Council Reneges, Won’t Put Panel’s Proposals to Vote

Reneging on a promise it made more than 14 months ago, the San Diego City Council on Monday refused to place a package of 13 recommendations from its appointed Charter Review Commission before the city’s voters.

The 5-3 vote drew a sharp reaction from Ed Butler, the retired state Appeal Court justice who served as chairman of the commission.

“They are apparently people without honor,” a visibly angered Butler said in an interview after the meeting. “To an eighth-grade civics class, I would have difficulty explaining that they voted how they did when we undertook a year’s effort based on their commitment.”

One of the commission’s major contentions had been that, in the era of district-only council elections, the mayor of San Diego should be granted veto power over council actions. Butler said that Monday’s decision boiled down to council members’ desire to protect their “turf” from the mayor.

Mayoral Veto Proposal ‘Is DOA’

In a separate vote, the council agreed to take up all 13 recommendations individually later this summer, but Charter Review Commission members held out little hope that the mayoral veto would be placed on the ballot after that review.

“I don’t think what we suggested had any hope of passage” by the council, said Scott Harvey, a commission member. “It is DOA.”

On April 4, 1988, the council voted to place all the commission’s recommendations on the ballot without alteration. That 7-1 vote, with Councilman Bob Filner dissenting and Councilman Bruce Henderson absent, came as the council appointed the commission and established the ground rules upon which the commission relied, Butler said.

‘Neglected Their Commitment to Us’

“They simply neglected their commitment to us,” Butler said. “It’s incredible. I can see why people don’t turn out to vote.”

The vote was carried by the same coalition of moderate to conservative Republicans who have occasionally joined together on politically sensitive issues in the past.

Ever since they approved commission proposals that appeared on last November’s ballot, some of the five--Ron Roberts, Gloria McColl, Ed Struiksma, Bruce Henderson and Judy McCarty--have warned that they might not abide by the April 4 promise again.

Struiksma, who was not present for Monday’s debate on the commission’s recommendations, appeared in the council chamber just in time to cast the crucial fifth vote.

Mayor Maureen O’Connor and Councilmen Wes Pratt and Bob Filner favored placing the recommendations on the ballot. Ironically, Filner was the only council member who last year favored reserving the power not to place the recommendations directly on the ballot.

Councilwoman Abbe Wolfsheimer, who recently underwent surgery, was absent.

The commission’s recommendations came to the council as Wolfsheimer, McColl, Struiksma and McCarty are gearing up for reelection campaigns in the city’s first district-only elections. The four will run in Sept. 19 primaries within their own districts. They then face Nov. 7 runoffs, again within their own districts, if no candidate receives a majority.

Previously, council members ran in primaries within their own districts but were elected citywide.

Safer to Delay Consideration

With McColl and Struiksma facing the possibility of tough campaigns, Harvey suggested that it was safer for them to delay consideration of some of the commission’s more controversial suggestions rather than take a position before the election. In addition to mayoral veto, the commission has suggested expanding the number of council districts from eight to 10, and establishing a commission to conduct the redistricting of council boundaries that must take place next year.

“The safer thing was to put it off until after district elections,” Harvey said. “It was safer to maintain the status quo.”

In a separate vote, the council asked City Manager John Lockwood to prepare a “request for proposals” from consultants who are interested in working on the redistricting. However, the council rejected Filner’s proposal that it immediately place on the ballot a citizen’s initiative calling for an independent commission to redraw council boundaries.

In rejecting them, the council members listed a variety of concerns about the recommendations. McColl, who at an April committee meeting said she favored a “strong-mayor form of government,” pressed for the commission to conduct a more extensive review of government structure in other cities, despite assurances that the commission had done just that.

Opposed Giving Mayor Veto

McCarty specifically opposed giving the mayor a veto without taking her off the council, a structure that she said would give the mayor “two votes.” O’Connor and future mayors would be able to vote on an issue, then exercise a veto if they did not agree with the council decision, McCarty said, leaving the council only the option of attempting to override the mayor.

Henderson said he is satisfied with the current council-manager form of government, claiming that the commission had not proven the need to alter the charter.

“As a defender of the charter,” Henderson said as he held the document, “it’s with great pride that I’m prepared to vote ‘no.’ ”