Former mayor Libby Schaaf lays out the case for a citizens’ initiative to reform Oakland’s charter and put in place a true strong-mayor form of government.
As one of only two two-term mayors in this millennium, I think Mayor Schaaf has an important perspective in this discussion. I will always be biased toward a strong mayor system because I worked for such an amazing mayor in Atlanta (Keisha Lance Bottoms). I would be curious and grateful to learn more about how a strong mayor system might have changed or impacted Mayor Schaaf’s two terms as mayor. From my experience, it was most helpful as a department head to know beyond any doubt that the boss was the mayor. I worked for an excellent administration and would be most happy to return to that type of professional environment.
Seneca, thank you for your comment. Former mayor Schaaf's commentary is focused on Oakland's form of governance-- an important and relevant current topic of debate. It sounds like you agree with her main point, which is that Oakland will function better with a strong-mayor form of government. With respect to ranked-choice voting, there is room in the charter reform conversation for other potential changes. It does not have to be limited to just one thing. Oakland Report is open to publishing other commentaries about charter reform, with ranked-choice voting being a particularly relevant aspect, and we invite you to submit your perspective on the topic. Thanks again.
Seneca, thank you for your comment. Former mayor Schaaf's commentary is focused on Oakland's form of governance-- an important and relevant current topic of debate. It sounds like you agree with her main point, which is that Oakland will function better with a strong-mayor form of government. With respect to ranked-choice voting, there is room in the charter reform conversation for other potential changes. It does not have to be limited to just one thing. Oakland Report is open to publishing other commentaries about charter reform, with ranked-choice voting being a particularly relevant aspect, and we invite you to submit your perspective on the topic. Thanks again.
Libby did a great job here of basically regurgitating the SPUR report on this topic. No shade, I did the exact same thing as it’s just the best body of work out there IMO.
But RCV has demonstrably harmed local voting turnout, confidence, ect. Especially in communities of color and the working class. It’s tantamount to voter suppression and it’s extremely insidious how these blatant facts and data points are ignored in a city obsessed with “equity”.
As one of only two two-term mayors in this millennium, I think Mayor Schaaf has an important perspective in this discussion. I will always be biased toward a strong mayor system because I worked for such an amazing mayor in Atlanta (Keisha Lance Bottoms). I would be curious and grateful to learn more about how a strong mayor system might have changed or impacted Mayor Schaaf’s two terms as mayor. From my experience, it was most helpful as a department head to know beyond any doubt that the boss was the mayor. I worked for an excellent administration and would be most happy to return to that type of professional environment.
Seneca, thank you for your comment. Former mayor Schaaf's commentary is focused on Oakland's form of governance-- an important and relevant current topic of debate. It sounds like you agree with her main point, which is that Oakland will function better with a strong-mayor form of government. With respect to ranked-choice voting, there is room in the charter reform conversation for other potential changes. It does not have to be limited to just one thing. Oakland Report is open to publishing other commentaries about charter reform, with ranked-choice voting being a particularly relevant aspect, and we invite you to submit your perspective on the topic. Thanks again.
So, basically what I have been saying for nearly 4 years now and ran on for mayor in 2022 and everyone jeered or ignored me? Cool story.
It’s hard being years ahead all the time….
And any charter amendment that does not eliminate RCV is a waste of time.
Seneca, thank you for your comment. Former mayor Schaaf's commentary is focused on Oakland's form of governance-- an important and relevant current topic of debate. It sounds like you agree with her main point, which is that Oakland will function better with a strong-mayor form of government. With respect to ranked-choice voting, there is room in the charter reform conversation for other potential changes. It does not have to be limited to just one thing. Oakland Report is open to publishing other commentaries about charter reform, with ranked-choice voting being a particularly relevant aspect, and we invite you to submit your perspective on the topic. Thanks again.
Libby did a great job here of basically regurgitating the SPUR report on this topic. No shade, I did the exact same thing as it’s just the best body of work out there IMO.
But RCV has demonstrably harmed local voting turnout, confidence, ect. Especially in communities of color and the working class. It’s tantamount to voter suppression and it’s extremely insidious how these blatant facts and data points are ignored in a city obsessed with “equity”.
We need to talk about it more. END RCV