COUNCIL NOW AVAILABLE TO THREE-TIMERS.

Byline: KERRY CAVANAUGH Staff Writer

Los Angeles City Council members -- already among the highest-paid municipal officials in the nation -- will also be among the longest-tenured among large cities that use term limits.

Council members now will be able to serve 12 years rather than eight after roughly 60 percent of voters approved a ballot measure that also revised city lobbying and campaign finance rules.

And a day after the tally, relieved City Council members said they were pleased -- and a little surprised -- that Measure R passed by such a large margin.

``The people spoke loud and clear: They want us to stay for three terms,'' said Councilman Dennis Zine, who represents the west San Fernando Valley. ``I see it as a support for the people on the City Council and I'm honored.''

Councilman Ed Reyes was particularly happy. With two years left on his second term, the Eastside leader has been scrambling to finish projects in his district.

Now with the option of running for a third, four-year term, Reyes said he wants to initiate a neighborhood bus line, a project he may not have attempted on a shorter timeline.

``It's like there was a huge balloon payment coming due and it was just extended,'' Reyes said Wednesday. ``Policy-making is a very complicated process. Now I can get much more done.''

Salaries to rise

City Council members had been limited to two four-year terms in office, but the new measure adds a third four-year term.

Salaries for the 15 full-time council members next year will rise from $150,696 to $171,648.

All but three have said they will consider seeking a third term in office now that it is available.

Without an extension, seven of the 15 members would have been termed out in 2009: Eric Garcetti, Janice Hahn, Alex Padilla, Jan Perry, Reyes, Jack Weiss and Zine. Five others, presuming they are re-elected, would be termed out in 2011.

But, city leaders admit the fight over the term-limits measure isn't over yet.

David Hernando of North Hollywood, who has crusaded to reinstate a cross to the Los Angeles County seal, has vowed to pursue a legal challenge against Measure R.

He wants to take the place of Neal Donner of West Los Angeles, who filed suit in August to keep the measure off the ballot -- a challenge that was postponed until after the election.

Donner said recently that he did not want to overrule the will of voters and would drop the lawsuit if the measure was approved.

``This is about more than whether people get another four years on the City Council,'' Hernandez said. ``This is about the total disregard of the process, the manner in which City Council totally ignored the city attorney and the manner in which they really sidestepped the true purpose of the Ethics Commission.''

Indeed, many opponents were more angered by how the measure was proposed than by the measure itself.

The measure was conceived by the League of Women Voters of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce as a package designed to limit the influence of lobbyists and special interests on City Hall.

But the proposal was written by a law firm that represents lobbyists, then fast-tracked through the City Council with little community input.

Critics argued that the measure wrapped an unpopular term-limits extension inside popular ethics reforms. And mailers sent out by the Yes on Prop R campaign suggested that the measure would enact term limits to ``prevent Council members from serving for life.''

In fact, the measure allows council members to serve 12 years instead of eight years.

``I think a lot of people were confused and that's unfortunate because my opposition all along was toward the misleading tactics and lack of participation,'' said Jeff Jacobberger, a neighborhood council member and co-chairman of the Not PropR committee.

``I'm disappointed in the results. Now I'd like to move forward on public financing of elections and other things that will really do more to reduce the perception of pay-to-play in Los Angeles.''

But Cindy O'Connor, who headed the Prop R campaign for the League of Women Voters, said the strong support from voters is a sign they are eager for change in city government.

``Maybe they saw a need for reform as much as we did. I think this adjustment in ethics and term limits was right on target and we're really proud with the results,'' she said.

Not so confused

Political experts said some voters may have been confused by the measure, but probably not as much as opponents would like to think.

``Overall, Los Angeles voters are fairly sophisticated. My sense is they probably had a good idea what it was about,'' said Tom Hogen-Esch, an associate professor of political science at California State University, Northridge.

He also viewed the vote as an endorsement of current city leaders.

``If you had some of the characters of the past and scandals of the past, I don't think this would have passed,'' he said.

While the measure now would allow some termed-out council members to run again, at least two former City Council members said they had no interest in returning to City Hall.

Former Councilwoman Ruth Galanter said she was surprised the measure received such wide support.

``I just can't believe people did this,'' Galanter said. ``All it does is further remove the council from competitive races and raises the prospect of them getting pensions.''

Former Councilman Nate Holden, who had supported the measure, said he also had no desire to return.

``I supported this because I believe people with talent should be allowed to serve,'' Holden said. ``We have a very good council now and they're all my friends. I wouldn't run against them.''

Staff Writer Rick Orlov contributed to this report.

kerry.cavanaugh(at)dailynews.com

[phone]