O.C. Charter: Plan for Voters or Politicians?

To hear Todd Spitzer tell it, Measure V on Orange County’s March 5 ballot embodies the essence of democracy by letting voters fill vacant seats on the county Board of Supervisors, rather than having the governor appoint someone.

From Richard F. Taylor’s somewhat different perspective, Measure V is an end-run by insider politicians who want to swap jobs and subvert voter-approved term limits while simultaneously trying to stack the political deck against converting the former El Toro Marine base into a commercial airport.

But for the average voter, the looming question about Measure V is whether the issue--enacting a charter form of county government--will make any difference in their lives. For the most part, counties exist to do the local work of the state, such as administering social services programs, and have less legal authority than cities, said Steve Keil, legislative representative for the state Assn. of Counties in Sacramento.

Most of the state’s 58 counties, including Orange County, operate under what is known as general law, which means their tasks are largely defined by the state Legislature.

But 13 counties, including Los Angeles County, operate under voter-approved charters that give them more freedom on such issues as how to select supervisors--including the number of supervisorial seats--and how to deal with administrative issues, from the hiring of department heads to pay scales.

Under Measure V, though, the only element that would change from Orange County’s current setup is how vacant supervisorial seats are filled. Now the governor fills them. If Measure V passes, special elections would be held.

Spitzer, 3rd District supervisor and an opponent of creating an airport at El Toro, said he pushed the measure onto the ballot because he didn’t like the idea that Gov. Gray Davis would appoint his successor if he wins the 71st Assembly seat being vacated by Bill Campbell (R-Villa Park), who cannot run for reelection because of term limits.

Under county term limits, he said, more supervisors could be leaving their seats as they move up to other elected positions in midterm, creating the potential for political stalemates if the five-member board is reduced to four members who could deadlock.

State law gives the governor no deadline for filling vacancies. Siskiyou County recently went more than a year with a vacant supervisor’s seat, Spitzer said.

“What would happen in Orange County if there was a vacancy for over a year?” Spitzer asked. “It’s very unfair to the constituents of that district, and it empowers the other supervisors in other districts to make decisions on behalf of those constituents. We have an obligation for self-determination and a responsibility to determine our own destiny.”

Taylor--a longtime supporter of converting El Toro into a commercial airport--disagrees, rejecting Spitzer’s arguments as a smokescreen.

Taylor said the real issue is Spitzer’s desire to control who will succeed him should he win the Assembly seat; if he loses, he would remain on the Board of Supervisors. Taylor expects that if Measure V passes, Campbell will run for the seat in a special election. Like Spitzer, Campbell opposes an airport at El Toro.

“It’s a sham and it’s wrong,” said Taylor, president of the Airport Working Group of Orange County, formed about 20 years ago to lobby against expansion of John Wayne Airport. “They want to get this backroom deal and work this out.... It’s totally about the airport. This charter does nothing to lower taxes. It does nothing to make government more accountable. It’s a waste of money and time.”

Spitzer disputed Taylor’s analysis as a self-serving attempt to reduce the voice of anti-airport advocates on the board, which routinely approves pro-airport measures by a 3-2 vote with Spitzer in the minority.

And he rejected arguments by some critics that a charter would bring the possibility of endless voter initiatives.

“That’s a spurious argument,” Spitzer said, pointing out that voters can put initiatives on the ballot now. “It’s a fundamental right to safeguard against an abusive government.”

Effects of Voter Initiatives Debated

Keil said voter initiatives could not change the charter contrary to state and federal laws or mandates. For instance, a charter amendment could not reduce social service payments to families below the state-set levels.

“There could be an initiative that might deal with a related issue, such as saying the county is going to provide a new level of service,” he said.

And placing a change in the charter on the ballot would require petitions signed by 10% of the county’s registered voters--currently about 71,000 signatureswhich make it difficult for fringe or nuisance charter amendments to reach the ballot, Keil and others said.

Los Angeles County has operated under a charter since 1913 and has had no voter-initiated amendments that current officials can recall.

“It’s a lot of work getting an initiative that size,” said Hal Melom, an attorney in the Los Angeles County counsel’s office.

One relatively recent change came in 1978, when voters approved a charter amendment making it simpler for county officials to contract for work not easily done by staff members. The downside, he said, is that general-law counties can effect change by pressuring state legislators, while charter counties “have to go directly to the voters.”