District Elections Open the Lid on Pandora’s Box

In 1973, former City Atty. Edward Butler was chairman of a commission that reviewed the San Diego City Charter and decided the city needed to invest more power in the mayor’s office.

The voters disagreed, and the strong-mayor amendment was defeated. After 15 years, Butler is now poised for a second attempt at replacing the strong city manager system.

In the wake of last week’s narrow victory for an amendment to elect City Council members by district, Butler thinks the strong-mayor concept makes more sense than ever. As chairman of yet another charter review commission, he wrote to council members late last week telling them so.

The retired appeals court judge also announced that starting with its 5 p.m. meeting today at City Hall, the commission will begin reviewing the strong-mayor idea, the first step toward preparing a proposal for voters to consider.

It is illogical, he said, to give a mayor who is elected citywide only as much authority as council members elected by individual districts.

“The symmetry of the 1935 charter has now been destroyed,” Butler said. “District elections have dramatically altered the balance of power.”

Butler prefers a system whereby the mayor would no longer preside at council meetings but would have legislative veto power and authority over the city manager (the system that lost in 1973).

As if that isn’t controversial enough, Butler says the district election system also calls into question whether council members, now that they no longer have citywide responsibility, need budgets of $350,000 each and six to nine staffers. A part-time council may now be in order, he said.

Butler also found an overlooked snag in shifting to district elections. It means there will be fewer general elections when decisions could be rendered on referendums, initiatives and charter amendments.

Among other things, members of the slow-growth movement had wanted to have a measure on the 1989 ballot, when four council seats will be decided. Because only half the city’s voters will be going to the polls, a growth vote will not be possible without calling a costly special election, Butler noted.

“Life under district elections is going to be entirely different,” he said.

Sending Signals--Mixed and Decidedly Otherwise

Final signs of a long campaign:

No, the San Diego Symphony did not have Michael Dukakis in mind when it listed among its subscriber services Liberal Exchange Privileges.

And political gadfly Rose Lynne, whose contrary behavior has disrupted many a City Council meeting, is now wearing a button that says, “I Deserve Better Treatment.”

When’s Winner a Loser? Just Ask Both Winners

The San Diego Trial Lawyers Assn. has named Richard Huffman its Trial Judge of the Year. The 1,300-member group is composed mainly of civil-litigation attorneys, who represent people who sue other people in hopes of recovering money.

An interesting choice, Huffman.

As his final act as a trial judge on the Superior Court (before shifting to the state appeals court), Huffman reduced by $107 million a jury verdict in a case in which a Rancho Santa Fe couple allegedly were defrauded by a time-share resort exchange agency.

Huffman, who presided over the two-month trial, cut the award from $130.9 million to $23 million, the largest reduction ever ordered in a civil-litigation case in San Diego County.

“When I called him about the award, he said: ‘Who, me? Don’t you know what I did?’ ” said association official Louisa Porter. “We figure it took courage to reduce the award, and we admire judicial courage.”

There may be some interesting back-and-forth among the honored guests when the association bestows its awards at a banquet Dec. 1.

The Lawyer of the Year award is going to Brian Monaghan, who represented the Rancho Santa Fe couple in Huffman’s court and saw their judgment slashed 83%.