Los Angeles Proposition R
Proposition R is a classic wolf in sheep’s clothing proposition. For whatever reason <insert cynical view here>, it was drawn up to deal with two seemingly separate issues: term limits and campaign finance laws.
The politics on this proposition are almost as bad as the the actual bill.
UPDATE: I forgot to mention that this proposition seems to be trying to get a free ride on state proposition 89, similar to proposition H’s attempt to get a ride off of 1C.
The politics are great. Apparently the measure was rushed through the city council (rather than going the signature gathering route), bypassing the city’s ethics commission, bypassing the normal public hearing process, and basically giving the snub to the neighborhood council’s that LA has set up.
Other fun things include the city attorney (Rocky! Rocky!) saying that various parts of the bill are not legally sound, a court challenge that killed the proposition, an appeal that put it back on the ballot but the whole thing could be wiped out by a subsequent legal ruling on Nov. 28 (after the election). Who said LA politics is boring?
I’m not a huge fan of term limits in general, as them seem symptomatic of a lazy electorate, but LA’s voters seem to be exceptionally lazy, so perhaps they are good here. Either way, term limits were only put in place in 1993, so one has to feel somewhat cynical about extending them from 8 years to 12 already. The city council approved this measure 14-0. According to the LA Times, half of the council membership are due to be pushed out in 2009, and most of the rest are going to be thrown on the street two years later.
So, what are the lobbying reforms? R will ban lobbyists from serving on commissions (no such limitation on people who hire lobbyists), something that is already current practice but not encoded in the charter. Lobbyists won’t be able to give gifts to city officials any more, but the existing rules limit the value of such gifts to $25 (I have a hard time believing any city official can be swayed by a $25 gift, and if we’re really worried about that, let’s fire them). It’ll extend the ban on ex-city politicians lobbying city agencies from one year to two (it’s hard to see what the impact of one more year really is). Currently when you win a contract with the city you have to certify that you will comply with the city’s lobbying laws, but the proposition will extend this to anyone who bids on contracts. It also will force disclosure of political donations for ballot measures, and lower threshold for forced reporting of political donations, as well as lowering the threshold for one to qualify as a lobbyist.
If you are getting the impression that most of these lobbying reforms are nickel and dime stuff that won’t have much of an impact on the day to day operations of city hall, I suspect it is because you aren’t a fool.
All in all, the main conclusion I’m drawing about this one is that I’m not going to vote for my council member the time their name comes up on a ballot.