Bernson Misses Ballot Deadline for Tax Rebuttal : Initiatives: The councilman planned to detail his opposition in a voter pamphlet to a plan to pay for 1,000 police officers. He still can offer a shorter argument.

Los Angeles City Councilman Hal Bernson, traditionally an archenemy of taxes, has missed a deadline for submitting a ballot argument against an upcoming tax initiative.

Due to foul-ups in Bernson’s office, the city’s anti-tax forces may have lost a golden opportunity to speak out against the proposed tax increase plan on the April 20 ballot.

The problem occurred when Bernson’s office failed to meet a 5 p.m. Monday deadline for submitting written arguments against the plan to raise property taxes to pay for 1,000 more police officers.

“We goofed,” said Greig Smith, Bernson’s chief deputy. “But the city clerk’s office didn’t really warn us that we were nearing the deadline, either.” A change of office assignments, a staffer’s illness and finally a game of phone tag accounted for the mix-up, Smith said.

Unless there’s a plot twist, Bernson’s error means tax opponents won’t be able to publish a 300-word argument in information pamphlets mailed before the election to the city’s 1.9 million registered voters. Political strategists view the pamphlets as a key way to reach the voters, particularly with complex ballot measures that don’t generally have large campaign budgets.

Bernson still has until 5 p.m. Thursday to submit a formal rebuttal to the pro-tax arguments. But it won’t be the same. Rebuttals must be under 150 words.

“It’s very critical to us getting our message out to have our arguments in the voter guide,” Smith said. “We’ll be at an unfair disadvantage unless we get on the ballot with all our arguments.”

Patricia Letcher, chief legislative assistant in the city clerk’s office, broke the bad news to Bernson about the missed deadline Tuesday. “I told him we could not accept his arguments,” Letcher said. The city clerk handles election matters.

Bernson, who represents a fiscally conservative San Fernando Valley district, had been named by council President John Ferraro to write the anti-tax measure argument. Bernson drew the writing task because of his belief that City Hall belt-tightening, not new taxes, is all that’s needed to hire more officers.

In fact, Bernson wrote the ballot argument against Proposition N, the police tax measure that fell only a few points shy of the two-thirds voter margin needed to win last November. The April 20 measure is identical to the failed November initiative.

Bernson’s antipathy to higher taxes and his support of the police are well-known. He recently proposed amending the City Charter to give the Police Department the first slice of the city’s budget pie each year until it got enough money to pay for 10,000 officers.

But Bernson may still have a trick or two up his sleeve to fight the tax. Bernson--along with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn.--is planning to sue to overturn the city clerk’s decision, even though it was upheld this week by the city attorney’s office.

“We don’t see any public purpose served by denying us the right to be on the ballot,” Smith said. “We had it written. It was on my desk. We just missed the deadline.”