THE SUPERVISORS: : A Day in the Life . . . : THE ASSESSOR DEBATE : Appointed or Elected? Issue Going to Voters

Following a lengthy debate punctuated by one supervisor’s charge that outgoing Assessor Alexander Pope “is not a good manager,” the county Board of Supervisors agreed Tuesday to let voters decide on June 3 whether Pope’s successor should be appointed or elected.

The vote followed warnings from Supervisors Ed Edelman and Kenneth Hahn that making the controversial position appointive could strip taxpayers of key representation. Assessors, whose evaluations of property determine tax amounts, are elected to office in all 58 California counties.

“The power to tax is the power to destroy,” said Hahn, arguing that assessors should remain elective. “You’re tampering with democracy here . . . the fundamental processes of government.” Hahn vowed to write the ballot argument against the measure.

But Supervisor Deane Dana, the key proponent of the measure, said the office of assessor has “greatly increased in complexity” in recent years and needs someone skilled in data processing and good management.

Dana also argued that Los Angeles County should have a “unified voice in Sacramento.” The board’s conservative majority and Pope have often been at odds over key fiscal matters. Pope, as an elected official, has lobbied for changes in tax laws that could mean fewer tax dollars for the county at a time when supervisors have lobbied Sacramento for more funding.

“We are on different frequencies,” Dana said, referring to the recurrent conflict between Pope and the board majority, “and it makes for a very confused picture.”

Pope, who in a bitter campaign unsuccessfully opposed Dana’s 1984 reelection bid, bristled at Dana’s comments. Pope argued that while the Charter does not require him to have a data-processing background, neither were there comparable requirements for the five supervisors.

The assessor also charged that Dana had distorted Pope’s original suggestion, made two years ago, that the job of assessor be appointed. Pope said he would favor an assessor’s appointment only if it were linked with the expansion of the Board of Supervisors to reflect the growing county population.

Commenting later on the board decision, Pope called it a “useless exercise.” The ballot measure, he said, “will be rejected by the voters and therefore it’s a waste of taxpayers’ money.”

Supervisor Pete Schabarum charged Pope with politicizing the issue.

“Mr. Pope is not a good manager,” Schabarum said. He criticized Pope for not actively pursuing reassessments of certain properties so that more taxes could be collected at an earlier date.

Pope, offered a chance to rebut Schabarum by fellow Democrat Hahn, declined.

If the measure passes on June 3, there will be only seven elected county officials remaining: the five supervisors and the two remaining countywide officeholders, the district attorney and the sheriff.

Pope is expected to announce next week that he will not seek reelection to the job he has held since 1978 and will instead run for a vacant seat on the state Board of Equalization. The county counsel has ruled that if the Charter amendment passes, it will negate the June election to fill the vacancy created by Pope’s departure.

An announced candidate for assessor, former Democratic Assemblyman Jim Keysor, urged the board to reject the ballot measure.

“If this initiative goes through,” Keysor said, “the thrust of it would be to disenfranchise 8 million people.”

Also placed on the June 3 ballot was a proposed Charter amendment that could mean up to 1,500 county managers being removed from the Civil Service system. The proposal originally drafted by Chief Administrative Officer James C. Hankla called for possible removal of only 1% of the county’s 74,000-employee work force, but Supervisor Mike Antonovich insisted that the number be doubled.

Hahn also attacked this proposal. Repeating past criticism of the idea, he said passage of the measure would lead to a spoils system and patronage.

Schabarum, arguing in support of the proposed Charter amendment, said that the Civil Service system had “outlived its usefulness” in certain areas and that its protection “breeds mediocrity.”

Although the ballot language will not include any details, passage of the Charter amendment would lead to the creation of a management service plan in which participants would be eligible for promotions and bonuses based on merit. Hankla promised that details of the merit plan will be made known well before election day.