Oakland is a unique case. Its government design has been described by some as a \u201chybrid\u201d<\/a> that has elements of both the strong-mayor and council-manager systems. And lots of people think this has downsides. SPUR, the nonprofit public policy organization with offices in Oakland, wrote in a 2021 report<\/a> that Oakland\u2019s system \u201cmakes it difficult to establish accountability for the effective functioning of government, since it leaves open the question of which branch of government is in charge.\u201d<\/p>\n Right now, Oakland\u2019s mayor has the power to hire and fire the city administrator (the same thing as a \u201ccity manager\u201d in other places) and the police chief. But the mayor can\u2019t pick department heads and isn\u2019t in charge of running the city day-to-day. The City Council, meanwhile, has the power to approve new laws and policies. But the councilmembers are banned from directing city staff to do anything, a rule that was originally put in place to prevent corruption.<\/p>\n When it comes to the budget, the mayor leads the administration in drafting a detailed proposal. The council then gets to make some amendments (usually modest) and passes the final budget plan.<\/p>\n As public debate about Oakland\u2019s style of government intensified over the past couple of years, Mayor Barbara Lee set up a task force to study the issue. In January, the task force recommended<\/a> some big changes. In May, Lee and City Council President Kevin Jenkins put pen to paper and came up with a plan<\/a>. The council then voted to place these changes on the ballot \u2014 though not everybody was on board. Even though many people agree that the charter needs to be changed, they strongly disagree on the details.<\/p>\n When you get your ballot for the Nov. 3 election, this will appear as Measure EE. It needs a simple majority to pass.<\/p>\n What would Measure EE do?<\/p>\n If voters approve Measure EE, the city charter, Oakland\u2019s constitution, would be amended to recast the distribution of power and to create some new checks and balances. The following highlights are drawn from an impartial analysis by the city attorney<\/a>.<\/p>\n The mayor of Oakland\u2019s role would change in the following ways:<\/p>\n The mayor would become Oakland\u2019s chief executive, gaining the right to directly appoint most department heads and the authority to direct their work.<\/p>\n There would still be a city administrator, appointed by the mayor, but this person would have much less power. Their job would be to run the departments of Human Resources and Finance.<\/p>\n If the City Council passed legislation the mayor disagreed with, the mayor could veto it. At the same time, the mayor would lose the ability to cast tie-breaking votes whenever the City Council is deadlocked.<\/p>\n The city budget would fall much more under the mayor\u2019s control because they would have line-item veto power.<\/p>\n To check the power of this strengthened mayor, the City Council would gain the following:<\/p>\n The city administrator\u2019s picks to lead the departments of Human Resources and Finance would need to be confirmed by the council. Similarly, leadership appointments to any departments responsible for designing, building, and maintaining infrastructure would need council approval (think OakDOT or Public Works).<\/p>\n To scrutinize the mayor\u2019s budgets and help review legislation, the council would get an independent legislative analyst.<\/p>\n Councilmembers would be empowered to communicate directly with city staff about concerns they\u2019re hearing from constituents. They still wouldn\u2019t be permitted to give orders to city staffers who work for the mayor and administration, but this rule would no longer be enforceable as a misdemeanor.<\/p>\n If the council feels stymied or stonewalled, they would be able to issue subpoenas forcing city staff to hand over records and give testimony.<\/p>\n Although the mayor could veto legislation, the council could override these vetoes with six affirmative votes. The same would go for the mayor\u2019s line-item budget vetoes.<\/p>\n City Council would be considered a full-time job, and members would be banned from outside employment that interferes or conflicts with their official duties.<\/p>\n Is there a cost to Measure EE?<\/p>\n According to the City Auditor Michael Houston\u2019s impartial analysis<\/a>, switching to a strong mayor system will cost $2 to $2.6 million per year.<\/p>\n That\u2019s because the measure will require the Public Ethics Commission, not the council, to set new salaries for the mayor and councilmembers. The commission would be tasked with setting their pay at levels comparable to professional, full-time employees and similar public officials in other cities in California \u2014 a process already used to set pay for other officials in Oakland. Houston says this would probably lead to increases between $36,000 and $108,000 in pay and benefits for each councilmember.<\/p>\n What are the arguments in support of Measure EE?<\/p>\n Supporters say Measure EE is the path toward a more trustworthy City Hall that\u2019s responsive to residents\u2019 calls for services and accountable when things go wrong. Advocates of charter reform say the mayor often gets blamed for issues in the city by constituents who don\u2019t realize their power is limited.<\/p>\n \u201cReforming Oakland\u2019s system so city department heads answer to one executive leader \u2014 the Mayor \u2014 strengthens coordination, focus, and more decisive responses to crises,\u201d supporters write in the official argument in favor of Measure EE<\/a>. \u201cYou elect a Mayor to do a job, and you should be able to clearly judge their performance.\u201d<\/p>\n Centralizing authority under the mayor \u201cspeeds up action and service on homelessness, public safety, and illegal dumping,\u201d they say.\u00a0<\/p>\n The independent budget and legislative analyst office that would work with the City Council would provide greater oversight for how tax dollars are spent. And the mayor\u2019s new powers would be checked by the council\u2019s veto overrides, they argue. Plus, they say, the council could hold the mayor and city department heads accountable with their new subpoena power.<\/p>\n In addition to Barbara Lee and Kevin Jenkins, Measure EE supporters include:\u00a0<\/p>\n Former city administrator Fred Blackwell<\/p>\n Revitalize East Bay Chair Isaac Abid<\/p>\n Labor leader and small business owner Richard Fuentes<\/p>\n Block-by-Block Organizing Network Co-Chair Sheryl Walton<\/p>\n League of Women Voters of Oakland President Ernestine Nettles<\/p>\n Pastor and former Faith in Action Co-Chair Michael Wallace<\/p>\n Former Mayor Libby Schaaf<\/p>\n Former City Attorney Barbara Parker<\/p>\n What are the arguments against Measure EE?<\/p>\n Opponents say Oakland does need to amend its city charter to create a more effective, trustworthy, and modern system. But they maintain that Measure EE has some major flaws.<\/p>\n The official argument against Measure EE<\/a>, submitted to the clerk\u2019s office by former councilmember Loren Taylor, Budget Advisory Commission member Ben Gould, and community advocates Pam Drake and Naomi Schiff describes the measure as a \u201cpower grab.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIt makes our government less transparent, increases the risks of corruption, and drives political gridlock. This isn\u2019t about the current mayor \u2014 it\u2019s about Oakland\u2019s future,\u201d they write.<\/p>\n They believe a stronger mayor would actually lead to more \u201cbackroom dealings\u201d in which the mayor would be increasingly influenced by special interests while community needs are neglected.<\/p>\n The mayor\u2019s ability to pick department heads is bad, they argue, because it \u201clets future mayors appoint their unqualified friends and allies to cushy government jobs,\u201d risking corruption and mismanagement.<\/p>\n And they believe it will cause more political gridlock because the veto-wielding mayor would be able to block the majority will of the council.<\/p>\n \u201cThis measure gives councilmembers massive pay raises \u2014 all while asking them to do less,\u201d they say. (The measure doesn\u2019t set specific salaries for councilmembers, but it introduces a process allowing increases.)<\/p>\n Other opponents of Measure EE include:\u00a0<\/p>\n Alameda County Supervisor Nate Miley<\/p>\n Former councilmember Nancy Nadel<\/p>\n Former Public Ethics Commission Chair Ralph Kanz<\/p>\n Civic activist James Vann<\/p>\n Political activist Sharon Rose<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\tread more about charter reform<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t \t\t\t\t\t\tOakland should become a \u2018strong mayor\u2019 city, says Mayor Lee\u2019s task force\u00a0<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n \n\t\t\t\t\tJanuary 30, 2026April 8, 2026, 4:04 p.m.\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t \t\t\t\t\t\t\u2018Strong mayor\u2019 for Oakland? City Council gets its first look \u2014 and some aren\u2019t sold<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n \n\t\t\t\t\tMarch 27, 2026March 28, 2026, 11:58 a.m.\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t![\"Oakland](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/large-OAK_CityHall_Drone-7.jpg\")
Oakland City Hall. Credit: Richard H. Grant for The Oaklandside<\/p>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t![\"Oakland](\"https:\/\/oaklandside.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/20260130-165545-1200x900.webp?crop=1\" "\\"Oakland")
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t![\"\u2018Strong](\"https:\/\/oaklandside.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/large-Oakland-City-Hall-1-1200x900.jpg?crop=1\" "\\"\u2018Strong")
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t![\"A](\"https:\/\/oaklandside.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/large-20251007_StateoftheCity_EG_05-1200x900.jpg?crop=1\" "\\"A")
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n