Prop. 5: A Mistake From Start to Finish

Proposition 5 on the June 4 ballot is a mistake--in more ways than one.

This measure would give the City Council the opportunity to review actions taken by commissions and boards. Recent events demonstrate the council has more than enough opportunity to meddle right now. By giving the council even more authority, Proposition 5 would reduce the mayor’s political clout. Voters don’t have to be fans of Mayor Tom Bradley to see that the passage of this measure would further decimate the influence of the executive branch. The charter change would have the long-term effect of undermining the clout not only of Bradley, but of all future mayors.

It all started when a mix-up in Bradley’s office caused the mayor to accidently sign this measure, thereby placing it on the ballot. When he realized his mistake, Bradley immediately sought to undo it. But Superior Court Judge Ronald Sohigian--the same judge who later ruled that the council held preeminent power over the city’s Police Commission--said that Bradley could not rescind his signature. Thus Proposition 5 remains on the ballot.

Proposition 5 would give the council authority on an issue-by-issue basis to review commission actions. The council would have five days to request a review of any action and 21 days to reverse it.

The decisions of many commissions already are subject to final council approval. This measure primarily would affect the harbor, airport and Department of Water and Power boards, which now manage and operate independently of the council. The boards oversee multimillion-dollar budgets and vote on major contracts; there is good reason to keep the process insulated from the council’s second-guessing micro-management. The council already has the power to reject any mayoral appointee to any commission. The council claims that Proposition 5 could guard against a repeat of the Community Redevelopment Agency’s $1.5-million buyout of its executive director, which the council was powerless to rescind. But the CRA is state-chartered, so it’s not clear that a City Charter amendment would cure that ill.

And what of the city Ethics Commission, set up by charter to be independent? If Proposition 5 applies to all commissions, might not this measure place the Ethics Commission under the thumb of the very politicians it’s supposed to be watching?

The charter needs comprehensive reform, not piecemeal reform that could have unintended and disastrous consequences. Voters should not compound the mistake that placed this measure on the ballot in the first place. Vote no on Proposition 5.