 2014

Opposition

• Stop The Power Grab website, accessed October 6, 2014

Additional reading

• Watch Dog Wire, "SACRAMENTO MAYOR KEVIN JOHNSON USES RACE TO BOOST STRONG MAYOR INITIATIVE," September 30, 2014