Charter: Don’t Let It Slip Away

Against long odds, leaders from the two commissions rewriting Los Angeles’ charter cleared the path Wednesday for a single, compromise proposal to go before city voters in June. The draft charter has the support of nearly every interest: business, civic and labor organizations and, now, Mayor Richard Riordan.

The proposed draft marks a major improvement over the 73-year-old rules and regulations that currently guide city government. The voters will ultimately make the decision on adopting a new charter in June. Only two things can obstruct progress: If the full elected commission fails to endorse the deal or the City Council meddles in the details. If either happens, crucial momentum will be lost, and with it the chances of the revised charter that Los Angeles so badly needs.

As part of the deal struck during Wednesday’s six-hour meeting, the new charter would grant the mayor authority to fire nearly all commissioners. In exchange, Riordan dropped his insistence that voters should decide whether future mayors need the unfettered ability to fire city department heads.

The new package wisely also eliminates a separate initiative that would have allowed voters to choose elected neighborhood councils. This decision angered some members of the elected commission, but it is the right choice. Instead of councils elected by neighborhood residents, the compromise calls for creation of advisory councils selected by each community. These groups would include not only neighborhood homeowners but also representatives of local business, schools and tenants.

Most important, the new package offers residents the hope of better representation at City Hall. The proposed charter would increase the 15-member City Council to 21 or 25 members, depending on a citywide vote. The council districts, now comprising nearly 250,000 residents, would be cut to either 150,000 or 178,000, a reduction that should please constituents.

The City Council-appointed reform commission has already approved this compromise. Approval by the elected panel is likely on Monday but not assured. With just a week left before the package must go before the City Council, there can be no renegotiation, and putting two separate packages before voters would only increase the chance of defeat for both.

The City Council, which has until March 5 to approve the proposal for the June ballot, has the opportunity to demonstrate that it is not the obstacle to change that many assume it is. The council must resist tinkering just because it can and quickly embrace the work done by the commissions. In doing so it will help ensure better city representation.