This is an archive of a past election.
See http://www.smartvoter.org/ca/alm/ for current information.
LWV League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
Smart Voter
Alameda County, CA March 2, 2004 Election
Measure P
City Elections Charter Amendment
City of Oakland
Majority Approval Required

54,604 / 69.7% Yes votes ...... 23,705 / 30.3% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures
Results as of May 4 2:39pm, 100.0% of Precincts Reporting (245/245)
Information shown below: Summary | Fiscal Impact | Impartial Analysis | Arguments |

Shall the City Charter be amended to retain the Mayor-Council form of government ("Strong Mayor") and elected City Attorney and provide (1) that no person may be elected Mayor for more than two consecutive terms; (2) Mayor must annually hold four public meetings; (3) that Council make appointments to boards and commissions when vacancies are unfilled; (4) limitations and voter-approval requirements for Councilmember salary increases; and (5) formula setting City Attorney and Auditor salary increases?

Summary Prepared by Deputy City Attorney, S. F. County:
  • Repeals the sunset provision of 1998's Measure X, to retain the Mayor-Council ("Strong Mayor") form of government and elected City Attorney without another vote at the November, 2004 election.
  • Changes the term limit for Mayor from two terms to two consecutive terms.
  • Authorizes the City Council to fill vacancies on City commissions if the Mayor does not fill the vacancy within 90 days.
  • Reduces the number of votes needed for the City Council to pass an ordinance on reconsideration from six votes to five votes.
  • Authorizes the Public Ethics Commission, beginning with Fiscal Year 2003-2004, to adjust annually the salary for Councilmembers to match increases in the consumer price index; the Commission could grant increases beyond the change in the consumer price index, but any portion of the increase over five percent would require voter approval.
  • Eliminates the prohibition on paying the Mayor more than the City Manager.
  • Authorizes the City Council to set the salaries of the City Attorney and the City Auditor at not less than 70 percent nor more than 90 percent of the average salaries of the city attorney and the city auditor in California cities within the three immediate higher and the three immediate lower cities in population to Oakland.
  • Requires the Mayor to deliver an annual State of the City address to the City Council, and to hold four town hall meetings each year for the public.
  • Eliminates the rule that the Mayor vacates his or her office by missing ten consecutive City Council meetings.
  • Requires the City Council to elect a Vice-Mayor each year.
  • Requires the Mayor to advise the City Council before removing the City Administrator.
  • Changes the title of the City Manager to "City Administrator."

    s/THOMAS J. OWEN
    Deputy City Attorney
    City and County of San Francisco

Fiscal Impact:
REMOVES VOTER APPROVAL REQUIREMENT FOR CERTAIN CITY COUNCIL SALARY INCREASES The Public Ethics Commission will adjust City Council salaries each year by the increase in the consumer price index (CPI) over the preceding year. The Commission may adjust salaries beyond the CPI increase up to 5%. Any increase in excess of 5% is subject to voter approval. The consumer price index applicable is not specified.
CITY CHARTER LIMIT ON ANNUAL INCREASE IN CITY COUNCIL SALARIES WILL BE REPEALED The City Charter provision limiting annual changes in City Council salaries to 10% will be repealed. No replacement limit is provided.
CITY CHARTER LIMIT ON SALARY OF MAYOR REPEALED The City Charter provision limiting the Mayor's salary to the salary of the City Manager will be repealed. The formula for determining the Mayor's salary is retained.
CITY ATTORNEY SALARY TO BE REDUCED The salary of the City Attorney will be set by the City Council to an annual amount within a mandated range of 70% to 90% of the average salaries paid to City Attorneys in the three cities immediately smaller and the three cities immediately larger than the City of Oakland. There is no provision for cost of living increases.
These cities range in population from 274,100 to 481,000 compared to Oakland's population of 412,200. The computation of the amount based on year 2003 information would require a reduction of the City Attorney's salary from 19% to 37%. The adjustment will be required for the new term of office commencing in January 2005.
CITY AUDITOR SALARY TO BE REDUCED The salary of the City Auditor will be set by the City Council to an annual amount within the mandated range of 70% to 90% of the average salaries paid to City Auditors in the three cities immediately smaller and the three cities immediately larger than the City of Oakland. There is no provision for cost of living increases.
These cities range in population from 274,100 to 481,000 compared to Oakland's population of 412,200. Only 2 of the 6 cities have the position of City Auditor, one elected and one appointed. The computation of the amount based on year 2003 information for the 2 cities with a City Auditor would require a reduction of the City Auditor's salary from 15% to 34%. The adjustment will be required for the new term of office commencing in January 2007.
OTHER CHANGES The fiscal impact of the change in the City Manager's title, required public meeting performances of the Mayor, notice of removal of the City Administrator, appointment to boards and commissions, reconsideration of ordinances and the Mayor term limit change are indirect and based on events and data that will become known in the future. The fiscal impact of all the provisions is based on future economic conditions which cannot be determined at this time.

s/SEFTON BOYARS
Certified Public Accountant

Impartial Analysis from Deputy City Attorney, S. F. County
Repealing the Measure X sunset provision. The provisions of 1998's Measure X, creating a Mayor-Council (or "Strong Mayor") form of government, will expire after the November, 2004 election if not renewed by the voters at that time. The proposal would repeal that sunset provision, retaining the Mayor-Council form of government and elected City Attorney without another vote at the November, 2004 election.
Term limit for Mayor. No person may now be elected to the office of Mayor more than twice. Under the proposal, no person could be elected to the office of Mayor for more than two consecutive terms.
Vacancies on commissions. The Mayor now fills vacancies on City commissions. Under the proposal, if the Mayor did not appoint a successor within 90 days, the City Council could fill the vacancy.
Approving ordinances on reconsideration. If the Mayor now sends an ordinance back to the City Council for reconsideration, the Council must approve the ordinance by at least six votes for the law to take effect. Under the proposal, the Council could approve an ordinance on reconsideration by five votes.
Councilmembers' Salaries. The Public Ethics Commission now sets the salary for Councilmembers, not to exceed 110 percent of a base salary set in 1997. No increase can take effect without voter approval. Under the proposal, the Commission would, beginning this year, annually adjust the salary for Councilmembers to match increases in the consumer price index. The Commission could grant increases beyond the change in the consumer price index, but any portion of the increase over five percent would require voter approval.
Mayor's salary. The proposal would eliminate the current rule against paying the Mayor more than the City Manager.
City Attorney and City Auditor salaries. The City Council now sets the salaries of the City Attorney and the City Auditor. The Charter does not limit the amount of those salaries. Under the proposal, the salaries of the City Attorney and the City Auditor could not be less than 70 percent nor more than 90 percent of the average salaries of their counterparts in California cities within the three immediate higher and the three immediate lower cities in population to Oakland.
Mayor's State of the City Address and town hall meetings. The proposal would require the Mayor to deliver an annual State of the City address to the City Council, and to hold four town hall meetings for the public.
Mayor's attendance at City Council meetings. The proposal would eliminate the current rule that the Mayor vacates his or her office by missing ten consecutive City Council meetings.
Electing the Vice-Mayor. The City Council now elects a Vice-Mayor at its first meeting in even-numbered years. The proposal would require the City Council to elect a Vice-Mayor each year.
Removal of City Manager. The proposal would require the Mayor to advise the City Council before removing the City Administrator.
City Manager/City Administrator. The proposal would change the title of the City Manager to "City Administrator."

s/THOMAS J. OWEN
Deputy City Attorney
City and County of San Francisco

   Nonpartisan Information

League of Women Voters Written Pros & Cons
Scroll Down to Measure P. Document also includes Pros & Cons of Measure 2, Measure A, Measure E, and other Oakland City Ballot Measures
Events

LWV Oakland Pros & Cons Presentation
Wednesday, February 18, 2004 at 7 PM
EBMUD Training Room,
375 Eleventh Street.
News and Analysis

KTVU

San Francisco Chronicle Oakland Tribune
Suggest a link related to Measure P
Links to sources outside of Smart Voter are provided for information only and do not imply endorsement.

Arguments For Measure P Arguments Against Measure P
Don't give up your right to vote for the person who runs the City. Vote YES on P.
Now, more than ever, we need leadership. Facing a huge state deficit, the new governor and many legislators are trying to take money from local government. They want to solve their problems at our expense. That's why it is absolutely necessary to have a strong mayor fighting for the citizens of Oakland+just like the strong mayors of San Francisco and Los Angeles. Oakland needs a mayor+with authority+to protect its financial interests.


Under the old system, the city council met in closed session and picked Oakland's chief executive called the city manager. Instead of an independently elected mayor, Oakland got a contract employee as the top person at city hall. This was undemocratic and it blurred responsibility as nine council members pushed the manager in different and conflicting directions. The result was drift and bad decisions that cost us hundreds of millions of dollars.


The League of Women Voters helped establish a broadbased citizens group that examined the Strong Mayor provisions of the Charter. The group held extensive public hearings and carefully crafted a set of changes that form Measure P. These changes reduce the power of the mayor to veto ordinances, give the council greater authority over appointments, and require public meetings with the mayor to ensure citizen participation in mayoral decisions.


We have had the mayor-council form of government for almost six years. It is a balanced form of government just like the great cities of Boston, New York and Chicago.


Please Vote YES on P to retain:
1) A mayor publicly accountable to the voters;
2) A strengthened city council; and
3) An elected city attorney to guard the public trust.

s/JERRY BROWN
Oakland Mayor
s/ROBERT L. JACKSON
Bishop and Founder, Acts Full Gospel Church
s/DANNYWAN
Oakland Councilmember
s/IGNACIO DE LA FUENTE
President Oakland City Council
s/JOSEPH J. HARABURDO
President & CEO, Oakland Chamber of Commerce

Rebuttal to Arguments For
Let's get a few things straight!
  • Measure P does NOT mean a strong City Council, it means a weak and increasingly ineffective one. Oakland started out with a corrupt Mayor/Commissioner system that collapsed when several officials were sent to San Quentin. The people wrote a new Charter that adopted the City Council/City Manager system. That system is used in the overwhelming majority of cities in the state and nation + to end the cronyism, favoritism and corrupt bosses that had been seen in Chicago, New York, Boston and San Francisco, under "strong mayors."
  • Holding a handful of informal meetings with the public does NOT make an absentee mayor accountable. Only when a mayor takes part in day-to-day decision making, and publicly votes on policy issues at the City Council, is there real accountability.
  • We have two elected officials who should be truly independent: the City Auditor and City Attorney. They are meant to represent US, not the politicians. But Measure P goes a long way toward reducing their independence.
  • In the next six years of the "strong mayor" system, the city has rung up some of the biggest budget deficits in its history.

    Measure P is supported by the politicians, the vested interests and the want-to-be mayoral candidates. We should clear the decks, return to a system that gives us the greatest representation! VOTE NO ON MEASURE P !
    s/ARTHUR B. GEEN
    Executive Vice President
    Alameda County Taxpayers Association

The time has come for Oakland voters to shoot down the failed, ill-conceived "strong mayor" scheme, once and for all. Further tinkering will not improve a flawed system + just make it more unresponsive and clunky!
  • Municipal experts have for years favored the City Council/City Manager system, which grew out of the corruption and arrogance of "strong mayors" across the country. City Council members are our direct representatives, best able to understand our needs. We should not weaken and handcuff the Council!
  • Where is the leadership under a "strong mayor" system? An absentee mayor, making only rare City Council appearances, does not have the needed grasp of day-to- day city operations. So, highly-paid administrators need to be hired. But they would not have the authority of a City Manager, and they would not respond to the City Council!
  • Oakland grew and prospered under the Council/Manager system! Let's get back on track! VOTE NO ON MEASURE P!
    s/ARTHUR B. GEEN
    Executive Vice President
    Alameda County Taxpayers Association

Rebuttal to Arguments Against
Under the strong mayor provisions of the city charter, Oakland has avoided the costly mistakes of the past+and is now recognized as among the top ten cities in America.


The reason is clear. Given seven members of the city council from seven separate and diverse districts, there must be one elected official, responsible for the city as a whole. Such a charter arrangement works well because our strong neighborhood representation is balanced by an elected chief executive. The two branches of city government +mayor and council+equally strong, work for the greater good of the city.


Remember the costly mistakes under the weak mayor form of government: a contracted city manager earning more than $250,000 a year and layers of unneeded bureaucracy. That has now been changed. Why? Because you have an elected mayor in charge of the city hall who is accountable directly to you.


A strong mayor is intimately involved in the day-to-day operations of the city government, not just a figurehead, who does nothing more than chair meetings.


Look at the results. New housing is being built in West Oakland and East Oakland for the first time in decades. The number of affordable units is up 50%. Lake Merritt is being restored and neighborhoods are revitalized. Oakland has had its first elected city attorney, accountable only to you the voters.


Don't give up your democratic right to vote for your chief executive and your city attorney. Vote Yes on P.

s/JERRY BROWN
Oakland Mayor
s/DEBORAH EDGERLY
Oakland City Manager
s/DEVIN SATTERFIELD
Neighborhood Arts Coordinator

Alameda Home Page || Statewide Links || About Smart Voter || Feedback
Created: May 4, 2004 14:40 PDT
Smart Voter <http://www.smartvoter.org/>
Copyright © League of Women Voters of California Education Fund   http://ca.lwv.org
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.