Two Mayoral Hopefuls Urge Term Limits

Less than a week after voters in Los Angeles and throughout the state showed their enthusiasm for the idea of term limits for political officeholders, mayoral candidates are showing a renewed eagerness to embrace the issue.

Mayoral contenders Richard Riordan, a Los Angeles lawyer and businessman, and City Councilman Michael Woo are sponsoring rival plans. Riordan and Woo are old political hands at City Hall, but by espousing term limits both hope to project images as reformers who want to make City Hall more accountable to citizens.

Citing the 51% margin of votes in the city cast Nov. 3 for congressional term limits, Woo said Monday he would try for the second time in three months to win council approval for a somewhat modified ballot measure that would restrict city officeholders to two terms.

But as Woo brings back a proposal similar to one that was defeated three months ago, some in City Hall are wondering if he is more interested in improving his mayoral chances rather than fashioning a term limits proposal with a serious chance for City Council approval.

Once again, Woo wants to combine term limits with a proposal to remove Civil Service protection for top managers in city government, a change that would give the new mayor a freer hand to run the City Hall bureaucracy.

“It’s all part of a broader critique of what is wrong with city government,” Woo said about his dual proposal. The way the system now works, he said, elected officials can blame the city’s problems on an unresponsive bureaucracy and claim that they have no power to change things because Civil Service protects the bureaucracy.

Woo said he will ask the council today to put the combined measure on the April ballot.

Despite the changes Woo has made in his proposed ballot measure, it is not clear whether opposition to it has softened since August, when the council voted it down 8 to 5.

One council member who supports the plan said that Woo may not have gone far enough in altering his proposal or worked hard enough to win support before bringing the measure to the council floor.

“I am not sure whether the way Woo has gone about it will garner sufficient votes,” said Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas. “The question I raise is if you don’t have support to accomplish it what’s the point?

“If he is risking defeat, and defeat ends up the reality, it does a disservice to the issue,” Ridley-Thomas said.

Riordan, whose measure does not go beyond advocating a limit of two terms, said that by combining term limits with Civil Service changes, Woo may have ensured that his plan fails.

“You could have the unions come out against you if you push for Civil Service changes,” Riordan said. “It could be a clever way to torpedo term limits.”

Vicky Rideout, Woo’s campaign manager, contended that while Woo’s opponents on the council are “interested in protecting their political careers, Michael’s interest is in overall government reform.”

Riordan was the first prospective mayoral candidate to come out for term limits for city officials, spending more than $200,000 of his own money to collect the 175,000 signatures needed by Dec. 28 to qualify his initiative for the April ballot.

Grace Harper, president of the Los Angeles Professional Managers Assn., the bargaining unit that represents City Hall managers, said that although she has not seen Woo’s latest plan, “as far as I know, the unit is not in favor of lifting Civil Service protection for its members.”

In an effort to ease opposition, Woo said he modified the proposal that was defeated by the council. Another candidate for mayor, Councilman Joel Wachs, unsuccessfully sought to get on the term limits bandwagon with a measure aimed at the November ballot that was virtually identical to Riordan’s.

Woo’s latest plan would reduce the number of City Hall jobs that would lose Civil Service protection from 500 to about 70. He said the 70 would include general managers and assistant general managers.

Woo has also adjusted his approach to term limits, now making it possible for several members of the council, those elected to even numbered council seats, to serve longer than they could under Riordan’s plan. Woo’s plan would let all of those members serve out the remainder of their terms and stand for election two more times.

Under Riordan’s plan, those members could only stand for election one more time.

The rest of the council would fare the same under both plans.