POWER GRAB?
Stop the presses, Santa Cruz, we have a problem. Mayor Fred Keeley wrote recently that he and the city council were doing some clean-up of the language in the Santa Cruz City Charter. Upon closer inspection of the changes he and the city council wish to make, it appears like a potential power grab by a group already emboldened and in the process of exerting irreparable structural changes on this city’s architectural landscape.
Let’s keep in mind what the city charter is. It is our local government’s constitution, meaning it defines how our city is organized, what the powers and functions and essential procedures are in city governance. It is special being a charter city; not all cities have been granted this privilege by the state legislature. Messing with the charter can have significant impacts and unintended consequences.
In the Mayor’s column, he would have us believe that the charter changes afoot by this council are, ”Clear rules and aligned processes [to] support better decision-making, reduce confusion and help maintain public trust.” Trust in government is what is so sadly lacking. Here the Mayor had an opportunity to level with the people of Santa Cruz and say what exactly are these proposed changes that would “modify outdated language” and “improve clarity?”
It turns out the clarity Keeley writes of is nowhere to be seen in the changes he seeks. For example, Section 603 of the charter is the section governing the mayor and city council’s pay.
Now, anyone connected to local government knows the council and mayor deserve a significant boost in pay, given that department heads make exorbitant salaries, all in excess of $200-250k per year, while councilmembers are paid $1,000 per month and the mayor $2,000 as prescribed in the current city charter.
The charter also says they may accord themselves a 5% raise each year, so today the council and mayor ought to be making around $45,000 and $90,000, respectively, had they taken the 5% each year since the 1999 amendment. In addition, they receive healthcare, cell phone and parking benefits.
The proposed big change would be that, instead of council salaries being set by the city charter, the council itself would set its own salaries.
This council is swinging for the fences. They want to be able to have 1) only one meeting per month from the current two-meeting charter rule and basically eliminate night meetings; 2) limit the finance director to producing one annual report on city finances instead of every month; 3) allow the city manager to hire family members, which is now prohibited; 4) allow the formation of boards and commissions to be at the behest of the city council and not governed by the charter; and one I find really head-scratching, 5) the council and mayor wish to relinquish their discretion over the hiring and firing of the city clerk to the office of the city manager.
Why? Traditionally, the council hires and fires three people: the city manager, the city attorney, and the city clerk. It is a power with a long tradition and not one that should be so easily given to the city’s chief bureaucrat.
Fortunately, the mayor gets it right when he describes the process of getting these amendments through. “Ultimately,’ he writes, “because the charter belongs to the community, any amendments will be decided by Santa Cruz voters in the November election.” That’s right, the people get to vote on these changes. I only hope the debate and discussion of such profound alterations is shouted from the city hall rooftop so the community can hear about them.
Chris Krohn | candidate for mayor | Santa Cruz
