THROUGH MY EYES -- Ron Davis

Some of you may have read about a proposal being floated by some in the

community to elect the Huntington Beach City Council Members from seven

districts, rather than at-large.

In response to a population that surged from little more than 10,000

residents in the early ‘60s to more than 80,000 by 1965, the City Charter

was amended to enlarge the council from five to seven members. With a

population now approaching 200,000, it is appropriate to reconsider how

we conduct government in Huntington Beach.

Some people are concerned that a city with districts will be a city

divided -- consumed by council members whose sole concern is for their

district, rather than the city generally.

I agree that the creation of seven districts increases that likelihood.

On the other hand, an at-large structure, while professing to possess a

global view of Huntington Beach, already has a hidden district component.

To suggest that current council members are not more knowledgeable and

responsive to problems in their specific neighborhoods, than a like

problem in other portions of the city, is absurd.

The objective is to have balance, so that all areas of the city are

generally represented equally.

It is for that reason that I favor a city with four council districts,

which elect one council member from each district, and three council

members who are elected by the city at-large.

Such a structure provides greater knowledge and representation of the

specific concerns and problems within a given district, while at the same

time mitigating against any tendency for council members to be totally

consumed with their insular, district concerns.

A 4-3 council doesn’t swing the pendulum to the opposite extreme, but

places it squarely in the middle.

Having four districts makes sense for a number of other reasons.

First, at least you’d know who to call if you have a problem in your

district. And, since the representative came from your district, you’d

have greater assurances that the problem would be addressed.

Additionally, those who are interested in city government, but don’t have

a citywide reputation or deep financial pockets, could campaign for

office at about 1/4 the cost of mounting a citywide campaign.

Further, districts are likely to promote more community involvement in

city government.

I would expect that district elections would not only foster more

candidate forums within a district, so that the people of that district

could meet the candidates, but once elected, a greater likelihood that

the representative would hold periodic informational and feedback meeting

in the district, thus promoting political awareness and involvement.

As a hedge against district representatives being too narrow in their

view, I also advocate a change in term limits.

Currently, council members serve a maximum of two consecutive terms for a

total of eight years. I favor changing the term limits so that a member

could serve eight years as either a district or an at-large

representative, and a four year term in the remaining capacity.

I suspect that over time, most council representatives would be first

elected out of their district. If they served in that capacity for eight

years, the at-large community would have an opportunity to evaluate that

representative as a potential at-large representative, forcing the

representative to develop a citywide agenda.

If I had to choose between no districts and seven districts, I would

support districting as a preferable form of city government. But, I think

a four-three split provides the best alternative.

If our council is genuinely looking for serious advisory feedback in the

March, 2000 election, I think the subject of districts in Huntington

Beach should place on the ballot.

Ron Davis is a private attorney who lives in Huntington Beach. He can be

reached by e-mail at ronscolumn@worldnet.att.net .