When Ellyn Bell made public her intention to leave the Sacramento City Unified School District board of trustees–so she could live closer to her new job in San Francisco–her colleagues on the school board decided it was too late and too expensive to call an election to fill her seat.

So they plan to pick their own replacement to represent Area 1 (Land Park, Curtis Park, the Grid), and to serve the remainder of Bell’s term, which ends December 2014.  The board is scheduled to pick from eight applicants, and to make that appointment this December 20.

That decision may be overruled by voters, however.  Community activists and district labor unions are now calling for a special election to replace Bell.  And they’re threatening a petition drive that would force an election, even if the board makes it’s own pick.

Annette Deglow is one of the folks leading the effort–she was also one of the community activists who helped to write and pass Measures J and K, which brought area elections to the district and replaced the old at-large system in 2006.

Deglow says the school board’s decision to appoint a new board member, rather than allowing area residents to pick their own representative, is undemocratic and undermines the system voters put in place just a few years ago.

“It flies in the face of J and K. Those candidates aren’t out there trying to work the residents of Area 1. They are trying to work the board members,” says Deglow. “We will challenge the appointment, whoever it is. I don’t want them to think it’s personal.”

If the board decides to go ahead with its plan to appoint a new board member, Deglow, or anyone else, would have 30 days from the time of the appointment to collect 2454 signatures to force the district to hold a special election to fill the seat.

That’s 1.5 percent of the registered voters in the school district, according to Sacramento County Campaign Services Manager/elections guru Brad Buyse. He said the petitioners would probably have to collect 2800-3000 signatures to be on the safe side, since a lot of signatures don’t check out as valid.

Given the timeline set out by Buyse, if the petitioners turn in enough valid signatures the election would likely wind up being held in the summer, I’m assuming June 2013.

Here’s where it gets weird. If there is a special election, the new board member elected at that time wouldn’t be seated until December 2013. So, whoever the board appoints this month would be in office for about a year (12/12 to 12/13). Then whoever gets elected in 2013 would also be in office for a year (12/13 to 12/14).

Again, this is my best understanding of the how the process would work, though I think it’s still being sussed out by district lawyers and election officials.

The potential a having a new board member rotate through every year for the next two or three years is…not optimal. And I’m sure the argument will be made that it would be a lot smoother just to let the board make their appointment. On the other hand, democracy is messy. And why are we in this messy situation in the first place? Isn’t it because of decisions made by members of the school board?

After all, who really knew what, and when, regarding Bell’s departure? Given that Bell took the San Francisco job back in the spring, why was this not sorted out a lot sooner? With just a little more notice, her seat could have been up for election on last November’s ballot. Deglow and others are asking why Bell’s resignation was delayed so long.

Of course, the other big argument for a board appointment is that the cost of the election is just too high.  According to Buyse a special election would cost $155,000 to $280,000. However, it is possible for the District to decide to hold a mail-in ballot only election, which could save some money. How much money? Proponents say it could save as much as 60 percent off the normal costs.  Buyse said he didn’t have enough information to give an estimate, but he acknowledged that a mail in election could save money, because the county could then avoid setting up polling places, paying precinct workers, etc.

This seems like something to watch for.  If you really want to weigh all the options and come up with the best answer, as democratic and as cost-effective as possible, then you should at least ask the question, and have the county elections folks bring back an estimate for the costs of a mail-in only election. Right?  We’ll see if any of the trustees raise the question at the Thursday board meeting, or if they just plow ahead with appointment.  My money is on plow.

Some will question spending ANY money on an election if it can be avoided. But as Sacramento City Teacher’s Association president Scott Smith points out, the board spends all kinds of money that people don’t always agree with. For example, “They had $500,000 to spend on City Year.”

The rumor is that of the eight candidates who have applied for the job, Bina Lefkovitz already has lined up the four votes she needs to get the appointment. That wouldn’t be so surprising. Her resume is long, and she showed at a recent community forum at Cal Middle School that’s she’s quite knowledgeable about our schools. (She’s also a big fan of Superintendent Jonathan Raymond’s “priority schools” program, which will win her some points down at Serna Center ).

And she’s got some very powerful friends lobbying on her behalf–like California State Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, and of course her Sacramento City Council member husband Jay Schenirer, who has weirdly been trying to keep reporters from mentioning his name in this story.

I’m sorry for this diversion, but I should explain:  After I mentioned on this blog , and in my column, that Lefkovitz is married to Schenirer, and that Schenirer made some pretty dubious (to put it politely) decisions back when he was a member the school board, Schenirer flipped out.  He complained to the SN&R editors, and to the paper’s owner, though never to me directly, and said I was sexist for bringing up his record in a story about his spouse making a bid for the same office he once held. Because, what political reporter would do that, right?

Sorry, politics and Schenirer’s record are a big part of the backstory here. That’s why I don’t much care what Jay Schenirer says I can or can not write about. I’m more interested in what George Orwell and/or Bill Moyers have to say: “The news is about what people want to keep hidden. Everything else is publicity.”   (A little pretentious for a blog post, sure, but it helps me to keep some of this stuff in perspective.)

Where was I? Oh right, 2454 signatures. If you think about it, not all that many signatures. Especially with the teachers union and other district labor groups now officially backing the idea of a special election. And especially if it looks like the board’s appointment is some sort of back room deal.

Standard Podcast [ 24:01 ] Play Now | Download

Big ideas week continues at Sacramento Current. The last episode was about new notions in California state budgeting. In this podcast, we drill down on a new idea for local governments that I’ve been really excited about. It’s called participatory budgeting and it’s been piloted in districts in New York, Chicago, and soon San Francisco. But the City of Vallejo, Ca, is the only city in the US to try it on a citywide basis. The idea is simple–turn a chunk of your budget over to citizens, and they’ll decide directly how to spend it.

To find out more, I called up Vallejo City Council member Marti Brown. Brown has a strong Sacramento connection, she worked as a redevelopment planner here for several years, and recently took a job a director of the North Franklin District Business Association.

Brown highly recommends PB, and I think Sacramento ought to consider a similar project. Earlier this month, we voted to tax ourselves to improve our city, why not let us have more input in deciding how that money is spent? I don’t know if the idea would ever catch on here. We’ve seen a certain anti-democratic impulse among certain council members recently. Measure M comes to mind. But who knows?

(I’m out of town posting this with limited broadband and unable to use the usual WordPress podcast widget. So I’m using Soundcloud instead. This podcast will be added to iTunes later.)

Interesting line up of applicants for the vacancy on the Sac City school board. Later in December, the board will choose a replacement to fill out the term of board member Ellyne Bell, who is leaving halfway through her second term to take a job in the Bay Area.  The applications are embedded below, for your perusal.  The applicants are: Gwynnae Byrd, Jay Hansen, Bina Lefkovitz, Anna Molander, Samara Palko, David Ross, Harold Stewart-Carballo, and Kathryn Tobias.

Some of the names are familiar to me (and probably to you as well), others less so.  Ross ran for this seat back in 2010. I thought he was good candidate back then, he had a good critique of the school district’s heavy use of expensive consultant contracts. Molander is a fellow progressive and an activist in the local Democratic Party. She was one of the higher vote getters in the (Quixotic) race for Sacramento Charter Commission. Samara Palko just finished her own run for the Sacramento Municipal Utility District board.

Lefkovitz is interesting too. She’s married to Sacramento City Council member Jay Schenirer. You’ll recall that Schenirer was on the school board too a few years back. In fact, he was one of the board members who pushed for the giveaway of Sacramento High School to Kevin Johnson’s St HOPE charter school company. That decision is an open wound in the district, years later.  Schenirer was also one of the main architects of the CASA pension scheme that later blew up so spectacularly, costing the district millions.  In other words, Schenirer’s tenure on the school board was really kind of a disaster.  And he was voted off the board largely because of those decisions.  Likewise, Bell was motivated to run for school board partly out of her frustration with the Sac High giveaway.

So, should Schenirer’s past sins be held against Lefkovitz? Just because Schenirer did terrible, destructive things to the Sac city schools, that doesn’t mean she will too. Right? I’m sure the board will ask her just that during the public meetings leading up to the appointment. Or not. 

Redacted Applications

I got a link to this video in my Twitter feed this morning.

It reminded me that Steve Hansen completely blew off the questions I sent him Friday about ethics and transparency. He’s made a big deal about the need for ethics reform at City Hall. For a lot of reasons, I can’t take his rhetoric at face value.

Some of the reasons are in that column I linked above. Below is the email I sent to Steve on Friday, outlining some more reasons.

Hi Steve.

I just want to push a little more on this issue of ethics and transparency. I’ve got to be honest with you, some of the things I’ve seen and heard in the last few weeks are worrying to me. 

For example, I saw that Obama mailer too, and it made me wince. I know you think it’s no big deal. But I think the little things like that do matter. If your opponent had put out that mailer, implying that he was endorsed by Obama–and it really does imply that, Steve–you would flip out. So, why do it?

Also, tell me again why we shouldn’t be worried about electing a lobbyist to City Council?

Here’s why I ask: 

Your shop at Genentech gave $4000 to Perez last year, he turned around and gave you $1500 for your council campaign. Genentech gave Ricardo Lara $5000, he gave you $3000. Your employer gave Rich Gordon $5000, he gave you $3000. In fact, some of those contributions went back and forth on the same day.

What interest do these Southern California pols have in our local City Council race, beyond returning the favor for the money they got from the guy at Genentech?  This sure starts to look like a revolving door of campaign contributions. Maybe not illegal, but not seeming highly ethical either.

How do I know that you’re not using your position at Genentech to trade favors–to leverage corporate campaign contributions from your employer for contributions to your own campaign coffers?

Also, I’m sure I’m not the only reporter in town who’s heard rumors that you’ve withheld Genentech donations to groups who did not want to contribute to your campaign.  I don’t know if that’s true, I’m sure hoping it’s not. But obviously that’s the kind of thing that gets politicians into pretty serious trouble. It’s the kind of thing that people are going to wonder about. I’m going to wonder about it.

As you’ve noted in your own campaign materials, we have a problem with ethics and transparency in City Hall. We have council members who flat out say things that are not true, in order to score political points. Who try to bend the rules, or who think the rules just don’t apply to them. 

Why should we think that you are the guy who is going to fix that stuff? A secret map, a shady campaign mailer, a constant flow of campaign contributions and favors. Where is this all going? Tell me why voters should trust you.

No reply so far. I did get a short response from Hansen’s campaign guy, Thomas Dodson, who said that those revolving donations came from gay legislators supporting Sacramento’s possibly first-openly gay council member. Not sure why that matters, and there are other candidates, like City Council member Jay Schenirer, who have engaged in this sort of round robin with Hansen and Genentech. But ok, point taken.

Dodson also said that Kevin McCarty--whose last campaign was run by Andrew Acosta, same guy who is running Joe Yee’s campaign–also used Obama’s image in a mailer before. I’ll post them both here, and you can tell me if you think the message is the same:

Anyway,  I’ll let you know if Hansen does eventually get back to me. I do think this stuff is important, especially if your campaign is supposed to be about accessibility and accountability and transparency and all that stuff. It’s certainly what the campaign is about for me.

Today we did back-to-back interviews with Steve Hansen and Joe Yee–both candidates in the Sacramento City Council race, District 4. Both candidates had to field some questions they would rather not. Hansen got bristly when asked about some of his endorsements–like the police union and Chamber of Commerce. Yee got similar pestering about developers and his backing from the local party “establishment.”  Also, I think Isaac asked him if he’s too old. Ouch. All in all, these interviews are nearly as hard-hitting as the ones Fox 40 did a while back.

We recorded each interview as a separate podcast, for easier digestion. Follow the links to listen to each.

Steve Hansen

Joe Yee

Hey everybody this is a guest post from my friend Devin Lavelle. Devin’s got a master’s in public policy from CSUS, same program I’m in now, and needs a little space to wonk out now and then. Happy to oblige. Honestly, I didn’t know we were technically in a “depression” here in Sacto. I thought we were just a little sad…

Hello and welcome. My name is Devin Lavelle. You may remember me from such blogs as devinlavelle.com. Unfortunately, I did not have time to keep my own site fresh with worthwhile content, so it has fallen by the wayside. On the bright side, my friend, Cosmo Garvin, has offered me the opportunity to write from time to time in this space, so here I am. As I did on my own site, I plan to focus on analytical work. Simply put: what do the numbers say and, for better or for worse, what do they mean?

Unfortunately, the numbers I want to talk about today fall very firmly in the ‘for worse’ camp. As we all know, Sacramento has been slower than the state and the nation to emerge from the recession. Our unemployment stands at 10.3%, ranked 327^th out of our nation’s 372 metropolitan areas.

The reality is that while our nation suffered through and is slowly emerging from the Great Recession, Sacramento has been mired in a full-on depression.

Ok, so you are probably asking, what is the difference between a depression and a recession? A depression is generally defined as either a recession lasting two or more years or a decline in Real Gross Domestic Product exceeding 10%.

On both counts, Sacramento meets the definition of a depression. Real Per Capita Gross Domestic Product (hereafter GDP) shrunk every year from 2007 through 2010. In 2006, the Sacramento metropolitan area was producing $43,947 per capita (2005 dollars) in total output. By 2010 that figure was down to $38,697. The Bureau of Economic Analysis regional figures for 2011 are not available yet, but if trends continue it appears likely that, due to the continued losses in the public sector, 2011 may have seen a net loss in GDP as well, despite a slowly rebounding private sector. GDP has declined for at least four and quite likely five consecutive years – at least twice as long as the minimum period to qualify as a depression.

The GDP decline from 2006 to 2010 totaled $5,250. This represents an 11.9% decline from the region’s high in 2006. Again, the decline clears the minimum definition with ample room to spare. As the following graph shows, Sacramento began experiencing negative economic growth about a year before California and the United States as a whole did and has experienced a slower recovery.

Particularly disheartening is that, as of the most recent available (2010) data, Sacramento’s economy fares worse than even Stockton by these measures. Stockton, though, started with a much weaker economy and negative trends there have not improved, so this may change when future data comes online.

Suffice it to say, we could be doing things a lot better here in the Sacramento region. It is worth pointing out that, while the City of Sacramento is often considered unfriendly to business, most of the region’s population and economic activity lies in other parts of the metropolitan area and, despite the pro-growth reputations of cities like West Sacramento and Roseville, the region as a whole has still slumped terribly.

If I can assume that I have depressed everyone amply for one article, let me at least leave you with this hopeful glimmer. I do have what I believe would be an extremely helpful and cost effective partial solution … and I will lay it out in my next article.