Political Reform Hits Home, Too

Together, the citizens’ commission on governmental ethics chaired by Geoffrey Cowan, and the Los Angeles City Council, led by President John Ferraro and Councilman Michael Woo, have forged a landmark package of ethical and campaign finance reforms that can restore the city’s reputation as a national model of open, effective, equitable municipal government. But before that can occur, the people must approve a proposed charter amendment that will appear on the June ballot.

There will, in fact, be two proposals presented to the electorate. One should be rejected because it is an unnecessary attempt to extend the council’s authority over eight city departments, commissions and boards currently protected from such intervention. The other proposal, which would enact tough, enforceable new ethics statutes, an affordable system of public campaign financing and a sensible level of pay for elected city officials, deserves the vote of every thoughtful Angeleno.

Combining a pay raise with the reform package may cause problems for some voters. In fact, opponents of serious ethics reform and public financing are cynically hoping that a reflexive public resentment of pay increases for council members will doom the entire package. But an open-minded appraisal of the pay issue argues otherwise. In the 16 inflation-ravaged years since council pay increases were capped at 5% per year, the constant dollar value of the members’ $61,522 annual salary has declined by more than 30%. Today, there are more than 1,500 city employees who make more than council members. The lowest-paid manager of a city department receives $7,000 more per year than a council member.

Moreover, since the ethics package proposes to make the City Council America’s first legislative body to ban all outside earned income, gifts and honorariums, passage of the proposal without an increase in compensation would amount to an unfair and punitive cut in the council’s pay. Linking the council’s salary to the $94,344 paid to Superior Court judges--as has already been done with the County Board of Supervisors--simply recognizes that as a deliberative and administrative body discharging vital and complex responsibilities, the 15 council members are underpaid.

Democracy is a necessary but not sufficient condition for good government. One of the differences between a democratic system and all others is that it envisions an active role not only for those who govern, but also for those who are governed. The citizens’ commission and the council have done their job. Now the people must do theirs .