City Ordered to Put Reform Initiative on April Ballot

In a major victory for Mayor Richard Riordan, a federal judge Wednesday ordered the Los Angeles City Council to put the mayor’s government-reform initiative on the April ballot.

The council had balked at putting the measure before voters, arguing that Riordan’s petition is legally flawed and would expose the council to lawsuits.

But U.S. District Judge Mariana Pfaelzer expressed little sympathy for the council’s position, signing an order that requires the council to act by Friday or face court sanctions.

“It’s a major victory for residents of Los Angeles and the over 300,000 people who signed the petition,” Riordan said after Pfaelzer signed the order. The mayor added that as far as he was concerned there was never a question of whether the measure would make it to the ballot--the only question, he said, was when.

The measure asks voters to create and elect a 15-member citizens panel to rewrite the 71-year-old charter that serves as the city’s constitution and sets the balance of power in City Hall.

Several council members expressed concern over at least one outstanding issue but said they would comply with Pfaelzer’s ruling.

“The council’s intentions are to abide by the order,” said Councilman Mike Hernandez, one of the harshest critics of Riordan’s measure.

The only way the council can keep the measure off the ballot and avoid court sanctions would be to appeal to a higher federal court for a stay of Pfaelzer’s ruling, which both sides say is unlikely.

A majority of the council has been critical of the measure, accusing Riordan of trying to use charter reform to increase the mayor’s authority at the expense of the council’s power.

Riordan’s supporters have responded by accusing the council of trying to thwart the will of the people by delaying a vote on the proposal, which initially was put on the ballot by a petition drive that gathered 304,000 signatures.

“The council has been fighting us procedurally for so long,” said David Fleming, a Studio City attorney who teamed with Riordan on the initiative in response to threats of a San Fernando Valley secession. “We think this decision today is a victory for democracy.”

The council has already created its own advisory panel to recommend charter reform measures to the council, which can act on them as it sees fit. Riordan’s elected commission, on the other hand, would have the power to put reform measures directly on the ballot, bypassing the council.

The crux of the legal dispute centered on whether the council can place on the ballot a measure that was substantially changed after the signatures were collected.

The original petition stated the city would hold a “citywide” election for the reform panel, but Pfaelzer ruled earlier that an at-large election would violate the Federal Voting Rights Act. She then declared the election should be held by district.

In a motion passed Tuesday, the council majority expressed fears they could be sued for putting a substantially altered measure on the ballot.

Pfaelzer’s ruling, however, put such concerns to rest, since the council can now say it had no choice. She ordered the council to put the measure on the April 8 ballot, call for elections by district and require candidates to be registered voters in the district in which they run.

The districts’ boundaries will very likely be the same as the 15 council districts, council members say.

The only issue that has not been resolved is whether the reform panel members would need to obtain a simple plurality, or require a 50%--plus majority, with a runoff in June for any undecided races.

Riordan wants the candidates to be selected on a simple plurality, arguing that runoff elections would require candidates to raise more money and require the city to spend an additional $1 million for a second election. But the council has insisted on choosing candidates by majority vote, saying it would help ensure that minorities would be fairly represented on the panel.

Pfaelzer postponed a decision on that issue, saying it can be resolved at a later date.

Pfaelzer’s ruling, however, did not put an end to the bickering between council members and Riordan’s supporters.

Fleming has called the council’s legal wrangling a delaying tactic to keep the measure off the ballot.

Council President John Ferraro fired back, saying there would have been no delays had Fleming fixed the legal problems before he and Riordan circulated the petition.

“We wouldn’t have these problems if they had done this properly,” Ferraro said. “He can blame us, but we want to do this right.”

Riordan responded that it was the city attorney’s office that drafted the language for the petition.

Pfaelzer’s ruling clears the way for what is expected to be a bitter election debate over how to overhaul the charter and who represents the will of the people.

The council has already put together an impressive slate of past and current city leaders who have signed the ballot argument against the measure, including two men who rarely agree on much: former Mayor Tom Bradley and former LAPD Chief Daryl F. Gates.