Sacramento’s Measure L, which would give the city’s mayor more autonomy in making decisions, is the latest attempt to change the political structure of California’s capital city. But the real question is whether the city would benefit from the change. On one hand, Sacramento’s mayor would be like a governor or president and have more authority to enact change, so he or she could act quickly and effectively. On the other hand, the mayor would have less restraint in making those changes, which means there’d be fewer checks on his or her power. Jessica Trounstine is an associate professor of political science at UC Merced and studies city governments. She joins us to analyze the pros and cons of being a city with a strong-mayor form of government.   

Jessica Trounstine Studies: 

• The Provision of Local Public Goods in Diverse
  Communities: Analyzing Municipal Bond Elections
• Who or What Governs? The Effects of Economics, Politics, Institutions, and Needs on Local Spending
• Municipal Institutions and Voter Turnout in Local Elections
• Elected Versus Appointed Policymakers: Evidence from City Treasurers*
• Hierarchical Accountability in Government Theory and Evidence
• City Caesars? Institutional Structure and Mayoral Success in Three California Cities
• Structural Change And Fiscal Flows: A Framework for Analyzing the Effects of Urban Events

LINK: 

• Strong-Mayor Council Institute