Renumbering Plan Would Keep Roberti in Senate Seat : Politics: The Democrat wants to change Alan Robbins’ old 20th District to an odd number so that it would elect a senator--him--this year to serve a full four-year term ending in 1996.

The political life expectancy of Democratic state Senate Leader David A. Roberti of Los Angeles would be doubled--from two years to four--under a plan for renumbering San Fernando Valley and Westside legislative districts submitted Monday to the state Supreme Court by the Senate’s lawyer.

Roberti, a legislator since 1966 and Senate president pro tem since 1980, is one of the incumbent senators most adversely affected by a plan for new political districts drawn by three retired judges at the high court’s direction.

Under the proposal by the so-called “special masters,” Roberti’s present district--which includes parts of Burbank, West Los Angeles and Hollywood--would be split up among several new districts.

To remain in the Senate, he would have to run against Republican Sen. Newton R. Russell of Glendale or Democrat Herschel Rosenthal of Los Angeles, or seek the remainder of the term of former Sen. Alan Robbins (D-Van Nuys), who resigned after admitting to corruption charges.

But Roberti’s lawyers have told him that if he were elected in a special election April 7 to complete Robbins’ unexpired term, he could serve only until the end of that term in 1994, not beyond. The remainder of Robbins’ term would be considered Roberti’s second and final term under provisions of Proposition 140, the term limits measure adopted by voters in 1990.

Enter the numbers game, which is based solely on this quirk of Senate election law: Districts with odd numbers are up for election this year; even-numbered districts will have elections in 1994.

Robbins’ old district is even-numbered--the 20th--and not scheduled for a regular election for another two years. Roberti proposes to change the district to an odd number so that it would elect a senator this year to serve a full four-year term ending in 1996.

As it happens, Roberti’s problem dovetails nicely with a situation involving Rosenthal, the neighboring senator. Rosenthal now represents the 22nd District--his term expires in 1994--but is planning to run this year in the new 23rd District, which includes much of the same territory.

If Rosenthal runs and wins in the 23rd, he will resign his old 22nd District position--leaving two years of that term remaining, which would by filled in a special election. The Senate’s lawyer, Allan Browne, said the special election would cost the taxpayers $500,000 to $750,000.

But if the 23rd district became the 20th--and the 20th became the 23rd--Rosenthal could serve in his present seat until 1994 and then run for another, four-year term in the new 20th District.

Browne argued that if the two districts switch labels, the taxpayers would save a large sum of money, and Roberti and Rosenthal would get the chance to serve in the Senate the maximum number of years allowed them under Proposition 140.

Browne conceded that the plan he advocates would violate a provision of the state Constitution requiring districts to be numbered 1 through 40 in sequence from north to south. But he said that rule had been bent before and suggested that even the special masters’ plan violated it elsewhere in the state.

Several justices asked questions about the proposal but none indicated whether they were likely to accept it.

Roberti’s maneuver drew criticism from one declared and one potential candidate in the April 7 special election for the seat formerly held by Robbins.

Sherman Oaks lawyer Fred N. Gaines, who has already filed papers to run, said the renumbering effort was an attempt by Roberti to take over the 20th District seat “without having to run or get elected in the San Fernando Valley.”

“This would deny the people of the Valley the chance to vote for their state senator,” said Gaines, who specializes in land-use law. “They’d just get hit with an incumbent whether they wanted to or not.”

Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar), who has said he is considering running for the seat, called Roberti’s effort a move to “get together with a couple of friends and divide up the world.”

Both Gaines and Katz said they think that the Supreme Court will ultimately reject Roberti’s request because the new proposed districts were drawn by the special masters without regard for the political well-being of incumbents.

“If the courts are going to bend over backwards, as they have said, to be nonpolitical and nonpartisan . . . I can’t imagine why they’d suddenly reshuffle the deck to benefit an incumbent,” Katz said.

Assemblyman Terry B. Friedman (D-Los Angeles), who has also expressed interest in running for Robbins’ old seat, could not be reached for comment.