Charter Panel Hopefuls Favor Localizing Power

A majority of the 52 candidates contending for the 15 seats on a panel that could rewrite Los Angeles’ 72-year-old City Charter want to create up to 99 neighborhood councils with the authority to decide local planning and public safety issues, according to a survey by The Times.

About half of the hopefuls also say the effort to overhaul the complex, sometimes incomprehensible 680-page document that serves as the city’s constitution should include a rethinking of the roles and responsibilities of the City Council and the mayor, with many favoring an increase in the mayor’s authority. A handful of the 52 candidates also suggest expanding the 15-member City Council to increase the ratio of elected officials to residents.

Both Mayor Richard Riordan and his top challenger, state Sen. Tom Hayden (D-Los Angeles), support the concept of neighborhood councils, but they disagree on how much decision-making authority the panels should get. Riordan frequently has expressed his frustration with the city’s weak mayoral system. Hayden has endorsed council expansion, so long as the body’s overall budget remains the same.

Proposition 8--an initiative measure on the April 8 ballot that Riordan has strongly backed with his money and political clout--asks voters not only to approve charter reform in concept, but also to elect 15 people to undertake the job.

If voters approve the measure, as expected, the panel will work without pay for up to two years to overhaul the charter. But in the end, the panel’s reform suggestions must be approved by voters.

A central theme that most candidates expressed in response to The Times survey is the need to create a city government that better addresses complaints that City Hall doesn’t listen or care about the problems of neighborhood residents. Many candidates note that the charter reform movement was sparked by threats last summer of a San Fernando Valley secession.

“You have to create a sense of community or you will have secession movement that continues to roll and roll and roll,” said Walter Prince, a candidate in the northwest San Fernando Valley who has been endorsed by two neighborhood groups.

By far, the most popular idea among the candidates is the proposal to create neighborhood councils that would give residents direct decision-making authority over local issues.

The candidates have suggested between 35 and 99 neighborhood councils--either one for every city planning district or one for every neighborhood in the city, as defined by the post office.

Erwin Chemerinsky, a reform candidate and USC law professor who helped write the constitution for Belarus, a former Soviet republic, suggested one neighborhood council for each of the 15 council districts.

“The problem with a city as geographically vast as Los Angeles is we have one government entity making decisions over everyone and that tends to leave some people out of the process,” he said.

With neighborhood councils, “you would be taking something that is handled by the city bureaucracy and transferring it to the neighborhood.”

Another popular proposal among candidates is to reexamine the responsibilities of the City Council and the mayor, and reapportion the power they wield.

The city government currently operates under a so-called weak mayor/strong council system. But many candidates have echoed Riordan’s suggestion to increase the mayor’s authority to act as the executive officer of the city, with the power to hire and fire department heads. Such a change, they argue, would make it easier to hold the mayor accountable.

Under such a scenario, the council would be relegated to a legislative role, banned from intervening in the internal operations of the city departments.

At a recent candidate’s forum, Sal Grammatico, a former real estate agent who is running for the reform post in the Venice area, called the council members “15 dictators.”

“The council should give up some of its powers,” he said.

About a quarter of the candidates support expanding the size of the council to increase the ratio of citizens to city representatives. Each of the 15 council members represents about 230,000 residents, which is roughly the population of Pasadena and Burbank put together.

By increasing the number of council members and reducing the size of each district, some candidates argue that council members would need to raise less money at election time, thus reducing the influence of special interest contributors.

“Council districts are too big for any one council member to manage effectively, and they have too many constituents to be able to stay in touch,” Bennett Kayser, a teacher and charter candidate in the Hollywood area, said.

The resumes and statements provided by the candidates also provide a window into the personalities and experience of the people who are vying for the reform panel posts.

On paper, the 52 candidates appear to represent the city’s diverse population. They include a welder, a police officer, a teacher and a doctor. Most of the candidates have experience working with government agencies. At least eight are lawyers by training. Nine hopefuls have worked or currently work for a government agency. Eleven were once candidates for a city or state political office.

Most candidates insisted they do not see the post as a stepping stone for higher office, but several candidates sound like political pros on the campaign trail.

At a recent forum, one candidate promised to reduce business taxes and make the city’s trash collection system more efficient. Others have promised to use charter reform to protect environmentally sensitive wetlands.

Jeff Brain, a Sherman Oaks businessman who unsuccessfully ran for a council seat two years ago, gave up another shot at the post this year to seek a seat on the reform panel. But he says he has no interest in seeking higher office.

“I see this as a greater opportunity to do what I want to do,” he said.

Because of the potentially profound impact of charter reform, city officials, labor unions and others are trying to influence the outcome by endorsing and funding their preferred slates of candidates.

Riordan has raised $556,500 to support a slate of 12 candidates, while labor unions and homeowner groups have vowed to raise thousands of dollars for their slates to balance Riordan’s influence.

A Common Cause-launched coalition is trying to carve out a niche for itself as the citizens’ alternative to the better-financed slates backed by the mayor and municipal labor unions. Dubbed the Neighborhood Cause Coalition, the group announced its own slate of 13 candidates during a news conference outside City Hall last week.

The City Council has long opposed Riordan’s reform effort, calling it an attempt to increase the mayor’s authority. Facing Riordan’s threat to support the charter reform effort, the council created a competing, 21-member appointed reform panel that must submit its reform measures to the council, which can revise, reject or put the changes directly before voters without a change.

Still, most council members believe voters will vote on April 8 to create the elected panel. Therefore, council members are trying to influence the outcome by backing their own candidates.

Most of the reform panel candidates, however, insist that if elected they will act independently of the mayor, the council, the labor unions and other influences.

“I won’t be anybody’s patsy on this commission whether it’s Mayor Riordan or anyone else who has endorsed me,” said Lorrie Jean, a Riordan-endorsed candidate and executive director of the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center.

Times staff writer Jean Merl contributed to this story.