Ex-Mayor Mehaul O’Leary’s biting criticism of Culver City’s term-limits ordinance last week when he was forced to step down from his City Council seat has sparked a new round of debate over the controversial regulation.
In this century, the law approved by Culver City voters in 1994, has not been allowed to rest in peace.
Heat to liberalize the law steadily has been building.
An amendment that would extend the limit from two terms to three may be placed on the Culver City ballot for the presidential election in November.
What was the community mood like in ’94 when Councilman Steve Gourley finally succeeded in his six-year fight to win term limits?
Below is a Los Angeles Times’ story from March 27, 16 days ahead of the election. Intriguingly, there is no indication that term limits spurred much of an argument.
POLITICS : Growth, Clerk’s Pay Key to Culver City Elections
March 27, 1994|CAROL CHASTANG | TIMES STAFF WRITER
By the Los Angeles Times
Dateline Culver City — In what looks like a repeat of Culver City’s 1992 elections, growth issues are dominating the debate this year among the four candidates seeking two City Council seats.
But there’s something else: The city clerk’s race, usually a non-event, is downright contentious.
City Clerk Pauline Dolce, 73 years old, is being challenged for the first time in her 16-year tenure. Her opponent, computer consultant Tom Crunk, 37, has taken aim at her for opposing a Council decision in January to drastically cut her $75,000 salary.
Mr. Crunk says the cut, which will reduce the clerk’s monthly pay from $6,327 to $732 in 1996, was long overdue. But Ms. Dolce disagrees, saying her pay is justified by her wide-ranging duties.
There are, to be sure, a variety of other issues at stake in Culver City’s April 12 elections.
In votes on two binding ballot questions, for instance, residents will decide whether to limit Council members to two consecutive four-year terms, and whether to transfer the city clerk’s financial accounting responsibilities to the city treasurer’s office.
The term limits are intended to ensure fresh perspectives on the Council, and the accounting move would help streamline operations, said Councilman Albert Vera, who co-sponsored the measures with Councilman Steven Gourley.
In the City Council race, Mayor Mike Balkman, a pro-growth candidate and president of an electrical contracting firm, is seeking his second four-year term on the five-member Council. Mr. Balkman proudly points to his support for renewal projects under way to build a new City Hall and renovate Downtown.
The other candidates are film company controller Richard Marcus, attorney Ed Wolkowitz and Jim Hilfenhaus, a political organizer. Councilwoman Jozelle Smith decided not to run for re-election.
Mr. Marcus, 39, and Mr. Hilfenhaus support the term-limit measure, while Mr. Balkman, 40, and Mr. Wolkowitz, 44, oppose it.
Mr. Hilfenhaus, 43, is a slow-growth candidate who criticizes city planners for not using enough foresight when considering projects such as the controversial Marina Place retail mall approved almost five years ago. The 18-acre lot, near Lincoln and Washington boulevards, has yet to be developed.
The planned $169-million mall is an example of growth the city doesn’t need, Mr. Hilfenhaus said, asserting that it would significantly worsen traffic in an already heavily traveled area. “I can’t see building on the most impacted intersection in the Westside,” he said.
But Mr. Marcus, a pro-growth candidate, argues that the city has not done enough to attract business. Mr. Marcus said existing businesses are being scared away by restrictive ordinances such as an interim sign ordinance, which limits the size of wall and free-standing signs outside businesses. A new sign ordinance will be up for consideration at next week’s Council meeting.
Mr. Wolkowitz, who also wants the city to become more business-friendly, staunchly opposes a proposal for the city to take over electrical service by buying out Southern California Edison.
Such a move, said Mr. Wolkowitz, would send the wrong message to business. “What business in their right mind would want to come to Culver City, knowing the city will take its profits?” he asked.
However, the competition seems fiercest in the race for the clerk’s post, in which Ms. Dolce seeks a fifth, four-year term.
Ms. Dolce said she is “sick and tired” of the attention being given to her salary.
Her salary, in fact, seems comparable to those of city clerks elsewhere on the Westside. Beverly Hills’ city clerk makes $68,000 a year; Santa Monica’s, $75,000 annually.
On the subject of the clerk’s pay, Mr. Crunk is adamant. The $75,000 salary, he said, is “not appropriate” for a position he considers a community service, comparable to that of Council members, who are paid $485 monthly.
The more things change….the more they stay the same. The problem is that Culver City is in for changes, the scale of which, no one would have thought possible 10 years ago. It seems that neither side on this issue is able to understand and lead in a constructive way as these necessary challenges to the status quo present themselves. Our potential is great, we need to get over that fact and deal with it!