For the first time in recent memory, L.A. business leaders are teaming up with labor interests to lead a political campaign.

What force was powerful enough to draw them together? It was the desire to change term limits for state legislators.

The leaders of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce and the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor are co-chairing the Californians for a Fresh Start campaign, with the goal of placing their measure on the November ballot. Last week, the campaign submitted more than 1 million signatures, well above the number required, to qualify the measure.

The chief advantage of the change, as the proponents see it, would be to allow future lawmakers to hold their seats in either the Assembly or Senate for more years, and thus gain greater expertise on more complex issues.

“When we talked about it, we realized that if this was to succeed, both labor and business had to be on board,” said Gary Toebben, chief executive of the chamber.

The chamber-labor alliance on term limit reform is more a marriage of political convenience, not some deep-seated realignment of interests. Both the chamber and the labor federation have separately sought similar changes.

Maria Elena Durazo, executive secretary and treasurer of the labor federation, said her organization is backing the measure because the system is so dysfunctional that legislators can’t accomplish anything of substance.

Toebben said businesses have grown increasingly frustrated with the inability of elected officials to address the long-term problems affecting the business climate, especially education and a decaying infrastructure throughout California.

But both organizations realized that previous term-limit reform initiatives had failed in part because they were perceived as partisan or benefiting a particular special interest.

“The folks at the County Federation of Labor thought that if they just put it on the ballot themselves, it would be attacked as a measure to enrich unions,” Toebben said. “While we realized that if business put it on the ballot itself, it would be attacked as a measure to enrich business interests.”

The ballot measure is the latest in a long line of efforts to change the state’s 1990 term limits law, which restricts legislators to serving a maximum of six years in the Assembly, eight years in the Senate, and 14 years total. This measure would reduce the total time that legislators can serve in Sacramento to 12 years, but lawmakers could choose to serve those entire 12 years in one house. It would take effect in January, and wouldn’t apply to legislators already in office or those elected in November.

The labor federation initially developed the term limit measure and sought out the chamber’s support.

“While the business and labor communities may disagree on some things, we can agree that our state is in desperate need of repair,” Durazo said in an e-mail late last week. “Legislative term limit reform … is a step in the right direction.”

The chamber signed on, and both labor chief Durazo and chamber chief executive Toebben became co-chairs.

Political bedfellows

“This is the first time that labor and the chamber in L.A. have instigated a ballot measure together and are actively running the campaign,” said Fernando Guerra, director of the Levy Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola Marymount University. He noted that both organizations supported the Measure R transportation sales tax on the November 2008 ballot, but they didn’t lead the campaign.

“This is historic in that ballot measures have usually been a battleground between labor and business,” Guerra said.

Robert Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles, said it’s rare for chambers and labor organizations to form a political alliance.

“I can’t remember a time when a chamber and labor organization have worked together on a statewide ballot measure,” Stern said. “Of course, the L.A. chamber is a bit more politically moderate than the state chamber, which reflects more the political makeup.”

The chamber brought some necessary fundraising prowess to the drive to qualify the measure. The group helped convince developer Ed Roski Jr., chief executive of Majestic Realty Corp. in City of Industry, to kick in $300,000 and multimillionaire Stephen Bing’s Shangri-La Construction Co. to donate $25,000. The chamber has committed $10,000 of its funds to the effort. (Business Journal Publisher Matt Toledo, who is also chairman of the chamber, participated in the fundraising.)

Successful initiative qualification drives typically need to pay signature gatherers at least $1 per signature. With the campaign turning in more than 1 million signatures – much more than the 694,000 required – that would bring the total cost of the campaign to date to more than $1 million. The group will have to raise more money for marketing for the election campaign.

The L.A. chamber has some experience in getting a statewide ballot measure passed. It successfully led the campaign to place a redistricting measure on the November 2008 ballot and then convinced voters to pass it. That measure took the power to redraw legislative district lines away from lawmakers and gave that power to a citizens commission. (A drive is currently under way to repeal this measure; local billionaire and Democratic activist Haim Saban has donated $2 million to the repeal effort, which is also aiming for the November ballot.)

Uphill battle

But the term limits measure still faces long odds in November. Despite dissatisfaction in some circles about the current term limits law, voters have repeatedly rejected efforts to alter it. With legislators’ approval ratings at record lows in statewide polls, there would seem to be little appetite to pass anything that could lengthen the time lawmakers serve in either house.

Proponents with Californians for a Fresh Start decided to keep the current term limits law in effect for legislators now holding office; the proposal would only impact legislators elected after the law takes effect. Opponents of the last term limits proposition in February 2008 successfully attacked that measure for allowing current lawmakers to serve up to six more years beyond the existing term limits.

Stern of the Center for Governmental Studies believes this measure stands a better chance as a result.

But the proposed ballot measure is being attacked on other fronts as well. U.S. Term Limits, a Washington, D.C.-based non-profit that supports strict term limits for elected officials, is focusing on the role of developer Roski, noting that he mounted an intensive and successful lobbying campaign last summer to get the Legislature to waive some environmental rules for a professional football stadium he wants to build in the City of Industry.

“This is Mr. Roski’s payback to California lawmakers who created a special exemption so he could build his stadium, and it stinks,” said Philip Blumel, president of U.S. Term Limits.

A spokeswoman for Majestic Realty rejected that characterization.

“This initiative specifically excludes the existing legislators, so it is hard to understand Mr. Blumel’s conclusion,” said Fran Inman, senior vice president with Majestic Realty and immediate past chairwoman of the L.A. chamber. “It is mind boggling to understand where he sees a payback. It is actually quite the opposite.”

The chamber’s Toebben said initiative proponents plan to tap into voter discontent with Sacramento by emphasizing the overall reduction in time a legislator can serve from 14 years to 12.

“There is a building frustration with legislative performance in Sacramento,” Toebben said. “A lot of people see the reduction from 14 years to 12 years as important, and this is a very simple, straightforward way of doing this.”

What’s more, he added, “we’re going to make sure people realize this measure isn’t coming from lawmakers themselves interested in furthering their own careers; it’s coming from the people.”