COMMUNITY LEADERS SHARE EXPECTATIONS FOR CHARTER REFORM.

Byline: Patrick McGreevy Daily News Staff Writer

A key feature of any charter reform plan must be the creation of neighborhood councils with the power to make local decisions, Los Angeles homeowner leaders said during a citywide summit Saturday.

More than 140 leaders from homeowner associations and community groups throughout Los Angeles gathered on the soundstage of ``The Price Is Right'' game show at CBS Studios in West Los Angeles to discuss their concerns with city officials about competing charter reform plans.

Several community leaders voiced skepticism about the motives behind competing charter reform proposals, saying it appears that they are aimed at gaining or keeping power.

Mayor Richard Riordan and Studio City attorney David Fleming are campaigning for an initiative to create an elected charter reform commission with power to put charter changes directly on the ballot, without council revision.

The council is appointing an advisory commission that will recommend reforms to the City Council, which will decide which changes to submit to the voters.

``It's business as usual,'' said Mildred Weller of North Hollywood Concerned Citizens after the three-hour summit. ``The council has no intention of giving up their power.''

Langdon Sooner of the Crenshaw Neighbors group said he was disappointed that the discussion by the summit's panel - which included City Council members and Fleming - kept focusing on what sounded to him like a competition between ``the mayor's power vs. the council's power.''

The summit was organized by a group of seven homeowner associations, including the San Fernando Valley Federation, Westside Civic Association and Baldwin Hills Coalition.

Summit co-organizer Gordon Murley, president of the Woodland Hills Homeowners Organization and the San Fernando Valley Federation, said there is a growing consensus among homeowner leaders that neighborhood councils must be part of any change in the charter to make government more responsive to the public.

``We think they are a key element because right now the rights of the communities are being abrogated by the mayor's appointees and the City Council, and they are beholding to special interests,'' Murley said.

Environmental planner David Diaz, speaking for homeowner leaders who organized the summit, said it is the power of neighborhoods, not that of elected officials, that most needs enhancing.

Sitting on a panel that included City Council members Ruth Galanter, Nate Holden, Mike Feuer and Marvin Braude, as well as City Attorney James Hahn and Fleming, Diaz outlined a proposal by homeowner leaders to create 35 elected community planning councils throughout the city.

Diaz urged officials pushing for charter reform to support changes that would allow the creation of the community councils with authority to affect decisions on development, planning and other issues at the neighborhood level.

``If the mayor thinks that a directly elected charter reform commission is good for the city, he and the council cannot escape the conclusion that directly elected residents and local planning councils is also the best strategy to rationally determine future growth and development in Los Angeles,'' Diaz said.

The concept of changing the charter to allow neighborhood groups to play a larger role in decision-making was endorsed in concept by most of the city officials who participated in the summit.

``The citizens will only buy a (charter reform) product if local communities are empowered,'' Fleming said.

Agreed Braude, ``We must empower neighborhood groups more than we have thus far. It's important because people feel a sense of separation from their government.''

Hahn told the homeowner leaders that the proposal for neighborhood councils is ``an exciting development.''

``I think people want to see the government process that is a lot more localized,'' Hahn said.

Feuer said he plans in the next month to create two community advisory councils in his district to provide better public involvement in the government process.

But while most everyone on the summit panel supported the idea of more local control, the panel split over which of the two competing reform processes is best suited to reach that goal.

Fleming said the initiative will provide for an independent reform process that will let residents have a direct say in how they want to be governed.

He questioned whether the council's advisory commission will be able to get meaningful reform past the council, which has veto power.

``The council, having essentially all the power in this city, would be asked to voluntarily give up some of that power, an assumption that past history has indicated is not likely to happen,'' Fleming said.

However, council members Holden and Galanter said the mayor's initiative is an attempt by Riordan to grab power from the council.

``The real issue here (for initiative backers) is whether the mayor has enough control or whether the evil City Council of which there are 15 (members) has too much control and hampers the mayor,'' Galanter said.

She said despite Fleming's statements for more localized decision-making, the initiative being circulated makes no mention of establishing neighborhood councils.

``There is no substance on the table,'' she said.

Holden also said Riordan is trying to grab more power.

``What the mayor really wants to do is change the checks and balance system in city government.''

Fleming, however, said charges that Riordan is trying to buy power by helping to finance the initiative are wrong because any reforms probably will not be enacted until after Riordan finishes his last term in 2001.

``The only thing he will be doing is helping to create a new, restructured city government for the next mayor, whoever that may be,'' Fleming said.

Diaz said he is concerned the council's proposal appears to include too many City Hall insiders, while he worried the mayor's elected commission could be dominated by special interests who could finance their own candidates.

``A mayor-financed lobbyist group, a development interest lobbyist group . . . could develop a campaign kitty of a half a million dollars and figure out who they want to support for the charter reform commission,'' he said.

Hahn also voiced concern about electing a charter reform commission when there are no firm rules to limit campaign fund raising and spending for candidates.

Noting the location of the summit, Hahn said, ``If `The Price is Right' is going to be determinate of how we get charter reform, I'm not for it,'' Hahn said.

Fleming said the courts may be able to provide guidance in how to regulate campaign fund raising when electing a commission.

Fleming said his campaign has gathered 165,000 of the 197,000 signatures needed to qualify the initiative. Noting the at-large election originally envisioned by the initiative may violate the federal Voting Rights Act, Fleming said the initiative backers may have to ask the courts to allow the 15 commissioners to be elected by council districts.

As the summit highlighted the differences between the two competing reform proposals, some officials on the panel warned that voters may reject all reform if competing charter reform proposals go forward on separate, antagonistic tracks.

``There will be so much confusion and lack of trust, I think neither will pass,'' Diaz said.