Board Gets Even : Supervisors Vote Restrictions on Gadfly Harangues

A handful of gadflies, capitalizing on a change in state law that took effect this year, has waited countless hours each week to lecture the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on topics ranging from the dangers of hypoglycemia to the perils of homosexuality and the pitfalls of public works projects.

One of these longtime board critics repeatedly has called for ailing Supervisor Kenneth Hahn’s resignation, or at the very least, a county grand jury inquiry into Hahn’s fitness to continue in office. This same gadfly has over the years continually blasted the credibility of county grand jury investigations.

All of these pearls of wisdom, delivered week in and week out at the end of sometimes lengthy board meetings, have tested the patience of the supervisors. Supervisor Pete Schabarum blew up at one gadfly, calling him a “peanut brain.”

Other board critics from time to time have been physically ejected from meetings or barely escaped arrest.

On Tuesday, the board got even.

Interpreting a 9-month-old amendment to the Ralph M. Brown Act, the state’s open meeting law, the board voted 3 to 1--ailing Supervisor Hahn was absent--to limit the number of times an individual may address the supervisors on any topic the individual chooses. Instead of once a week, a person will now be able to testify before the board only once every 90 days on any topic. And, the supervisors decided, no more than five people may address them on non-agenda items in any single meeting.

Individuals, including gadflies, may still address the board on individual agenda items, but only on one item per meeting.

The gadflies were not thrilled.

“What I am asking you is to kill this thing before it becomes pregnant,” said Howard Watts, a perennial candidate for elected office who has appeared numerous times before the Los Angeles City Council, Board of Education, the Board of Supervisors and other agencies. “We don’t want to have to go to a court of law to get a corrective action. . . .”

The new state law, requiring all local government agencies to set aside time for “public comment” on any topic, went into effect Jan. 1. An angry Schabarum repeatedly has said that if the new law is such a great idea, state legislators ought to subject themselves to its provisions.

Supervisor Mike Antonovich, who pushed for setting the limit at 30 days, voted against the 90 day limit, saying, “part of this (listening to the gadflies) is the price to pay for democracy.”

County Counsel DeWitt W. Clinton defended the new rule’s legality, saying the 90-day limit will give more people a chance to comment.

“It’s my opinion that the intent of the Brown Act . . . was to provide the opportunity to a reasonable section of the public to . . . give their opinion and testimony,” Clinton said. “When you have a county of this size, . . . (there) has to be a fairly tight restriction on the amount of time available for this type of public comment.”

Supervisor Deane Dana put it a little more bluntly.

“These people come and talk about anything,” Dana said. “There really are no new subjects and no substance.”

The gadflies voiced astonishment at the board’s audacity, declaring the new rule illegal.

“A democracy means that you got to listen to people that you object to,” said Leonard Shapiro. “Maybe everybody here doesn’t like to hear me talk, but according to a democratic attitude, you’ve got to listen.”