Unfortunately, the strong-mayor proposal on the table does not resemble any of the systems that have worked … except perhaps, Chicago.

Emulating Chicago-style politics, replete with the Daley family monarchy, is hopefully not what Johnson had in mind when he supported the strong-mayor concept. However, one need not look much further than his ambitious political advisers, supporters and "Kitchen Cabinet" members for complicity. Developers and hopeful city contractors will have to cater only to the mayor, not all nine council members. Johnson's friends, groupies, consultants and advisers looking for future appointments will have plenty of jobs to consider – Chicago-style.

According to Johnson's strong-mayor proposal, the mayor would have the power to hire and fire the city manager, city treasurer, city clerk, city attorney and many layers of subordinate staff – up to 800 city employees.

Under this scenario, the City Council would be powerless to stop the removal of city employees.

The strong-mayor proposal would give the mayor veto power over council decisions.

The strong-mayor proposal would give the mayor the ability to introduce a budget that would automatically become law unless the City Council voids it in a specified period of time.

The lack of an ethics commission or term limits is troublesome as well. Claiming that voters can vote a bad mayor out of office is disingenuous, with the multiple layers of mayor- appointed positions and staff.

Johnson's strong-mayor proposal lacks key ingredients pertinent to a healthy, constitutional checks-and-balances mayoral system. Specific areas of concern include:

• The immediate transition time after the election is unrealistic and potentially dangerous. The successful strong-mayor cities that were researched took, at minimum, one year to transition.

• Other cities have found that an ethics committee was needed to monitor and review strong-mayor governments for areas of conflicts of interest with elected officials, appointees and lobbyists. These committees also investigate complaints regarding possible ethics violations and campaign financing abuses.

• Johnson's strong-mayor proposal allows for the mayor to appoint city charter officers (city attorney, city manager, city treasurer, city clerk) and department heads. The mayor will control who works for the city, and has hiring and firing power over most of the city staff. This is acceptable in private business, but an open and transparent government should not be run CEO-style, as it begs for pay-to-play practices.

• In City Attorney Eileen Teichert's analysis of Johnson's proposal, she concluded that the proposed measure creates an imbalance of power among the city's elected officials, lacks vital checks and balances, and "blurs the lines of authority and accountability" adopted by other strong-mayor cities. She is correct.

• Term limits should only be a last resort, if all other checks and balances are not in place. Term limits are at least one way to somewhat balance an all-powerful executive mayor.

Much of the criticism heaped on Johnson for his strong-mayor proposal has been that his proposal is all about him. Critics accused him of being too impatient to even learn how to be mayor, when he introduced the proposal before he'd even warmed his office chair. Johnson has made no secret of the fact that as a voting council member, minutiae is not where he envisions spending his time and talents. Johnson is less of a detail guy and more of a big-picture, rainmaker style of mayor – the exact opposite of former Mayor Heather Fargo, who was known for her administrative acumen.

Somewhere in the middle lies the answer for Sacramento. Business as usual is not acceptable or realistic. While Sacramento has grown up and out, it still seems to be run using a town-council, neighborhood-activist mentality. Sacramento has a difficult time attracting big businesses, and officials still complain about not having a major-league arena.

Sacramento sits on two undeveloped rivers and has two railyards that have remained blighted, polluted, vacant and undeveloped for decades. Many people believe that the current City Council wastes precious time on the little things, while progress on the big-picture issues and long-term planning continues to elude Sacramento.

Mayor Kevin Johnson is fighting the Sacramento City Council on when Sacramento residents will be able to vote for the Strong Mayor Proposal.

Before you believe that Michelle Obama has successfully reinvented herself into a softer, happier White-House soccer mom, Michelle Malkin reports that “with intervention from Michelle Obama, the Americorps inspector general was given the boot and replaced — for doing his job too well, it seems, and uncovering squandering of funds by favored contributors, educational institutions, and left-wing groups.”

Malkin reports that this Associated Press article only scratches the surface:

President Barack Obama plans to fire the inspector general who investigates AmeriCorps and other national service programs amid a controversy between the IG and Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who is an Obama supporter and former NBA basketball star.

This little-noticed story in Youth Today yesterday points to another example of Walpin blowing the whistle on fraud:

The inspector general (IG) of the Corporation for National and Community Service is being removed by President Barack Obama, a week after the IG questioned the eligibility of the largest and most expensive AmeriCorps program, and while the IG was contesting the “propriety” of a settlement made with a mayor for alleged misuse of AmeriCorps funds.

The “Mayor” referred to is Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, and big Obama supporter.

Byron York at the Examiner.com interviewed Walpin about the firing:

The White House’s decision to fire AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin came amid politically-charged tensions inside the Corporation for National and Community Service, the organization that runs AmeriCorps. Top executives at the Corporation, Walpin explained in an hour-long interview Saturday, were unhappy with his investigation into the misuse of AmeriCorps funds by Kevin Johnson, the former NBA star who is now mayor of Sacramento, California and a prominent supporter of President Obama. Walpin’s investigation also sparked conflict with the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento amid fears that the probe — which could have resulted in Johnson being barred from ever winning another federal grant — might stand in the way of the city receiving its part of billions of dollars in federal stimulus money. After weeks of standoff, Walpin, whose position as inspector general is supposed to be protected from influence by political appointees and the White House, was fired.

Walpin learned his fate Wednesday night. He was driving to an event in upstate New York when he received a call from Norman Eisen, the Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform. “He said, ‘Mr. Walpin, the president wants me to tell you that he really appreciates your service, but it’s time to move on,’” Walpin recalls. “Eisen said, ‘You can either resign, or I’ll tell you that we’ll have to terminate you.’”

What is going on? What is Sacramento’s Mayor caught up in?