As a long time businessman and former city councilmember, I will attempt to peel away the layers of hazy dialogue regarding the questionable benefits to charter reform.
The latest series of items coming in May to the Long Beach voters is under the banner of charter reform. The very notion of reform goes to the issue of what is wrong in the first place and why we should be concerned and compelled to make a correction. Reform is defined as the necessity to improve because of abuse, injustice or force to abandon a wrong course of conduct in order to adopt a change for the better.
Will increasing council salaries, removing term limits, and empowering the mayor with a stronger veto, if approved by the voters, make for better governance? Should our leaders be awarded benefits that are woven into the charter reform package of items?
Never in recent memory has the public taken to the initiative process to repeal bad law enacted by our elected representatives. What should be sound, practical, and meaningful legislation has instead caused to create one of the most anti-business climates ever in our city’s history. Let’s take a look at some recent actions by our elected officials that have created counter measures by the electorate to rescind their actions. We start with the Labor Peace Agreement. It was clearly created for the purpose of advancing the power base of an out of town union organization whose sole purpose was establishing a power base in Long Beach. A council majority held to the wishes of these power brokers and clearly wounded the hotel and tourist industry of our city.
Another action was the outlawing of the sale of groceries and food items by new, large wholesale retailers. This type of legislation targeted the entire free enterprise system and has caused a furor among the retailing community. Manipulating the market place for the benefit of special interests does not contribute to a healthy business climate. The real loser here is, once again, the working public.
Additionally, the past 12 years of leadership under former Mayor Beverly O’Neill certainly did not demonstrate a rush to judgement regarding the necessity of increasing the veto power of the mayor. Mayor O’Neill never utilized the veto. Even when our present mayor recently vetoed one draconian version of a Labor Peace agreement, another surfaced and was voted into law by a majority of the city council, with no veto, thus causing the community to act to bring the matter to the voting booth.
Even without charter reform, our past and present city councils and mayor have had noteworthy successes. Presently, the mayor’s trade school initiative, and his cooperative strategy with the council’s anti-gang policing efforts, and aggressive support of the C-17 programs stand at the forefront.
On the other hand we’re witnessing our upcoming local election and the proponents for charter reform bringing in thousands of dollars of outside money in an effort to influence the election’s outcome favoring all the propositions. Can it be that some of these “disinterested” third parties to our city election actually have their self interest in mind with future business matters pending at city hall?
The strength of our city charter and the city manager/council form of government still consistently has stood up to the test of time. Our founding fathers created a document that has proven its value. The city manager and his team have time and again stood up to political pressures and have diligently kept vigil on a balanced budget and maintained the operations of our city at an exceptional level.
Where are there real problems, and should we being trying to fix something that isn’t broken? Additionally, do recent actions by most of our elected leadership justify handing more power to a majority block and validating the public’s acceptance of a “job well done?”
You be the judge!