A SUGGESTION OF DOOM?; DAILY NEWS' DIRE PROPHECIES DON'T HELP CHARTER REFORM EFFORT.

Byline: Erwin Chemerinsky 

A recent editorial in this newspaper said that my suggesting a bill of rights for the new Los Angeles City Charter has ``all but killed hopes for reforming the incomprehensible City Charter.'' It is inconceivable how merely discussing an idea could be so powerful as to doom charter reform. At this stage, the commission has not yet made a decision on the unanimous recommendation from one of its committees that the charter should include a preamble and a bill of rights.

Nor has the commission taken any position on whether noncitizens should be able to participate in neighborhood councils under the new charter. The mere suggestion by two commissioners that this be discussed prompted a scathing editorial suggesting that they be blamed if charter reform fails. Such hyperbole adds little to the constructive dialogue over the new charter.

The Elected Charter Commission has met at least once a week for almost a year and has spent a vast amount of time focusing on how to improve the structure of Los Angeles city government. It is expected that by mid-July the commission will have made tentative decisions on all of the major areas of the charter, including allocating responsibility between the mayor and the City Council, improving the budget and finance process, increasing the size of the City Council, enhancing the delivery of city services, and creating neighborhood councils. A joint conference with the appointed charter commission offers hope that there will be one proposal for a new charter before the voters in April or June 1999.

A committee of the elected commission has recommended a bill of rights for the new charter. This is not a novel idea; other cities such as Anchorage and Detroit include a bill of rights in their charters. Although the concept has been ridiculed on the pages of this newspaper, it is basic to American government. No government should have the power to deprive its citizens of fundamental rights. The limits on government power should be in the charter that grants it authority. The people, in ratifying a charter or constitution limited by a bill of rights, are empowering their government but denying it authority to violate basic liberties.

A bill of rights can ensure protection of basic liberties from the city government in areas where federal and state law are inadequate. Every state constitution has a bill of rights, even though there is federal protection of rights. The people in every state wanted to ensure that they were creating governments without the authority to violate fundamental rights. Likewise, a bill of rights to the charter would limit the power of a future city government to infringe basic rights. There should be a debate over what rights are worthy of inclusion, but the possible disagreements over particular rights are not a reason to reject the concept of a bill of rights.

The Daily News has proclaimed that the concept of the bill of rights, indeed the mere suggestion of a bill of rights, will kill the charter reform. However, the bill of rights can be voted on in a separate initiative, apart from the rest of the charter. If voters don't want a bill of rights, they can reject it, but still approve the rest of the charter. Also, rather than jeopardizing approval of the new charter, it is quite possible that a bill of rights might help to rally support for it.

The recent editorial in this newspaper also attacked me for advocating that undocumented immigrants be accorded the right to vote in neighborhood council elections. The problem is that I said no such thing. At the end of a five-hour meeting, a member of the commission suggested that appointed neighborhood councils might be preferable over elected ones because noncitizens could then participate. Two other commissioners disagreed. This few-minute exchange prompted a front-page story in this newspaper and a highly critical editorial.

Although the editorial attacks me by name, it failed to mention that I support elected neighborhood councils and that under state law, noncitizens cannot vote or serve on such councils. Additionally, when asked about undocumented immigrants, I said that it was a nonissue because those illegally present in the country are highly unlikely to come forward to serve. Never did I advocate allowing undocumented immigrants to vote or serve in government.

The task for the Elected Charter Commission is no less than designing a new government for Los Angeles for the 21st century. We are working as hard as we possibly can to accomplish this goal. Ultimately, passage of the new charter will depend on the people of Los Angeles being educated about the issues and coming forward to be heard. The Daily News does its readers no favors by declaring that merely discussing an idea is enough to doom charter reform or by mischaracterizing the views of commissioners in order to attack them.

THE PROPOSED BILL OF RIGHTS

These are the rights proposed by a committee of the elected Charter Reform Commission:

I. Residents of the city shall be assured of free exercise of their religion, and the city may burden free exercise of religion only if it is necessary to achieve a compelling government interest. The city shall not establish a religion or grant any preferences among religions.

II. Residents of Los Angeles have freedom of speech, press, association, assembly and to petition their government for redress of grievances. Residents of Los Angeles have the right to use city property for speech purposes unless the speech significantly interferes with the use of the property for its usual purposes or regulation is necessary to achieve an important purpose. (Property here refers to real property of the city, such as its sidewalks and parks).

III. All residents of Los Angeles are entitled to equal protection of the law, and the city shall not discriminate on the basis of race, national origin, religion, gender, age, sexual orientation or disability except in instances where such discrimination is necessary to achieve a compelling government interest. Los Angeles' strength is the diversity of its residents, and the city, consistent with federal and state law, shall act to foster diversity in its employment, contracting and educational activities.

IV. The city may take private property for public use only if it pays just compensation; when the city uses its eminent domain power it shall provide just compensation in a timely manner.

V. Employees of the city shall have the right to collectively bargain with the city.

VI. Residents of Los Angeles have a right to adequate police protection in a timely fashion and the police shall be respectful of the rights of all residents, including refraining from the excessive use of force. Residents have a right to a fair grievance procedure in presenting complaints against police behavior.

VII. The city shall not infringe the right of each person to make choices concerning reproductive autonomy except if proven necessary to achieve a compelling objective.

VIII. The city shall provide a fair and just procedure in determining the rights, benefits and privileges of individuals and shall provide due process in such determinations, including reasonable notice to a person of all proceedings where such determinations will be made, a prompt and fair hearing, and a neutral decision-maker.

IX. The right to vote being fundamental, the city shall act to ensure access to the polls for all of its citizens.

X. Every child in Los Angeles has a right to equal educational opportunity.

XI. The city shall provide its employees a living wage, and it shall not discriminate in the total compensation offered its employees on the basis of race, national origin, religion, gender, age, sexual orientation or disability. The city shall not contract with businesses that fail to provide their employees in their activities within the city a living wage or that discriminate in the total compensation offered their employees in the city on the basis of race, national origin, religion, gender, age, sexual orientation or disability.

CAPTION(S):

Box

Box: THE PROPOSED BILL OF RIGHTS (See Text)