City’s Contracting Ban Denounced as Reelection Ploy : Government: Anaheim council minority says action was taken to curry favor with labor unions. It could keep the city from realizing cost savings.

A new ban on further contracts with private industry for city services was a blatant attempt by some council members to win support from Anaheim’s labor unions for their reelection campaigns, opponents charged Wednesday.

“It’s as clear as the handwriting on the wall,” Councilman Irv Pickler said of Tuesday’s split council decision. “How we can do this is beyond me.”

The vote, supported by Mayor Fred Hunter, Councilmen William D. Ehrle and Bob D. Simpson, was taken on the eve of a candidates’ forum sponsored by the Anaheim Municipal Employees Assn. A similar event has been scheduled by the Anaheim Police Officers Assn. for this weekend.

Both Hunter and Ehrle are seeking reelection, and the city’s union workers have been key foot soldiers in their past campaigns.

“It’s clear to me that my colleagues have sold their souls to the labor unions,” said Councilman Tom Daly, who sided with Pickler and is challenging Hunter for mayor in the November general election. “It was 100% political. The employee unions wrote the script and Mr. Hunter read every word of it. It’s one of the worst moments in Anaheim history.”

Hunter, who initiated the action, could not be reached for comment Wednesday, but Ehrle said his vote was meant to guard against further cuts in the city’s work force.

“I don’t want our people out of work in a recessionary time,” the councilman said. “In the past couple of years, we have already reduced our work force by 200 or 300 people. . . . If it also mended fences with the union, then that’s fine too.”

Both Pickler and Daly said the vote prohibits the city manager from pursuing possible cost-saving measures through outside contractors during the down economy. The decision is especially restrictive, both said, since the city stands to lose up to $11 million in additional revenue that the state could claim to help balance its own budget deficit.

The vote also went against a recommendation from City Manager James D. Ruth, who warned Tuesday that the action would strip him of a valuable tool to “look at efficiency of costs” as the state nears a decision on its own budget.

Last year, Ehrle drew the ire of municipal labor unions when he declined to support a citywide utility tax. The tax was promoted as a way to boost lagging city revenue and prevent further cuts in services and positions.

Some officials said Hunter’s standing with the unions was in need of a boost as well, since the down economy during the last two years had forced a citywide work force reduction from 2,200 positions to about 1,900 today.

Ehrle conceded that labor endorsements have meant much to his past campaigns. In previous elections, the councilman said, he depended on members of the Municipal Employees Assn. to walk precincts and distribute literature in support of his candidacy.

“The more endorsements you get, the stronger the statement it makes to the voting public,” he said.

Ruth could not be reached for comment Wednesday and it was not immediately known how much the city would stand to lose in potential cost savings as a result of the decision. But Daly estimated that the figures could climb well into the millions with Ruth prohibited from seeking competitive service agreements with outside firms.

City contracts with private firms now total about $126 million, or about 23% of the city’s budget.

Though visibly delighted with the council’s decision, labor officials were downplaying their influence.

“It doesn’t mean that the unions rule the city,” said Sharon Ericson, president of the 800-member city employees’ union. “They could come back next week and change their minds.”