Anaheim, With Resources Galore, Ponders a Change in Government

Will changing the way city officials are elected give Anaheim the status of big league cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and Sacramento, or will the changes only promote big league problems like cronyism, favoritism and divisiveness?

Those are questions that will be pondered Tuesday as city officials consider appointing a review committee to study changes in the city charter.

At least two City Council members and several citizens groups say the city--with a $500-million budget, two professional sports teams, Disneyland and its own utility company--has outgrown its present form of administration.

They have proposed a number of changes in municipal government that they say will lead to more diverse and accountable representatives, and an increased role for citizens.

Some See Disorganization

Others warn, however, that the changes will mean more favoritism, factional infighting and a dismantling of the current city manager-controlled administration.

Among changes to be considered are increasing the number of council seats from five to seven, selecting some council members from districts, electing a full-time council and mayor, and electing a mayor separately from the ranks of council members.

No cities in Orange County now have full-time councils. Three cities--Santa Ana, Newport Beach and Huntington Beach--have seven-member councils.

Only last month, the council provoked criticism when it voted to pay its members fees for attending housing and redevelopment agency meetings--thus tripling council salaries--rather than put a salary increase before the voters.

The council majority argued that the raise was justified because of the growing amount of time that members spend attending to city business.

“We have to compare ourselves to cities like San Diego, Sacramento and Oakland, not typical Orange County cities like Buena Park or Garden Grove,” said Councilman William D. Ehrle, who proposed the charter revisions at a recent City Council meeting and who also voted to augment council salaries.

“We’re drowning in an abundance of resources that make us unique. No other city in Southern California draws 34 million tourists a year. These are changes . . . that will make local government run more smoothly.”

Citing the city’s sprawling dimensions--more than 45 square miles that range from flatlands in the south to rolling hills in the northeast--Ehrle has suggested dividing Anaheim into three council districts from which representatives would stand for council seats. The four other seats would be drawn from a citywide pool, and all seven council seats would be elected by citywide vote.

District elections are needed because of the diversity of interests within the city, Ehrle said. All told, the changes would bring elected officials closer to the community, he argues.

Ehrle has had some experience in persuading Anaheim voters to make changes in the way they elect their officials. In 1974, while a government teacher at Loara High School, he mounted a successful campaign that led to the direct election of the mayor. Previously, council members selected the mayor from their own ranks.

Several citizens’ groups have already come out in favor of many of the proposed changes. Doug Kintz, president of Anaheim Home or Homeowners for Maintaining Their Environment, said district elections would give neighborhoods a greater voice in council decisions.

Kintz cited a poll commissioned by his group that seems to indicate that residents are ready for changes. The poll was conducted last summer by Nason, Lunberg & Associates, an Orange firm that conducted polls for Anaheim council members Ehrle and Fred Hunter during their campaigns.

The poll’s aim was to gauge sentiment for a recall election of three council members after Anaheim Home successfully scuttled the $2.7-billion Katella redevelopment project. Although the recall never came off, the group at that time indicated that it would push for fundamental changes in city government.

In the telephone survey of nearly 800 registered voters, 55% favored district elections, while 26% were opposed and 19% undecided.

Forty-four percent of those surveyed agreed that the mayor should not have to be elected from the ranks of council members. Thirty-nine percent favored the present arrangement, while 17% were undecided.

“I think we will see major changes in city government,” Kintz said. “The City Council members would be more accountable. And when things are happening in people’s own back yards, they are more naturally concerned about them.”

But it is just such parochial concerns--and the attentions they likely would receive if the council included district representatives--that have raised some concerns.

“It would be a neighborhood approach rather than what is good for the city as a whole,” said Allan B. Hughes, executive director of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce. “There is also the possibility that one strong, persuasive person could direct the interests of the rest of the council to that person’s own district.”

Hughes said full-time council members would threaten the city’s current city manager-controlled administration.

“They want to get down into the departments and muck things up,” he said. “I would rather have professionals administering this city rather than some volunteer from the community. I think it (a full-time council) would make it very difficult for the city manager to operate.

Councilman Irv Pickler said he favors a review of the city’s charter but added that any future review panel should not have “specific suggestions for changes thrown at them” before the fact.

Pickler said many of the proposals suggested by Ehrle would lead to “petty politics and favoritism.”

“When you talk about districts or wards, that makes me think about Chicago, and I don’t think this city needs to operate that way,” Pickler said. “I think we as council members should represent concerns of 100% of the city.”