Measures Would Strengthen Mayor, Restrain Incumbents : Elections: Proposition I would give the mayor greater veto power. Proposition G would virtually limit incumbents to two terms.

By RICK HOLGUIN

Oct. 22, 1992 12 AM PT

TIMES STAFF WRITER

LONG BEACH — Two propositions on the Nov. 3 ballot could change the character of Long Beach government by giving the mayor more power and virtually limiting elected officials to two terms of office.

Of the two measures, city officials and civic leaders are focusing most of their attention on Proposition I. The measure would give the mayor greater veto power by requiring a two-thirds vote of the City Council for an override. A simple majority is now required.

The measure also would enable the mayor to cast a vote if the City Council is deadlocked. The mayor currently has no vote.

The proposition was proposed by a task force of city business and civic leaders, attorneys and activists--the Citizens Task Force for Effective City Government--who have called for a “fine tuning” of Long Beach government.

Long Beach leaders have come out for and against Proposition I, but there has been little campaigning. No campaign organizations have formed to support or oppose the measure, and no money has been spent, said a spokeswoman for the city clerk’s office.

Proponents say the veto power of Proposition I would enable the mayor, who is elected at-large, to steer a course to benefit the entire city. They say the nine council members are elected by district and get bogged down at times in parochial concerns. The veto power would force the council members to heed the mayor’s views.

“(Right now) the mayor’s hands are pretty well tied,” said Curtis L. McCray, president of Cal State Long Beach and a supporter of the measure. “We have a lot to gain by figuring out how to come together.”

Mayor Ernie Kell agrees.

“Once the council gets five votes, they can ignore the mayor,” Kell said. “With a veto, they’re going to have to get support from the mayor,” he said.

Kell also noted that the weak veto power of Long Beach’s mayor is exceptional, that a two-thirds vote is required to override a veto of Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, Gov. Pete Wilson or President George Bush.

But opponents of Proposition I contend that it would place too much power in the hands of one elected official.

“All the veto does is give one person the power to trample what the majority of the council wants,” said Marc Coleman, president of Long Beach Area Citizens Involved. “The veto power doesn’t provide leadership. You can’t legislate leadership.”

Kell’s nemesis on the council, Councilman Warren Harwood, also opposes the measure.

“What we need is leadership, which doesn’t require the ability to thwart what the council is doing,” Harwood said. “All it’s going to do is increase the divisiveness between the mayor and the City Council.”

Whereas Proposition I came from the diverse Citizens Task Force, Proposition G is the result of one man’s crusade to limit the tenure of local politicians.

Long Beach lawyer Dennis W. Carroll spent about $55,000 of his own money to hire a signature-gathering firm to qualify the measure for the ballot.

Proposition G would permit a mayor and council members who have served for two or more terms to run only as write-in candidates, placing incumbents at a disadvantage.

Current incumbents who have served more than two terms--Councilmen Thomas Clark and Harwood--would be allowed to run one more time on the city ballot. The other seven council members and Mayor Kell also would be limited to one more term if Proposition G were to pass.

The measure does not affect the offices of city attorney, city prosecutor or city auditor.

Carroll said he considered running for City Council but was put off when he realized that he would have to raise tens of thousands of dollars to effectively challenge an incumbent.

“When I learned how much it cost to run for City Council, it just didn’t seem right,” Carroll said. “To my view, it excludes 95% of us.”

Opponents of the measure acknowledge that incumbents have an advantage in raising money to run an effective campaign. But they contend that someone can win a council seat by developing a strong grass-roots campaign that concentrates heavily on walking precincts.

“If I want to support (a longtime incumbent), I want to have that choice,” said Councilman Jeffrey A. Kellogg, an opponent of Proposition G.

Kellogg pointed out that Councilman Alan S. Lowenthal was able to defeat former Councilman Wallace Edgerton earlier this year despite being outspent 2 to 1. Lowenthal, a former president of Long Beach Area Citizens Involved, won his seat with the support of the citizens group.

Lowenthal, however, said he supports Proposition G “as a way of increasing accessibility.”

But Lowenthal said he would prefer campaign reforms that limit contributions and expenditures and provide for public financing of city elections.

“But, since we don’t have that, (Proposition G) is the only way to increase accessibility,” Lowenthal said.

Very little campaigning has been done for or against Proposition G. Carroll said he might put up some signs in support of Proposition G, but he expects to do little else. As many as 20 volunteers have helped him, he said.

“Unfortunately, I don’t have the funds to do a high-profile campaign.”