Voters to decide if Oakland’s mayor should become far more powerful

Oakland voters will decide in November whether to grant Mayor Barbara Lee and future mayors sweeping new powers over city government, including veto authority over council decisions and control over hiring and firing most department heads. The Oakland City Council voted 5-3 to place the proposal on the fall ballot, setting up a political showdown that could transform the city’s governance from a council-manager system to a strong-mayor model similar to San Francisco and Los Angeles. Critics warn the change could concentrate too much power in one office, especially as former Mayor Sheng Thao faces bribery and corruption charges expected to go to trial around the same time.

Getting your Trinity Audio //trinityaudio.ai player ready...OAKLAND — Voters here will decide in November whether to give Mayor Barbara Lee — and her successors — sweeping new powers over the city’s government https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/02/10/oakland-strong-mayor-city/ , a bold proposal that Lee promises would reform Oakland’s dysfunctional leadership structure https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/06/06/oakland-barbara-lee-strong-mayor-government/ . It is the culmination of efforts by Lee, who took office a year ago, to overhaul how Oakland is governed, setting the stage for a political showdown this November that could establish a lasting precedent with far-reaching political consequences. Lee successfully lobbied the Oakland City Council to place her proposal on the fall election ballot, even making a rare appearance at the eight-member body’s regular meeting this week to plead her case. “The buck always stops with the mayor,” Lee told the council on Tuesday. The mayor had spent the past month privately whipping up support from the council, which on Tuesday voted 5-3 in favor of the proposal. Several council members who supported it admitted to feeling uneasy about ceding some of their own legislative power to the mayor’s office, but opted to let Oakland’s voters decide if that’s a good idea. Under Lee’s plan, the mayor would gain a crucial veto over the city council’s policy decisions while continuing to not be required to attend meetings. She could reject legislation outright or even specific laws within an ordinance. The city’s daily operations are currently overseen by a professionally hired administrator, but the new plan would shift many of their responsibilities — including the ability to hire and fire most city department heads — to the mayor alone. To override a veto, the council would need to reach consensus of a two-thirds supermajority, requiring six out of eight members to vote together. Otherwise, the mayor would call the shots, though the legislation establishes a new independent office to analyze the city’s budget. Effectively, Oakland would more closely resemble a “strong mayor” style of governance, in the vein of San Francisco and Los Angeles, absorbing the vast majority of executive power. To advocates, this rids cities of bureaucracy and simplifies accountability to a single person. “We need to empower a mayor to be a real change-maker,” said Councilmember Charlene Wang, who openly supported Lee’s plan, “and to break through red tape and bureaucracy.” Wang asserted that certain city department heads, which she declined to name, have become impossible to manage within Oakland’s bureaucratic tangles, with the council powerless to hold those staff accountable even as they oversaw multi-million dollar budgets. Opponents of the strong-mayor system, though, worry that the wrong person in the mayor’s seat could wreak havoc on a city in a short amount of time. Locally, critics do not have to look far to make their point: Sheng Thao, who preceded Lee in office before voters recalled her, is expected to stand trial in the fall for bribery and corruption charges — right around the time Lee’s proposal would go before voters. “We believe in you ” Councilmember Ken Houston enthusiastically told Lee. “But what about that next person?” “Democracy works,” Lee quickly responded. “People will vote for who they want as mayor.” Lee’s plan would repeal a city law that allows a council member to potentially be charged with a misdemeanor if they directly interfere with how a city employee is delivering services. That amendment appeared to satisfy Houston, who has long described the restriction as a thorn in his side. Broadly, some policy experts and an ex-administrator have long called publicly for Oakland’s governance structure to change. Often, though, they advised shifting to a more balanced power structure seen in most California cities, including San Jose. In those cities, the mayor is a voting member of the city council, which collectively oversees a city manager to handle the government’s daily affairs. It involves tradeoffs: far more decisions are put to a democratic vote, but most accountability falls on the back of an unelected bureaucrat. Councilmember Zac Unger, an outright skeptic of strong-mayor politics, had quietly worked behind the scenes this past month to place on the November ballot a rival ballot measure proposing a shift to that power structure, known as a “council-manager” form of governance. On Tuesday, Unger acknowledged he failed to whip the votes among his council colleagues needed to bring an alternative before voters. He voted against placing Lee’s plan on the November ballot, alongside council members Janani Ramachandran and Noel Gallo. Under Lee’s proposed setup, Unger argued, council members “would continue to be the face of futility… and we will essentially become shields for all of the failures of the administration.” Now, voters will decide on perhaps the most impactful and aggressive policy change proposed by Lee, a former 25-year congresswoman who ran on a promise to stabilize Oakland amid the political turmoil of the Thao era. The mayor, courted by several council members to run in that special election, has strongly hinted she will seek re-election to her seat in November. But she has struck back angrily at suggestions that the proposed governance reform is akin to a power grab. “Ultimately,” Lee said Tuesday, “this decision will not be made by one mayor or one city council. It will be made by the voters of Oakland.” Shomik Mukherjee is a reporter covering Oakland. Call or text him at 510-905-5495 or email him at shomik@bayareanewsgroup.com.