Debate Over Charter Reform

In its zeal to promote the proposed city charter measure, your May 19 editorial, “Nasty Turn on Charter Reform,” went too far. I find it appalling that after more than two years of debate over a multitude of charter issues, The Times would seek to cut off any right to dissent.

My opposition to the proposed charter stems from my deep commitment and love for Los Angeles. Long experience has taught me something about what works and what does not work in city government. While there are some good things in the proposed charter that I would like to see implemented, the measure is flawed by some significant and expensive provisions that would be very destructive.

These include: Limiting residents’ appeals of land use decisions; destroying the system of checks and balances on the respective powers of the executive branch, the council and the people; inviting corruption by shifting power to the mayor and council to decide many issues without a vote of the people; imposing significant implementation costs and escalating the city’s annual costs by many millions of dollars; and reducing resources available for public safety, trash collection and other services.

I have never been a supporter of the proposed charter, as your editorial states. I participated in the appointment of a charter commission because I believe Los Angeles needs charter reform. I kept my pledge to work to sustain the commission’s independence. I supported the goal of developing a single, unified charter proposal but found that in the last days of the process, changes made in the name of compromise overshadowed the goals of charter reform. I will be voting no on the charter.

JOHN FERRARO, Councilman, 4th District

*

Los Angeles has an opportunity to make city government more efficient while also giving residents more power within their communities--if voters support the proposed charter revision, yes on Measures 1 and 4.

In the present charter the mayor and council have loose control over department managers, who pretty much set their own course. Under the proposed charter a mayor who exerted leadership with department managers could produce more efficiency in the city and get more bang for the taxpayers’ buck.

Council members could concentrate on the concerns of their constituents, which vary widely from one community to another. They could be more available within the neighborhoods they represent.

PAT RUSSELL, Former Councilwoman, Marina del Rey