What’s In It For Them?

Prop R: What’s In It For Them?

Recently, the Los Angeles City council voted to place an initiative on the November ballot that will make changes to the current City Charter regarding ethics reform. This initiative (Proposition R) is known to the voters as the City Government Responsibility, Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act.

Many voters who do not regularly read the opinion section of local newspapers, have only the word of respected organizations like the League of Women Voters and the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce to help them make informative decisions on Election day.

These two organizations supporting this measure are responsible for bringing these changes to the city council earlier this year. Included in the changes is a term limit extension from 2 terms (8 years) to 3 terms (12 years) for city council members.

According to the City Attorney,
“Having reviewed the various proposals…we have concluded that the ethics, lobbying and campaign finance reform proposals can simply be adopted and implemented in their entirety through an ordinance passed by the City Council.”

Simply stated, the issue of ethics reform does not need to go before the voters. The only reason Prop. R is on the November ballot is because of the term limit increase.

So this is our question: Why do the League of Women Voters and LA Area Chamber of Commerce care about city council member terms being increased from 8 years to12 years? What is in it for them?

The mailers that were sent out to over 100,000 likely voters mislead the public in two ways: 1) by claiming that Prop. R will “limit” council members to “three terms (12 years total)” without informing voters that the current charter limits council members to two terms (8 years total) at present. And 2) that it will prevent city officials from swindling city government out of millions of dollars (referring to a case brought before the city council by City Controller, Laura Chick against the LADWP). These mailers suggest that this initiative if passed will prevent these incidents from occurring again and imply that the City Controller is a supporter of this proposition. In a letter printed in the Daily News, October 24, 2006, Laura Chick writes,

“For the Proposition R campaign to use my name in any way is duplicitous and intentionally deceiving. My work to expose millions of dollars in fraudulent public relations bills has nothing whatsoever to do with Proposition R. The City Council actually voted to turn down my request for them to stop the LADWP from paying millions of dollars more to outside public relations firms.”

“In fact I adamantly oppose Proposition R for many reasons, not the least of which is the disingenuous way with which this measure was placed on the ballot. I urge the voters of the City of Los Angeles to vote no on Proposition R.”
Sincerely,
LAURA N. CHICK
City Controller

When Liza White, President of the League of Women Voters, was asked about the mailers, she defended them saying “they aren’t deceptive.” If she really believes these mailers are not misleading, then how can this woman be trusted? She is obviously confused about what the word ‘deceptive’ means or she is trying to save face. Or she has another agenda.

Nevertheless, the most important thing the voters need to know when they go to the polls has not been made clear by the LA City Council, the League of Women Voters, or the LA Area Chamber of Commerce and that is: The changes to the city charter regarding ethics reform, can be made without voter approval.

If this council and these two organizations really care about ethics reform then this reform needs to begin closer to home. They need to be more transparent and truthful about their motives and political agenda.

Donna Connolly
David Hernandez
Citizens for Rational Reform

For more information, please go to www.TERMEDOUT.com.