The following is a list of both SHORT and LONG RANGE reasons to oppose Mayor Osby Davis's "Strong Mayor" initiative:

SHORTER RANGE REASONS

TOO LITTLE TIME TO VET

The Mayor's proposal for the November 2014 ballot only allows the City Council, staff and the public one week to fullly vet the proposal and make an informed decision to place it on the ballot. Because ballot language is due to the Registrar of Voters by August 8, 2014.

IRRESPONSIBLE PROPOSAL

The Mayor's proposal undermines the council's agreement to uphold and honor the approved 2014 Council goal setting agreements, which did NOT include a "Strong Mayor" initiative.

At a time when the city's still in a fiscally fragile state, it will cost the citizens of Vallejo approximately $100,000 to place the initiative on the November 2014 ballot.

After more than a decade of a revolving "City Manager door," the city finally has a strong and competent City Manager. This "Strong Mayor" initiative undermines the City Manager's credibility and sends a strong message that his years of experience and professionalism are not respected or wanted.

If approved for the ballot and the initiative wins, there will be two individuals (e.g., the Mayor and a City Administrator) being paid very high salaries and compensation that will likely exceed the current City Manager's compensation package.

"STRONG MAYOR" INITIATIVE WAS ALREADY PUT TO BED

The Council-appointed City Charter Review Committee of 2007/2008 already researched and reviewed the concept of a "Strong Mayor" form of governance for the City of Vallejo. The committee concluded and overwhelmingly rejected the idea in a 14-2 vote and recommendation to the city council to NOT move forward with this form of governance.

LONGER RANGE REASONS

LESS REPRESENTATION

A strong Mayor government is less representative of the diversity in a city of any size. Instead of the policy-making of a group of seven or more elected officials, citizens will get the views of a dominant one.

CEO SKILLS NEEDED TO RUN A CITY

Running a city is akin to managing a large corporation and very few people have those abilities. In addition, very few cities have the talent pool and expertise in public sector finance, large-scale budgeting and large-scale personnel management to manage the day-to-day operations of a city.

NEED FOR CHECKS AND BALANCES

Separating operations from policy gives a City checks and balances and better accountability. Without this essential protection, there is great risk for mismanagement and fraud.  Not incidentally, checks and balances are a fundamental aspect of most public and private enterprises.

PRONE TO CORRUPTION

A "Strong Mayor" form of government is susceptible to corruption. Special Interests only need to control one person vs a Council of seven. The notorious corruption of Tammany Hall, Boss Tweed, Boss Reuf, the Daly machine and many others led to Progressive Era reforms to eliminate Strong Mayor charters.

PATRONAGE JOBS AND NEPOTISM

Strong Mayor charters lead to nepotism and patronage jobs based on political alliances versus professionally-qualified employees.