Voters Moving to Give Council Power Over Commissions : Ballot measures: Charter Amendment 5, which Bradley mistakenly signed, is heading toward approval. Two tax-levying propositions appear on their way to defeat.

A controversial Los Angeles ballot measure that would allow the City Council to review decisions of city commissions appeared headed for approval Tuesday, while a $298.8-million bond measure to pay for an array of recreational and cultural improvements was being rejected by voters.

City Councilman Joel Wachs called support for Charter Amendment 5 “a major repudiation” of Mayor Tom Bradley, who strongly opposed the measure that would increase the council’s power over commissions appointed by the mayor, including those governing the harbor, airport, police and Department of Water and Power.

The boards manage those departments and now operate independently of the council.

City Council President John Ferraro said he does not believe passage of Charter Amendment 5 would cause a dramatic change in city government.

“We’d have a chance to look at (commission actions), but not necessarily take action,” Ferraro said. “We’re not obligated to do anything.”

Proposition 2, creating a graffiti removal and prevention tax that would add 10 cents to the cost of aerosol paint containers and 5 cents to the cost of wide-tipped markers, was losing as incomplete returns were counted.

Two less controversial charter amendments appeared headed for approval.

One of them, Charter Amendment 3, would create a legal mechanism to replace elected officials who become incapacitated.

The measure, prompted by the lingering illness of the late City Councilman Gilbert W. Lindsay, would call for an automatic hearing before a Superior Court judge if a council member, the mayor, controller or city attorney is incapacitated for 90 days.

The judge would determine whether there was “reasonable cause” to believe that the elected official would be unable to perform his or her duties for the remainder of the term.

The 9th District was left virtually without representation on the council for five months last year as Lindsay, who suffered a debilitating stroke, lay in a hospital bed and was unable to speak. Council members found that they had little authority under the charter to replace him.

Charter Amendment 4 would broaden the city’s anti-apartheid rules by extending them to cover independent departments, including the airport and harbor departments and the DWP. The anti-apartheid rules prohibit city contracts with companies that do business in South Africa.

The controversial Charter Amendment 5 was strongly opposed by Bradley, who intended to veto it. But the measure was placed on Tuesday’s ballot after the mayor mistakenly signed it.

Bradley has called it a “naked power grab” by the council that would seriously weaken the authority and autonomy of the commissions he appoints. Under the charter, about 35 commissions are appointed by the mayor to oversee and set policy for city departments.

Bradley vetoed a similar measure a year ago. The council revived it this year after a controversy over a $1.7-million retirement package approved for the outgoing director of the Community Redevelopment Agency by the Bradley-appointed board that oversees the CRA.

Passage of Charter Amendment 5 would reduce the clout of Bradley, who has been involved in an escalating power struggle with the City Council over issues stemming from the Rodney G. King beating.

In a recent decision, Superior Court Judge Ronald Sohigian ruled that the council held pre-eminent power over the Police Commission, which had tried to place Police Chief Daryl F. Gates on furlough pending an investigation into the police beating of King.

Charter Amendment 5 would permit the council to review commission decisions on a case-by-case basis, giving the council five days to request a review of any board action. The council would then have 21 days to reverse a commission action.

Proposition 1, which was heading toward defeat, would provide $298.8 million in parks and recreation improvements and would cost the average city homeowner an additional $13.20 a year in property taxes for 20 years.