S.J. Council should put stronger mayor proposal on ballot
Political leaders have debated for years whether San Jose would benefit from granting more authority to its mayor and abandoning the current council-manager form of government. It’s time to engage in a full public debate of the issue and let voters have their say.
The San Jose City Council on Tuesday should place a measure on the November ballot seeking voter approval to expand the mayor’s power. It’s not a slam dunk to go before voters. Beyond the politics of the proposed changes, the ballot measure could significantly alter the race to become San Jose’s next mayor.
Labor has been working for the past year to align San Jose’s mayoral election with presidential elections, believing increased turnouts would help its cause. But the proposal appeared dead last week after it failed to muster the necessary signatures to put the issue before voters.
So we were surprised, along with most, by the ensuing compromise announced by business-backed Vice Mayor Chappie Jones and laborbacked Councilman Sergio Jimenez. It’s welcome news. Their proposal, which has the blessing of Mayor Sam Liccardo, is a hybrid of the strongmayor system employed by the majority of major metropolitan cities in the United States.
Of the nation’s 10 most-populated cities, only San Jose, Phoenix and Dallas still use a council-manager form of government. Currently San Jose’s mayor does not have the kind of powers the title suggests.
The new proposal would push the mayoral election back two years to 2024, which labor covets. But it would also give Liccardo an additional two years in office, or 10 years total, since he first became mayor in 2014.
The other significant shift would give the mayor power to appoint, direct and fire the city manager. That provision wouldn’t go into effect until July 1, 2023 — 18 months before Liccardo terms out. Nor would it apply to the city attorney, city clerk, city auditor or independent police auditor.
The mayor and the city manager would both have the power to fire more than a dozen department heads. The City Council would be able to overturn any firing by a twothirds vote.
The mayor has long been frustrated by his inability to initiate and implement action on issues, especially during times of crisis, including the current coronavirus crisis.
“People expect the mayor to have the authority to act,” said Liccardo. “That’s what accountability is all about. The current system simply doesn’t allow for that. It’s a charade of accountability.”
The mayor would remain a voting member of the council. But unlike most strongmayor forms of government, he would not have veto power over the council’s policy decisions. Nor would the mayor be able to hire and direct department heads. Those hirings would be subject to council approval.
The proposal also includes tightening of campaign finance laws designed to restrict the influence of lobbyists, city contractors or any other direct beneficiary of city contracts. It also calls for a commission to determine whether more sweeping reforms are necessary.
San Jose was the first incorporated city in the state of California. But its residents haven’t had a significant chance to weigh in on how they will be governed since Jimmy Carter was president. We hope the City Council passes the proposal Tuesday, leading to a robust public debate on San Jose’s future.