Note: The online Request to Speak window has expired.
The online Comment window has expired
Agenda Item
5 26-0520 Subject: Informational Report On Charter Reform Recommendations
From: Councilmember Ramachandran And Council President Jenkins
Recommendation: Receive An Informational Report From The Mayor's Charter Reform Working Group
The need to reform Oakland’s charter has been well established and the Working Group spent many months looking closely at the different models, interviewed current and former staff and city council members as well as getting public input. Their report takes Oakland’s uniqueness into account and has offered two models. It is important that the council choose one of these and put forward a clean ballot measure. The work has been done and now we need the City Council to implement the recommendations of the Report.
I thank the working group for their hard work. However, I disagree with their recommendations. I believe there is a third option of the model city format with mayor and council having equal authority, where the mayor sits on the council and participates in the discussion and action. Most cities in the US are in this mode, including San Jose, which is much larger than Oakland. A professional city manager is engaged and that person generally works through more than one administration. It is difficult to engage an excellent city manager when the position changes with each mayor. Oakland has had some excellent city managers in the past, like Harry Gardner. I do not support a strong mayor, but make the charter be more effective.
Oakland needs charter reform. This report clearly lays out two options. Please choose one of the two options, and put that on the ballot for Oakland voters. You may want to change something, or to add something more. Please do not do that. Put a clean measure on the ballot. Make this important change to provide basic functionality to Oakland government. After that, we can talk about all the other changes that people would like to make.
Hello, I am an Oakland resident since 2009. I believe charter reform is urgently needed. Our current structure fails to deliver effective governance in almost every respect.
I do not, however, support the strong-mayor model. Concentrating too much power in a single individual is a recipe for corruption. We’ve already had too much of that in Oakland.
There is a better alternative: an empowered mayor embedded in a council-manager form of government. This approach features a city-wide elected mayor with significant leadership authority, as recommended by the Working Group, but also features a professionally trained city manager overseen by the Council and mayor working together, as proposed by the National Civic League’s Model City Charter.
Oakland needs reforms that are both structurally sound and politically viable. For that reason, I urge you to place a measure on the November ballot that features a strong, visible mayor embedded in and leading a council-manager model—a system that would strengthen accountability, professionalize city administration, and stand a far better chance of passing.
The need to reform Oakland’s charter has been well established and the Working Group spent many months looking closely at the different models, interviewed current and former staff and city council members as well as getting public input. Their report takes Oakland’s uniqueness into account and has offered two models. It is important that the council choose one of these and put forward a clean ballot measure. The work has been done and now we need the City Council to implement the recommendations of the Report.
I thank the working group for their hard work. However, I disagree with their recommendations. I believe there is a third option of the model city format with mayor and council having equal authority, where the mayor sits on the council and participates in the discussion and action. Most cities in the US are in this mode, including San Jose, which is much larger than Oakland. A professional city manager is engaged and that person generally works through more than one administration. It is difficult to engage an excellent city manager when the position changes with each mayor. Oakland has had some excellent city managers in the past, like Harry Gardner. I do not support a strong mayor, but make the charter be more effective.
Oakland needs charter reform. This report clearly lays out two options. Please choose one of the two options, and put that on the ballot for Oakland voters. You may want to change something, or to add something more. Please do not do that. Put a clean measure on the ballot. Make this important change to provide basic functionality to Oakland government. After that, we can talk about all the other changes that people would like to make.
Hello, I am an Oakland resident since 2009. I believe charter reform is urgently needed. Our current structure fails to deliver effective governance in almost every respect.
I do not, however, support the strong-mayor model. Concentrating too much power in a single individual is a recipe for corruption. We’ve already had too much of that in Oakland.
There is a better alternative: an empowered mayor embedded in a council-manager form of government. This approach features a city-wide elected mayor with significant leadership authority, as recommended by the Working Group, but also features a professionally trained city manager overseen by the Council and mayor working together, as proposed by the National Civic League’s Model City Charter.
Oakland needs reforms that are both structurally sound and politically viable. For that reason, I urge you to place a measure on the November ballot that features a strong, visible mayor embedded in and leading a council-manager model—a system that would strengthen accountability, professionalize city administration, and stand a far better chance of passing.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Korn