OAKLAND — As the story goes, former Mayor Jerry Brown had a plaque on his desk during his first months in Oakland’s top political office that directed anyone stopping by to instead speak to the city manager, who handled the local government’s daily operations.
The anecdote dovetails with one of Brown’s most important moves in his eight-year mayoral tenure: persuading voters in 1998 to change Oakland’s laws so that the mayor could skip City Council meetings and run the government separately.
The amendment to the city charter also gave Brown, along with future mayors, the ability to hire and fire City Hall’s top official, which today is the city administrator.
Nearly three decades later, Mayor Barbara Lee — a political figure with similar name recognition — has begun a shortened term in which she has promised to re-examine the mayor-council power dynamic that controls much of how Oakland is governed.
Voters once again would need to decide on Lee’s eventual proposal, which may be influenced by a citizen campaign that has declared the current system of governance “broken,” as it gives mayors no legislative power while separating them from the council.
The campaign — the Oakland Charter Reform Project, led by former City Administrator Steve Falk — has now settled on a specific recommendation after months of studying the issue.
In a new report, they call for Oakland’s mayor to return to leading council meetings and casting just a single vote like a regular member of what is currently an eight-person body.
In addition, the council would collectively hire, and fire, not just the city administrator but also the city attorney, which currently is an elected position.
Oakland mayoral candidate Jerry Brown interacts with local residents at the Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church in Oakland Saturday April 11, 1998. Brown spent the day talking and listening to small groups of the voting population around Oakland. (Kendra Luck/Bay Area News Group Archives) (Kendra Luck/Bay Area News Group Archives)
“Oaklanders,” the group writes, would “benefit from the expertise of a dependable and professional city manager who is selected and supervised by the entire City Council, thus working for all of the people of Oakland.”
There’s no indication of whether Lee will take up the group’s advice, but the new mayor is expected to meet privately with Falk in the coming days to discuss his group’s findings.
Most cities have some version of either a “strong mayor” who can propose laws and veto council decisions, or a “weak mayor” who is often more akin to what is known as a council-manager.
San Francisco is the popular example in California of a strong-mayor system, though New York City gives its mayor even more control over the city’s various agencies. It is one reason why those big-city mayors come to resemble political celebrities.
San Jose has a council-manager setup, which some have argued creates more long-term stability in a government by de-centering a single individual in major decisions.
“A city administrator would be a hard job if every few years you have a new mayor who wants to make sweeping changes and replace all the leadership,” said Nick Kaspar, a former chief of staff to San Jose City Councilmember Maya Esparza, who served until 2022.
Newly elected Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee arrives at her swearing-in ceremony at City Hall in Oakland, Calif., on Tuesday, May 19, 2025. (Dai Sugano/Bay Area News Group) Dai Sugano/Bay Area News Group
He currently does the same job for a council member in Long Beach, a city whose strong mayor can veto the council’s decisions, though the elected body can also override a veto by two-thirds vote.
In its latest report, Falk’s group notes that Long Beach is one of six cities among California’s 17 largest that grant veto power to their mayors.
The group does not take a formal stance on whether Oakland should follow suit, but there’s an obvious reason why Brown never pursued it for himself.
“Jerry Brown knew that putting veto power into the ballot proposal would probably sink it, because the public was not likely to support that,” said former City Manager Henry Gardner, who noted that two previous Oakland mayors had unsuccessfully sought to have voters amend the city charter.
Right now, Oakland’s mayor alone controls the administrator and police chief’s job security. But the mayor otherwise has no legislative power except to break ties in deadlocked council votes.
The split governance appeared to create divisions between the last two mayoral administrations and the councils at the time. But officials from Brown’s mayoral tenure — which took place from 1999 to 2007 and between his two stints as California’s governor — still defend the move.
“At the end of the day, the buck has to stop somewhere,” Ignacio De La Fuente, who served as the council’s president when Brown was mayor, said in an interview. “The mayor has got to be the person accountable.”
Oakland City administrator Jestin Johnson during a press conference on Tuesday, July 30, 2024. (Shomik Mukherjee/Bay Area News Group) (Shomik Mukherjee/Bay Area News Group)
Meanwhile, Oakland is among a small handful of California governments to elect a city attorney. Falk’s group contends that Oakland’s dual powers of mayor and council often conflict with the interests of the attorney’s office, which represents both parties.
The political nature of the office came into full display during last November’s election, in which winning candidate Ryan Richardson went up against an opponent who had openly backed and even formerly led the movement to recall Sheng Thao, the ex-mayor ousted November.
The race became a flashpoint of how toxic Oakland’s politics can become. Falk’s group believes that should change. And others attest to alternative styles of government offering far more balance.
“It’s just a little bit less political in nature,” Kaspar said of San Jose’s city government. “A council can sustain waves of pressure a lot easier than if you’re a single person.”
Shomik Mukherjee is a reporter covering Oakland. Call or text him at 510-905-5495 or email him at [email protected].