By Karen Carrey President League of Women Voters of Santa Monica
Next week Santa Monicans will make a very important decision about our city government — the direct election of the mayor by the voters.
Presently, the city council elects one of its members to serve as mayor, to be the presiding officer and serve in a mostly ceremonial position. This will be drastically changed if Measure HH is approved because a very powerful position of mayor will be created.
The sponsors of this initiative — who were responsible for getting it on the ballot — used direct election of the mayor as the selling point at signature gathering spots outside the grocery stores. It is a premise that sounds good when first heard. However, when the details became known, the dangers became apparent.
Under HH, the mayor sets the agenda for the city council and then presides over all proceedings of the council, serves as the liaison of the council with the city manager, represents the city in intergovernmental matters and supervises those functions, appoints and removes the mayor pro tem (city charter amendment to read: The mayor pro tem shall serve in such capacity at the pleasure of the mayor), and has the right to vote in matters concerning the removal of the city manager or city attorney.
In addition to the powers noted above, under Measure HH, the mayor will have the power to veto ordinances adopted by the city council. Every ordinance is presented to the mayor for approval; if it is vetoed, it then is presented with the objections of the mayor at the next council meeting. The council members could attempt to override the veto, but it would take five votes to do so. This would significantly change the process for adopting ordinances, as well as drawing out the time frame for their passage. On close votes of the city council the mayor has the ability to cast the deciding vote in joining with the minority on the council to reject a vote of the majority.
All this, yet proponents claim that this new position of mayor “will have no executive power … will have difficulty wielding even the modest power provided.” In effect, under Measure HH the mayor will not only act as the chief legislative officer but he or she will also act as the chief executive officer. Thus, unlike state and federal government where there is a separation of power between the executive branch and the legislative branch, this would not occur in the city of Santa Monica with HH.
Under Measure HH the mayor serves for four years and to be eligible needs only live in the city 30 days prior to the first date for filing as a candidate. No experience is necessary to wield this enormous power. The mayor only needs to be well connected with those who are willing to spend to get him or her elected.
The direct election of a mayor with veto power and the authority to set the agenda would concentrate a lot of control in one very influential person. It would be a very desirable position and would attract a lot of special interest money. If the proponents think you need a large war chest now to get elected, they should see the amounts that will be needed in future elections! As we have seen in numerous elections at all levels of government, who elects the officials (the voters) and who the officials are accountable to (the donors) are often very different.
Cost is a factor that has been mentioned in discussions about Measure HH; costs for the system of elections, costs of campaigning. I have not heard mention of a different cost: Increasing the number of elected officials by one. The mayor is in addition to the seven city council members so additional monthly compensation will be spent. Plus the cost of the medical, dental, health and other benefits now given to our elected officials plus other costs associated with them.
Measure HH proponents have mentioned a worthy goal of “creating a more accurate and effective method for the people to communicate their will to the city government.” The goal, one we can all agree with, would not be the result of this measure.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on October 29, 2002. Read the original PDF.