Assembly Rejects Beach Advertising Measure

In a setback for Los Angeles County, the Assembly on Thursday soundly rejected a measure to allow the marketing of swimwear, drinks or suntan lotion bearing an official seal of county lifeguards.

Assemblyman Richard E. Floyd (D-Carson) assailed the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors for sponsoring the measure and seeking to “rip off our beaches.”

County officials voiced surprise over the defeat on--on a lopsided 47-15 vote--saying they had pushed the measure to offset an estimated $11-million-a-year deficit for operating county beaches.

State Sen. Robert Beverly (R-Manhattan Beach), who is carrying the legislation on behalf of the county, acknowledged he was caught off guard by the Assembly’s action, which he described as “a vote against the county, at least the board.”

Beverly expressed optimism about reviving the proposal next week. It had been approved 28-2 in the Senate.

The legislation spells out the county’s authority to endorse products. It has been regarded as a way to expand existing county programs, including the use of trash cans to advertise suntan lotion on beaches and advertising on beachside telephone booths.

But a number of lawmakers voiced objections. For example, Assemblyman Phil Wyman (R-Tehachapi) said it would be inappropriate for the county to raise money this way and expressed concern about “the private use of a public logo.”

Chris Klinger, deputy director of county beaches and harbors, estimated the new program would bring in between $1 million and $4 million annually from firms using the Los Angeles County name in advertising their products. Under the measure, other counties could also gain the authority to establish similar marketing programs.

Klinger said Los Angeles County is currently engaged in “delicate negotiations” with a swimwear manufacturer in anticipation that the Beverly bill would become law. But, he said, “I didn’t think we’d run into this kind of buzz saw.”