When he entered the race for governor of California, San José Mayor Matt Mahan he pretended to be a pragmatic Democrat who will prioritize improving the quality of life of residents and the efficiency of government.
He unveiled a key part of that promise on Tuesday with a comprehensive plan to reform state government, including combining pay raises for elected officials and other top leaders on key issues, and vowed not to approve any tax increases until the state proves “we can deliver better results with the dollars we already have.”
Mahan also introduced a pitiful punishment for federal spending — which, as he often points out on the campaign trail, has increased by nearly 75% over the past six years. In 2020, amid the COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying economic uncertainty, California lawmakers approved a $202 billion state budget. Gov. Gavin Newsom latest spending proposal is about $349 billion.
“We’ve fallen into this lazy, inflexible mentality of always going back to the voters and telling them that the only solution to every problem is a tax increase or a new bond or a new law from Sacramento,” Mahan said in an interview. “We need to go back and take a good look at how we spend money and increase the level of transparency and accountability in government.”
His eight-page plan includes measures to measure and track accountability, some of which are taken from policies in other states. Including recruitment changes, following audit recommendations and overhauling the state’s digital infrastructure and its procurement process — services Mahan described as “bad and difficult.”
He also proposed the “California Performance Review,” inspired by a similar effort in Texas throughout the 1990s, it would review federal agencies and solicit input from employees to eliminate waste and inefficiency.
But near the top of the list is a proposal to tie pay raises for state officials including the governor, lawmakers and thousands of elected officials to “measurable results” in areas such as reducing homelessness and unemployment.
“People in the real world don’t get raises if they don’t do a good job,” Mahan said, “and I think the same should be true of politicians and senior executives who give budgets, lead projects, make big decisions on behalf of the people of California.”
Although the estimates will be created with input from the state Legislature, Mahan gave one example: reducing the homelessness rate by 5% to 10% within one year, something he said he has accomplished three years in a row in San José.
It’s a solution one might expect from a former entrepreneur and mayor of a city in the heart of Silicon Valley. Mahan made a similar proposal at the local level last year, but it was rejected by the City Council.
“Tying pay to performance is nothing short of reforming government. It’s an outdated private sector model,” said former state Sen. Steve Glazer (D-Orinda), a Mahan supporter who sponsored several bills aimed at increasing government transparency.
Dozens of tech giants are backing Mahan in the gubernatorial race and have collectively donated millions to his campaign, as well as two independent spending committees supporting him.
That raised concerns among some voters, and criticism from some of Mahan’s opponents, that he would be beholden to their interests and veto future legislation for tech or intelligence companies.
Mahan wants to allay those concerns, saying he believes AI and social media should be regulated. Regarding his plan to overhaul information technology systems and infrastructure, he said “whenever we spend public dollars, we must conduct open, transparent and competitive procurement processes that ensure the best value for taxpayers.”
Although Mahan did not specify how he would link the state’s results to the increase, state lawmakers did especially his campaign and they are less likely to board. The change would likely require voter approval.
Currently, annual raises for elected officials are determined by a citizen’s commission that was added to the California Constitution in 1990. Changing the way that panel works or putting limits on when it can approve nominations would require a constitutional amendment, which would require voter turnout.
But Mahan argued that it would be one of the quickest ways to fix a system that he says serves special interests by paying for working people.
“I’m not kidding that this will be easy, but I think it’s a reformation of incentive programs,” he said. “We have to be as accountable to the people as possible.”
