Prop KK Backers Seek Council Term Limits

By Teresa Rochester

In an effort to break Santa Monicans for Renters' Rights stronghold on local politics, supporters of a business-backed living wage initiative have launched a campaign calling for term limits for City Council members.

Donna Dailey Alvarez (who signed the ballot argument for Prop. KK on November's ballot) and Polly Benson-Brown (who signed an early letter of support for the hotel-bankrolled initiative) are now spearheading an effort to gather signatures for a charter amendment that calls for limiting council members to two four-year terms.

San Francisco-based attorney James Sutton, who authored Prop. KK, also wrote the term limit initiative.

"We seem to have people who want to make this [the council] a lifetime career," Alvarez said. "I don't think this is what the founding fathers intended. We've had one dominant party (SMRR) control the government for more than 20 years. I don't think it allows for free expression.

"All of our commissions are stacked with appointments by this party," Alvarez said. "I don't think it's good government. I think it's good to have exchange of ideas and that's why I filed it."

"I believe term limits have been healthy in California," Benson-Brown said. "I look at the City of Santa Monica and look at the amount of money it can take (to win) in any race for City Council. The incumbents really own it. I can't remember the last time an incumbent lost."

The initiative was filed with the City Clerk Tuesday and sponsors got the go-ahead to circulate petitions on Thursday, according to City Clerk Maria Stewart.

The proposed initiative not only limits new council members to two four-year terms, it restricts incumbents completing their first term this year to only one more term. That means that Councilmen Michael Feinstein and Richard Bloom, who are part of the SMRR super majority on the council, could serve only until 2004 if reelected in November.

Although he was elected in April 1999 to fill a vacancy on the council, Bloom would be covered under the new initiative, which counts partial terms as one full term.

Under the proposed initiative, tied council elections would be determined by casting lots, instead of holding a special run-off race.

Supporters argue that term limits will level the playing field between incumbents and newcomers and would add "new blood and ideas" to the council. Currently, four of the council's seven members have served more than one term, and Mayor Ken Genser is seeking a fourth four-year term next month.

"I don't know if it will break up the dominant party, but what it does is give other people incentive to run," said Alvarez, who has run unsuccessfully for the council. "It's extremely difficult to run against an incumbent. We see that in the national elections all the time. People vote for incumbents whether they like what they're doing or not."

Councilman Robert Holbrook, who has served on the council for 10 years and is up for reelection in 2002, said that while term limits are common in other cities he is ambivalent about such a measure passing in Santa Monica.

"I have a suspicion you wear out your welcome," Holbrook said. "My thing is I really don't care if there are term limits or not."

Holbrook pointed out that term-limits have forced some of the state's most talented lawmakers out of office, leaving decisions with far-reaching implications to political rookies. But he also said that some of the current council members have made serving "their thing in life."

Mayor Ken Genser, who is seeking a fourth term next month, said that the argument against incumbents doesn't fly. Genser named several incumbents, including Tony Vazquez and Christine Reed, who were defeated when they sought reelection.

"If you look at the length of time [council members serve] we're not like other cities where the same people are getting elected year after year" Genser said. "It's not like we have a council that's dominated by long-termers."

The Mayor added that the proposed initiative is a political ploy by supporters of Prop. KK, which has been denounced by a majority of the council members.

"I think the timing is rather interesting," Genser said. "I think if the proponents had a serious commitment there would be a community-wide discussion on the issue. They would have done it at a time that wasn't an election.

"It would have been done by a more bipartisan discussion and wouldn't have been drafted by the same San Francisco lawyer who has been working for the large hotel interest," Genser added.

While there is no way for the petition to qualify for November's election, Alvarez and Benson-Brown said they decided to launch their petition drive now to capitalize on the public's interest in the elections and in anticipation of any special elections that may arise after November.

Supporters will have to gather the valid signatures of 8,652 registered Santa Monica voters to qualify the initiative for a special election, Alvarez said.

"The bottom line is, I think this will be useful to Santa Monica," Benson-Brown said. "People are aware of the elections and perhaps willing to sign things when they are aware of political issues floating around in the press."

In the past decade two ballot measures that called for council term limits have failed. In 1990 the CURE Initiative (Citizens United to Reform Elections) was voted down at the polls. That initiative called for both term limits and the creation of council districts.

In 1992 voters shot down another ballot measure that limited council members to three consecutive terms and called for compensation and medical and dental benefits for council members. Alvarez and Benson-Brown argue that the measure was defeated because it was tied to compensation and benefits.

Sutton, the attorney who drafted the initiative, said that it's about time Santa Monica followed the lead of other cities.

"What's a progressive city like Santa Monica doing without term limits?" he asked.