76% Have Not Heard of Charter Measure

Despite a year of public debate and an expensive campaign led by Mayor Richard Riordan, 76% of Los Angeles’ likely voters have not heard or read about Proposition 8, a ballot measure to create a panel that would overhaul the City Charter, according to a Los Angeles Times poll.

The measure on the ballot Tuesday that Riordan has backed with his money and political clout asks voters to create an elected commission to rewrite the 72-year-old charter.

Despite the widespread ignorance of the measure, Times Poll Director Susan Pinkus said it is expected to pass.

After reading the proposition, 48% of likely voters polled said they will support it, with 19% saying they are undecided. Thirty-three percent said they would vote against it.

Pinkus predicted that a portion of the undecided voters will support the measure because it won’t have any impact on the city’s pocketbook and “it seems like something very democratic.”

She also noted that Proposition 8 does not face an effectively organized opposition group.

It is common for voters to pay little attention to ballot measures until just before election day. Last year, polls showed that more than half of the city’s voters had never heard of Proposition 209 before they voted to support the measure ending government affirmative action programs.

“When dealing with initiatives, people don’t focus on it until they get close to the election,” Pinkus said.

The Times Poll contacted 1,103 adults in the city of Los Angeles, including 811 registered voters and 243 likely voters by telephone March 22 through March 27. The margin of sampling error for registered voters is plus or minus 3 percentage points; for likely voters it is 6 points.

The proposal to rewrite the massive and sometimes arcane City Charter was first offered by San Fernando Valley leaders and city officials as a alternative to last summer’s threat by Valley activists to secede from Los Angeles.

But since then, the effort has turned into one of the city’s most controversial political feuds, pitting Riordan against the City Council and employee unions in a dispute over how to overhaul the charter.

After the Valley secession threats, Councilman Mike Feuer teamed up with Valley business leader David Fleming to propose the creation of a council-appointed panel to rewrite the charter.

A new charter could be a vehicle for overhauling a city government that many residents feel is unresponsive to the needs of citizens, Feuer and Fleming said. Even Riordan endorsed the effort, saying “unlike secession, reform can unite Angelenos.”

Instead, the effort further deepened the rift between the council and the mayor.

Under the Feuer-Fleming plan, the appointed panel would have the power to put its reform proposals directly on the ballot. But when the City Council insisted that it retain the power to amend or reject any recommendations, Fleming broke ranks with Feuer. Instead, he teamed up with Riordan to launch a petition drive to create an elected citizens panel with the power to put reform proposals directly on the ballot.

Council members fired back, accusing Riordan of trying to create a reform panel that would increase the mayor’s authority. Riordan has said he wants the mayor’s office to have more power, but rejects charges that he is trying to achieve that goal through charter reform.

Thus began two parallel efforts to reform the charter.

The council created a 21-member appointed panel to overhaul the document, but retained the power to reject or modify any panel recommendations before putting them on the ballot.

Meanwhile, Riordan and Fleming led a petition drive that collected more than 300,000 signatures to put a measure on the ballot asking voters to create the elected reform panel.

Voters appear to support Riordan’s position. The Times poll found that 54% of registered voters said the City Charter should be rewritten by an elected panel of citizens compared to 19% who think the charter should be written by a panel appointed by city officials.

Proposition 8 faces no organized opposition but a group of critics, including Council President John Ferraro, former Mayor Tom Bradley and County Supervisor Gloria Molina, have signed a ballot argument that calls the measure “risky” and “undemocratic.”

Still, Proposition 8 has attracted 52 candidates for its proposed panel, ranging from a welder from the San Fernando Valley to a law professor who helped write a new constitution for Belarus.

Because most of the candidates are relatively unknown, endorsements by Riordan, several council members and unions are expected to play a big role in the election. Like other elected officials, the candidates have spent the last few weeks stumping at forums and public hearings and ringing doorbells to spread the word about their government reform ideas.

From the beginning, Riordan promised that the campaign for charter reform would be a grass-roots effort. But nearly all of the money raised for the campaign has come from Riordan and a handful of business executives with close ties to the mayor.

Riordan has by far been the top contributor, providing $575,000 to collect the signatures that put the measure on the ballot.

He has also been instrumental in amassing an additional $1.3 million or so in three interlocking committees, which support the proposition and a slate of Riordan-backed candidates, according to campaign statements.

Riordan has promised to raise $300,000 to fund the staff costs of the panel. He also vowed to find a nonprofit foundation to help fund the work of the commission.

So far, the campaign has spent $1.5 million, mostly on mailers and consultants. But Phill Wilson, a spokesman for Yes on Proposition 8, said the campaign will kick into higher gear this weekend with more mailers and new radio ads.

“We are working day and night with our original strategy of getting the word out,” he said.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

How the Poll Was Conducted

The Times Poll contacted 1,103 adults in the city of Los Angeles, including 811 registered voters and 243 likely voters, by telephone March 22-27. Telephone numbers were chosen from a list of all exchanges citywide. Random-digit dialing techniques were used so that listed and unlisted numbers could be contacted. The sample was weighted slightly to conform with census figures for sex, race, age, education, area of city and registration. The margin of sampling error for all adults and registered voters is plus or minus 3 percentage points and for likely voters it is 6; for certain subgroups the error margin may be somewhat higher. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish. Asian American residents were included in the survey’s sampling design in proportion to their population in the city, but were too small a group to analyze separately. Poll results can also be affected by other factors, such as question wording and the order in which questions are presented.