[OldNorth] More on the Mayor Selection Matter

[John Lofland]

>Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2005 16:20:42 -0700
>From: "Stephen Souza" <ssouza at ci.davis.ca.us>
>To: <kjwag at dcn.davis.ca.us>
>
>Hi Ken, at the City Council meeting of May 24th the Governance Task 
>Force Report was presented to us with info on 15 areas of governance 
>and we asked for further info on 3 of those areas. We with the 
>motion concerning the selection of the Mayor asked staff to come 
>back with info on how we could implement option A of their report 
>(see below). My desire is to have the rotation of mayor and mayor 
>pro tem for one year terms and nomination of mayor and mayor pro tem 
>by newly seated Council. My desire is to have Sue lead this 
>rotation, since she is in line to be the next Mayor under the 
>existing ordinance. This new method of selecting the Mayor could 
>also take place in 2008.  We could also do nothing with the method 
>of selection of the Mayor and leave it as it now is. We could also 
>do nothing with the other two recommendations that will come back to 
>the Council for further Council direction/action. Nothing has been 
>done to change the existing system yet and one can assume there may 
>not be any change. Just because one asks for further information 
>dose not mean one has to act on that information. I hope this helps 
>to clarify what I had in mind with my vote. Thanks, Stephen
>
>Staff Report
>
>Recommendation #4 - Change the Means of Selecting the Mayor
>Although the Task Force recommended changing the means of selecting 
>the mayor, they could
>not agree on the best alternative to the current system. The two 
>proposals presented were for
>council selection of the mayor and direct voter selection from among 
>the council members and
>candidates on the ballot through a system of instant runoff voting.
>The proposal for mayor selection by council is a minor adjustment to 
>the current system, and
>requires a modification to the language in the city code related to 
>the designation of mayor pro
>tempore as the candidate who receives the most votes. The proposal 
>to have the mayor elected
>directly by voters is closer to the way the status quo operates. The 
>primary difference in
>Proposal B of the Task Force recommendation is that there would be 
>separate lists of council and
>mayoral candidates on the ballot. This would help to clarify to the 
>public for whom they were
>voting for mayor.
>A survey conducted through the League of California Cities 
>List-Serve regarding Mayor/Mayor
>Pro Tem Succession by cities participating indicated the most common 
>method was rotation of
>mayor and mayor pro tem for one year terms and nomination of mayor 
>and mayor pro tem by
>newly seated Council. A few cities responding to the survey adhere 
>to the highest vote getter.
>The issue boils down to whether or not the mayor should be viewed as 
>the leader of the Council
>(in which case the Council should select its leader) or the leader 
>of the people (in which case, the
>voters should select the mayor directly).
>
>Task Force Report
>
>4. Change the System of Selecting the Mayor
>Currently the mayor is selected by the city council, but an existing 
>city ordinance
>creates a presumption that: 1) the incoming mayor will be the prior mayor pro
>tem; and 2) the mayor pro tem will be the council member who received the most
>votes in the prior city council election. There was consensus among the Task
>Force that the de facto current system for selecting the mayor is 
>problematic (see
>the rationale following Proposal A). However, the Task Force was 
>split about the
>best alternative for changing the system. Accordingly, we present 
>two alternative
>Proposal A: Council Selects the Mayor
>Recommendation and Vote
>The Task Force recommends that: 1) the mayor continue to be selected by the
>city council from among present council members; 2) the city 
>ordinance related to
>selection of the mayor be modified to remove the presumption that the person
>chosen as mayor be the council member who had been serving as mayor pro
>tempore in the prior term; and 3) the city ordinance be further 
>modified to remove
>the presumption that the mayor pro tempore be the person who had won the
>most votes in the prior city council.
>Ayes: Dolcini, Lascher, Levy, Li.
>Noes: Adler Gefter, Mariano, Poulos.
>Absent: Garamendi.
>Rationale
>* Link with Identified Problems. Two related problems with the present means
>of selecting the mayor have been widely noted: 1) the mayor chosen in the
>present manner may not be the person most skilled at running and organizing
>council meetings; and 2) the mayor may not have strong support among city
>council colleagues. The proposal to remove the presumption that the mayor
>be the person who won the most council votes specifically addresses the
>identified problems.
>* Consistency with Other Legislative Bodies. It has been suggested that it is
>"undemocratic" to have the council elect the mayor. That suggestion does not
>take account of the fact that in the vast majority of legislative 
>bodies in the
>United States (both houses of the U.S. Congress, state legislatures, county
>boards of supervisors, school boards) the chair/president is elected by the
>membership.
>* Maintenance of the "Weak Mayor" System. The case for electing the mayor
>separately would be much stronger if Davis had a strong mayor system-i.e.,
>a system in which the mayor himself/herself developed and presented the
>budget, made appointments to city agencies, had the power to veto proposed
>ordinances, etc. In a strong mayor system, being mayor may call for different
>skills and background. But Davis has a "weak mayor" system and no
>proposal to adopt a strong mayor system is being seriously considered.
>Given that the mayor is simply "another council member" with respect to
>governance powers (although not with respect to ceremonial duties) it makes
>less sense to elect that individual separately.
>* Added Complexity of the Process of Using Instant Runoff for Mayor Selection.
>The Task Force has endorsed a plan for choice voting for council members,
>while recognizing that this will lead to some additional complexity for voters
>and need for additional public education. Such a process is much simpler if
>voters only face a new system for electing council members and not a new
>system for electing the mayor as well. Reasonable prudence would suggest
>giving the voters a chance to focus on using choice voting to select council
>members.
>
>Proposal B: Voters Select the Mayor from Among the City Council Members
>
>Recommendation and Vote
>The Task Force recommends that the public directly select the mayor from
>among the city council members through a system of instant runoff voting. The
>Task Force further recommends that there be separate lists of mayoral and
>council candidates on the ballot.
>Ayes Adler, Gefter, Mariano, Poulos.
>Noes: Dolcini, Lascher, Levy, Li.
>Absent: Garamendi.
>Rationale
>The increasingly important and visible role of mayor has made the issue of how
>the mayor is selected/elected a topic of considerable discussion. Public
>comment to the Task Force has been forceful on this topic. The current system
>is vastly misunderstood. The public believes that the council is bound to
>designate as mayor (initially as mayor pro tem) the candidate who received the
>most votes in the last election. Although the ordinance does not so 
>compel, the
>city council has developed a practice of designating as the 
>mayor/mayor pro tem
>the council candidate who received the most votes in the last election. There
>could be a direct election of the mayor but the Task Force has not 
>supported this.
>Instead the Task Force has recommended that the mayor be a member of the
>city council.
>If choice voting is established there can be two lists on the 
>ballot; one list is for
>council elections and one is for the mayor. The list for mayor will 
>contain the
>names of all council candidates and present council members whose terms have
>not expired and who wish to be considered for the position of mayor. 
>Candidates
>for council are listed on the ballot in one column. Those candidates 
>for council
>and continuing council members that wish to be considered for mayor are listed
>on the ballot in a second column. Voters rank their preferences for 
>council in one
>column and their preferences for mayor in the other column -- separately. To
>decide the new council members, a choice voting election is first 
>conducted using
>the council rankings (as would be done anyway). Then, to select the mayor, an
>instant runoff election is conducted among those newly-elected and continuing
>council members that chose to be considered for mayor. The mayoral ballots
>would be tallied simply by skipping over any rankings of candidates 
>that were not
>elected. The result is the council member with majority voter support.
>
>
>Councilmember Stephen Souza
>23 Russell Boulevard
>Davis, CA 95616
>Office: 530-757-5602
>Cell City: 530-681-7385
>Cell Business: 530-400-2222
>Fax: 530-757-5603