As Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee drums up support for a reform to the city’s charter that would give her more power within city hall, she’s facing questions about whether voters will put their trust the city’s top leadership.<\/p>\n
As Council Member Ken Houston put it: “We believe in you, but what about that next person?”<\/p>\n
On Tuesday, the Oakland City Council voted 5-3 to advance the charter reform proposal toward the November ballot, but not without expressing concerns with the expanded powers the measure would bring to the mayor’s office. Council Members Zac Unger, Noel Gallo and Janani Ramachandran opposed the motion.<\/p>\n
The measure – which would expand the mayor’s authority over day-to-day city operations, and give her veto power over council decisions – will come before the council again on June 16 for a second hearing, as is required of charter amendments, before it can officially qualify for the November ballot.<\/p>\n
Lee, who typically doesn’t attend council meetings, made an appearance to advocate for the measure, which she said would ensure “clearer executive leadership, stronger fiscal coordination, and a governance structure where residents can clearly identify who is responsible.”<\/p>\n
“Oakland is at a turning point and the status quo needs to change,” Lee said. “Our residents do not have patience for a government that cannot figure out where the buck stops or why the delivery of core services is lacking.”<\/p>\n
Under Oakland’s current system, the mayor acts as chief executive and appoints the city administrator, but cannot vote on council matters except to break ties. She proposes a budget, but ultimately the council makes a final decision on it. The city administrator manages city departments and reports to the mayor, yet is also charged with implementing the council’s directives.<\/p>\n
Lee’s proposal largely would delegate more responsibilities to the mayor –\u00a0effectively getting rid of the city administrator position and putting the mayor in charge of hiring and firing department heads. It would make Oakland’s system of governance more like San Francisco or Los Angeles.<\/p>\n
It also has a few perks for the council: it would require council members to work full-time, which most of them already do, and adjust their salaries accordingly. It would also create an independent budget and legislative analyst office within the council.<\/p>\n
Lee pushed back against critics who have called her proposal a “power grab<\/a>,” saying, “This is not about myself personally.”<\/p>\n Unger, who represents North Oakland, had been trying to bring forward a competing “strong council” measure that would have strengthened the powers of a city manager, as well as given council members greater power to perform constituent services. But that measure failed to gain steam among his colleagues.<\/p>\n “The council members under strong mayor would continue to be the face of futility\u2026 and will essentially become shields for all of the failures of the administration,” Unger said. “If council members lose primacy on budgeting, lose primacy on legislation, lose even more juice on constituent services, then what is a council member even for than to act as a punching bag?”<\/p>\n Other council members pointed out that while Lee is generally a trusted figure in Oakland politics, it hasn’t always been this way: Oakland’s previously elected mayor is currently facing federal bribery and corruption<\/a> charges.<\/p>\n “We don’t have the trust right now to invest in a single leader,” said Council Member Carroll Fife. “We are once again fighting an uphill battle about trust in local government with this ballot measure.”<\/p>\n In response to concern about how power could concentrated under a future leader, Lee responded:\u00a0“Democracy works… People will vote for who they want as mayor.”<\/p>\n Even if the charter reform passes, council members warned that it won’t solve Oakland’s problems.<\/p>\n “Anyone who thinks that strong mayor or strong council manager is the panacea for what ails us,” Unger said, “is deluding themselves.”<\/p>\n Subscribe<\/p>\n