By Douglas P. Shuit
TIMES STAFF WRITER

CALIFORNIA - With California's municipal election season about to get underway, a number of cities have done the unthinkable: They have canceled their elections because of a lack of interest. Seven cities in Los Angeles County have decided to forgo the democratic exercise of power this spring, some for the first time in their histories.

Beverly Hills, incorporated in 1914, has never before canceled an election, but it did this time. Ditto Lakewood, which had gone 45 years without missing an election. Monrovia hasn't had to cancel an election since the turn of the century. Cities cancel elections when mayors and city council members don't draw opponents. In addition to the three mentioned, elections were also canceled in Hidden Hills, City of Industry, Rolling Hills, and San Gabriel. When elections are scratched, incumbents win automatically.

Local candidates have always struggled for visibility in odd-numbered election years, when there aren't state or federal elections to draw interest, but never has there been such a dearth of candidates willing to run for office, say those who follow local politics. Voter registration has also been trending down for several years, and turnout for elections is often very low, both signs that interest in the political process is waning. "The turnouts are abysmal, often in the teens or lower," said Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder Conny McCormack in a discussion of off-year local elections.

Moving city elections into even-numbered years would boost interest because voting would be linked to state and national elections. Most other California counties, including Orange County, now hold their city elections in even-numbered years. But don't expect that to happen any time soon in Los Angeles County, McCormack said. With 88 cities and outdated vote-counting equipment, the county couldn't handle the load, the registrar said.

This year hotly contested elections are underway in many of Los Angeles County's 44 cities that are having elections March 2. Some cities, such as West Hollywood, Carson and South Gate, are having typical donnybrooks. Still, elections are being canceled in historic numbers. Last year, Orange and Ventura counties also experienced an unusually high number of canceled elections and races that failed to draw challengers, so it's not just a Los Angeles County phenomenon. Heightened interest among political activists to work for single issues, as opposed to more unpredictable candidates, is one explanation cited by some for this year's quiet election season.

A case in point is Beverly Hills, which canceled its City Council election when two incumbents, including the city's mayor, failed to draw opponents. But then the Beverly Hills City Council was forced to approve a special election in May after residents qualified a ballot measure that will ask voters whether furriers should be required to label fur coats in a way that describes the manner of death of the animal killed for its pelt. (Only Beverly Hills could come up with a referendum concerning the labeling of furs. WFI Editor)

Initially, Beverly Hills thought it would save money by canceling the city elections, a common theme among city clerks who view the scrapped elections as a budgetary godsend. But then came the fur-labeling initiative. "We saved $60,000 by canceling the council election, now we are having to spend it May 11, which tears my heart out," said Mayor Les Bronte. Bronte assumed the lack of challengers was to be taken as a sign that the people of Beverly Hills were satisfied, but supporters of the fur-labeling campaign like to point out that 800 more people signed initiative petitions than voted for Bronte in the last election.

Josh Gross, a Beverly Hills activist, thinks it is prohibitively expensive to run for the City Council, particularly against incumbents who conventional wisdom holds are re-election favorites. "Who's got $40,000 or $50,000 to run against an incumbent, who, by tradition, looks likely for a second term?" he asked. Still, he said the mayor's active opposition to the ballot measure infuriated many locals and likely would have drawn opposition. "If the filing period were right now as opposed to two months ago, you'd probably have several candidates running," Gross said.

SOURCE: Excerpted from the 21 February, 1999, issue of the Los Angeles Times, Orange County Edition, from an article entitled, "Lack of Rivals Cancels 7 Local Elections in L.A." Reprinted in the public service of the national interest of the American people.

The Federal Government is already fiddling with American elections. Voters overwhelmingly voted in favor of medical marijuana in six states, but the U.S. Government is actively trying to nullify those election results. Now local communities are canceling elections, and handing politicians authority to act without being re-elected. Is it just a matter of time before the political parties find some way to cut deals with each other, that enable their officeholders to continue in office, without elections? Today its local communities canceling elections, "due to lack of interest," tomorrow it could be statewide elections; and after that, the presidency. The politicians have already sanctioned this on one level of government. What is there to stop them from expanding the cancellation of elections to other levels of government?)