ORANGE COUNTY PERSPECTIVE : Election Overload

In March, many voters in Anaheim will have to decide on state Senate candidates, and all will have to decide important local ballot initiatives. The city has tried valiantly to do the sensible thing, which would be to combine the two elections on one day, March 19, set by Gov. Pete Wilson for a state primary to fill a vacancy created by the appointment of John Seymour to the U.S. Senate. That would have encouraged voter participation in both elections, minimized confusion, relieved even determined voters of having to come out twice in two weeks, and cut the estimated $100,000 cost of two elections.

None of those good reasons alone or together proved any match for bad timing, which, at the end of the week, killed a worthwhile effort. To have moved the city election back--once the governor earlier this month set the special election for the Senate seat--the Legislature would have had to pass emergency legislation. With deadline pressure closing in on the county registrar of voters this week to print ballots for the March 5 city election, there wasn’t time for a quick turnaround in Sacramento. So the effort was abandoned, but not for a lack of effort by the City Council, and especially City Atty. Jack L. White.

Anaheim voters now must trudge out on March 5 to decide these issues: the fate of a citizen-sponsored, mobile-home rent-control ordinance, whether the mayor’s race should be opened to any qualified resident and whether City Council members salaries could be doubled to $1,000 monthly, the maximum the state allows for a city of Anaheim’s size. Then they will have to catch their breaths and go on to the March 19 Senate primary.

The city may have lost a skirmish, but it has shown the way in a larger battle. For the future, the benefits of combining such special elections are so obvious as to inspire any municipality to try the same thing, provided time allows passage of emergency legislation. Extraordinary efforts to save money and make things easier are worth it.