Key Moment in Charter Effort

Charter reform in Los Angeles is proving to be not for the faint of heart. What began two years ago as an important exercise but one largely for policy wonks has become a dramatic game of high-stakes politics.

After months of to and fro, the elected charter commission, one of two working on a new charter, has taken big steps toward putting some flesh on its proposals. The second commission, appointed by the City Council, has worked in rough parallel with the elected panel and next month promises to unveil its first complete draft of a new charter.

So is Los Angeles on the verge of its first meaningful charter reform in decades or on the verge of more confusion and posturing from the 36 members of the two commissions trying to rewrite the 73-year-old charter? The elected commission’s next meeting, on Monday, should provide a strong clue to the direction this effort is headed. That’s when it will decide when its version will go to the voters. June 1999 is the wise choice.

This seemingly minor decision has become a turning point for both panels as they wrap up their work. While the two commissions see eye to eye on many provisions, they have veered apart on some key issues. The jockeying over a ballot date has become symbolic of a bigger debate between them: Should Angelenos have an up-or-down vote on a unified document--one that represents as much of a consensus as possible--or should each group go it alone, trumpeting its charter not just as better than the current 700-page clunker but superior to that of the other commission? In the latter direction lies probable defeat, and with it the death of hope for a more responsive city government.

The appointed panel agreed months ago on a June target date for completion. While the elected group has not formally named a date--Monday’s vote will be the first on this question--the panel’s schedule made June seem most sensible. But in recent weeks, some members of the elected panel have lobbied to get its proposals to voters first, in April.

Formal agreement on the common June date would be a symbolic commitment by the two groups to try to iron out their differences and present a unified front to voters. Consensus on the ballot date by no means ensures compromises on the scope of the mayor’s authority, the size of the City Council and other differences between the two panels. But failure to commit to a common ballot date guarantees that voters will be confused by a raft of separate, competing proposals.

There is real danger that voters, still not fully engaged by charter reform, will just stay home--whether in April or June. That would be Los Angeles’ great loss.