Martinez is the Only City Locally Where Voters Elect Their Mayor. Is That a Good Thing?

Neighboring cities in Contra Costa County typically change mayors every year. We've had the same one for 20.

It’s no surprise that the six-way race to succeed Rob Schroder as mayor is receiving the lion’s share of attention (and campaign signs) around town right now. But how many voters are aware of just how unusual it is for a city like Martinez to have a mayor directly elected by voters?

Most cities in California and Contra Costa County, especially smaller ones like Martinez, do not choose their mayors this way. The typical city has a “rotational” system where the mayor’s gavel passes among elected council members, with each one getting the title for one year before it changes hands. This is the way it works in our neighboring cities. No one “runs for mayor” in Concord (the largest city in the county by population), Walnut Creek or Pleasant Hill.

Note: Scroll to the bottom of this post for a City Council meeting update

In all of Contra Costa, Antioch, Richmond, Brentwood and San Ramon are the only cities other than Martinez where voters directly elect a mayor to a four-year term. Martinez is by far the smallest, in terms of population, among them.

Why it is that Martinez chose to directly elect its mayor, I can’t answer (perhaps someone reading this can). A 2018 story from the Martinez Gazette indicates that the tradition dates back to 1973, when the late John Sparacino became Martinez’s first directly elected mayor.

As with most governance issues, there are credible arguments both in favor and against the directly elected and rotational models. But one thing is clear. The vast majority of California cities (about two-thirds, according to a 2016 study by Common Cause) rotate the mayoral position among council members. If Martinez also adhered to this structure, we would have had many different council members serve as mayor over the last two decades, each with his or her own leadership style, philosophies and priorities.

Instead, Schroder has served as mayor uninterrupted for 20 years (no other Contra Costa County city that directly elects its mayor has had one person serve in the role for anywhere near as long).

Whatever the merits of either approach to selecting a mayor, it’s not at all surprising that the rotational structure is far more common. In all but a handful of very large California cities (such as Los Angeles, Oakland and San Francisco) where the mayor serves as the city’s chief executive, mayors are not full-time officials; the role is largely ceremonial; and day-to-day administration of the city falls under the leadership of an appointed city manager. Just as voters do not elect a person to serve as president of a local school or water district board, most cities see little value of having them elect a mayor to head a city council in which everyone’s vote counts equally.

So as Martinez voters prepare to elect our first new mayor in 20 years, it might be worth also considering whether this is really the way it should be done. While an elected mayor may have no more power than any other council member to enact law with his or her votes, it can be argued that the person is able to wield significant symbolic power and, therefore, influence over the direction of the city. The mayor runs the council meetings, has significant sway in setting the agenda and priorities for the council, and has all the prestige that the title carries. The mayor’s voice carries more weight on matters large and small, and that can ultimately make a big difference in which path a city chooses to follow on myriad issues, and whose interests get elevated as a result.

It also means that the mayor’s closest allies and supporters around town don’t have to worry year to year if the person wielding the gavel will be as receptive to their voices.

So, before we delve into the details of the different candidates running for mayor, and what may distinguish them from another, it’s worth looking beyond their “priorities” and “visions” to see how they may approach the role itself. Will they approach it much as a “rotational” mayor in Concord or Pleasant Hill might, viewing it primarily as a ceremonial position where they can use the stature it provides to try to build consensus and foster collaboration among the different council members while advocating for their priorities? Or will they see themselves as truly the top elected official in Martinez, with a mandate to try to implement a sweeping vision for the city and exercise as much power and influence as the role will allow?

Will they place their own agenda (and that of their allies) first, even if it runs counter to what the majority of the council desires? Will they be responsive to dissenting views from fellow council members and the public at large and try to forge compromises and elevate diverse voices?

If you meet mayoral candidates over the next several weeks to gauge their views on the future of the marina or economic development or public safety, it also might be worth asking how they see themselves performing the role of mayor itself if elected. They also may want to express an opinion on whether it would be better for them to be the last elected mayor in the city, or whether it would be fine to have the same person serve another 20 years.

Just because Martinez has traditionally had voters elect its mayor doesn’t mean it has to stay that way. Just look at St. Helena, which asked its voters in June whether they wanted to do away with its directly elected mayor. The voters in that case answered no. Would Martinez voters do the same if given the opportunity? Maybe through answers by you to this poll, we’ll start to get an idea.

And if Martinez voters do want to continue to directly elect our mayor, perhaps there’s a better way to do it, given that we have six candidates running for the position this year and it’s quite likely that the winner will receive far less than a majority of the total vote. Perhaps we should have a top-two runoff if no candidate receives over 50% of the vote (as is the case for county offices)? Or perhaps it’s time to seriously consider ranked-choice voting, which is growing in popularity in cities and states large and small, to increase the chances of electing someone who is broadly appealing and acceptable to most residents of Martinez? It’s quite possible, if not likely, that our first new mayor in 20 years will rise to the position by receiving no more than than roughly one-third or even one-quarter of all the votes cast, but it doesn’t have to be that way next time.

That’s it for now. Please feel free to offer any feedback to this post or the newsletter in general, by commenting below or emailing me at craig.lazzeretti@gmail.com. Let me know of any topics you’d like me to explore in upcoming posts. And look for a fresh one in a few days!

CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: The big item from last week’s council meeting was a vote authorizing the city to issue and sale lease revenue bonds to finance the purchase of the Alhambra Highlands, which voters approved through a parcel tax measure in June. While council members and the public alike expressed excitement at the next step forward in purchasing 297 acres to be preserved as public parkland and wildlife habitat, there was also broad concern about the eventual price tag to the city from the bond purchase, as interest rates continue to rise in the fight against inflation. Council members conveyed an urgency to lock in the best possible rates before they climb even further and discussed whether there might be other financial mechanisms available to minimize the interest rate sticker shock (there doesn’t appear to be). According to the staff report from the meeting, based on “current market conditions,” the city is expecting the annual debt service on the bonds to total $1.2 million annually, while the new parcel tax is expected to generate around $1.34 million this fiscal year. The city expects to close the bond deal by the end of the year, at which point we’ll know whether debt costs will be higher or lower than anticipated (interest rates are expected to continue rising).

From the staff report: “To the extent that interest rates at the time the bonds are issued are higher than originally anticipated, less surplus parcel tax revenue will be available each year. One option to maintain a sufficient level of parcel taxes to cover maintenance and operations is to issue a smaller bond amount, and use a portion of the City’s reserves to cover the balance of the purchase price.”