Charter Frees Voters to Decide
* Re “Charter Change Still Bad Idea,” editorial, March 18:
The editorial was accurate in pointing out that under the proposed charter for Orange County, all general laws would stay the same except one. The singular change would require a special election of the voters to fill vacancies on the Board of Supervisors, thereby putting the power in the hands of Orange County voters, not Sacramento.
I am puzzled, however, at the opposition to this change, which empowers people and is certainly the most democratic approach to local governance. Why would The Times oppose self-determination and local control, the only goal of the proposed charter? Could it be your desire to see Gov. Gray Davis appoint a Democrat to the all-Republican Board of Supervisors? Possibly.
The editorial also paraphrases Assembly Republican Leader Bill Campbell, who indicated he didn’t think Davis, given the opportunity, would appoint someone unacceptable to the community. A noble thought, but let’s think logically about this. Orange County’s 3rd Supervisorial District is solid GOP. Orange County is solid GOP. Vote-wise Davis has little to lose from delivering the ultimate political favor to a left-leaning Democrat friend and appointing him to the board. Campbell since has indicated his support for the proposed charter.
Orange County voters, Democrat and Republican alike, should see the proposed charter for what it is--local control.
MIMI WALTERS
City Council
Laguna Niguel
* The position you have taken against the proposed charter has done a great disservice to Orange County voters. Rushing to judgment on my proposed charter plan, without proper analysis, is shortsighted. To adopt a mentality that “all charters have been bad, so this one must be too” forgets the fundamental principle of elected representation: the right to vote for our public officials.
My analysis is simple: Orange County is in the midst of many heated battles. With so many important issues at stake, such as El Toro, the Musick jail expansion, health care, transportation and affordable housing, Orange County residents cannot afford a political appointment.
Under current law, the governor fills vacancies. The last time our current governor had a hand in filling a supervisorial vacancy was in 1979, when he was serving as the chief of staff to then-Gov. Jerry Brown. The result was the appointment of a left-wing political activist--Edison Miller--who did not “fit” the district he was appointed to represent and the voters wisely threw him out in the next election.
Another example occurred in 1995, when my predecessor, Don Saltarelli, served as a governor appointee due to an early resignation. He was in favor of building an airport at El Toro and expanding the Musick facility. Both of these issues were a centerpiece of my campaign--as they should have been--and my election reflected voter sentiment in my district against these projects.
Appointments by governors are, by their very nature, political and often in contradiction to the constituencies that they are designed to represent. An appointee, if out of step with the will of his constituency, can do serious and irreparable harm until the next election when, after two or more years of bad votes, the damage done is irreversible.
So I ask, are you consistent in your belief in the will of the people?
My suggested charter for 2002 makes only one change to county law: the right to choose one’s representative in the event of any vacancy. Orange County has a very talented and diverse group of locally elected officials and community activists who deserve to become a supervisor, but only after making their case to the voters. Not politicking to a distant governor in Sacramento.
TODD SPITZER
Supervisor, 3rd District