Weho's Idea of 'Election Reform'

The community, in no uncertain terms, is fed up. No matter the particular grievances, the trail always leads back to a badly flawed, at best - corrupt, at worst - “process” that is totally unaccountable to the city’s citizens.

And just as the community is discussing how to fix the process, an item suddenly pops up on the City Council agenda about election reform. Whether well intentioned or not, this could be our worst permanent nightmare. It shouldn't be decided quickly without ample community input.

Item 5C on Tuesday's regular City Council meeting agenda, “Discussion of Election Reform Measures to be Enacted in Advance of the West Hollywood Municipal Elections in 2013,” could have a devastating impact on our ability to change the system most of us deplore.

Is the City Council’s idea of election reform the same as ours?

The key issue to be discussed is an alteration of the municipal election date from March to November in order to coincide with state or federal elections.

I will offer an alternative to changing our election date. If the Council really wants to enact "election reforms" that will serve the people, they should start by voting to put term limits on the March 2013 ballot instead of changing the election date - no more than two consecutive four-year terms.

With a majority vote from council members, they can do just that, saving us all the tremendous effort of putting it on the ballot ourselves. If they don’t personally believe term limits are right for West Hollywood, they would have between now and the next election to make their best case before we vote on it.

If they are unwilling to reform our elections by voting to put term limits on the next ballot, well, how serious are they about enacting "election reforms" that the people want?

How changing election dates can hurt us

Until Thursday, when this item appeared on the agenda and I posted it in the comments of my Is City Hall Schizophrenic? blog post, I had a general sense that changing our elections from March to November, when more people voted, would be a good thing. Well, it didn’t take long for some very insightful residents to point out the serious pitfalls of that idea.

Thinking about my own experience, what those residents pointed out really rang true for me. If we move our elections to a time when more people vote for statewide or federal offices, a greater number of voters almost guarantees a greater number of voters who will be ill-informed about local issues (they’ll primarily be at the polls to vote for higher offices).

What do people do when they vote with less knowledge? They vote for someone whose name they recognize, who is usually an “incumbent.” Or they vote for someone who has been endorsed in mailers by organizations they believe have their best interests in mind - also usually “incumbents.”

FYI, it was the incumbents, Land, Heilman and Horvath, who rattled off all their endorsements in the last election’s debates.

Other problems hit a chord, too. Non-incumbents who have smaller campaign chests have at least a chance of reaching regular voters who have the interest to vote in city elections with a couple of mailers. They would never have the money to send mailers to all the regular voters in statewide or federal elections.

And as far as the effectiveness of mailers. Well, non-incumbent candidates’ possibly one single mailer would be lost in the blizzard of mailers for congressmen, senators or statewide initiatives. Just competing for the attention of voters focused on a gubernatorial or presidential race would be a near impossibility.

The second issue of “updating voter roles” is essential to ensure voters no longer living in West Hollywood are no longer voting in our local elections – that, I agree with. In the last election, residents of buildings torn down or converted to other uses long ago were still listed as voters at those addresses.

Ready to take action?

I wish we had the luxury of time to discuss this ad nauseam, but we don’t. So for the time being, if you agree, I’d recommend doing one or more of the following: Express your opinions in comments on this blog and email council members (jduran@weho.org - jprang@weho.org - jdamico@weho.org - aland@weho.org - jheilman@weho.org) or show up at the council meeting on Tuesday night at 6:30 p.m. to demand election reforms.

Vote to put term limits on the 2013 election ballot. Forget moving the election date for now. The community needs time to discuss and digest the ramifications.

Immediately make a request to the Los Angeles County Registrar’s Office to update West Hollywood’s voter roles. Instruct staff to return at the next council meeting, not six months from now, with a report of the response from the Registrar’s Office.

Meantime, spread the word and voice your opinions loud and clear. Don’t be dissuaded from making a comment, because you have to sign up on Patch. All it takes is the name you want to use, your email address and a password—easy as that.

So let them hear what you have to say. These are only my humble opinions. Voice your own.