Charter Vote Affirms Desire for Change

Los Angeles voters overwhelmingly approved charter reform this past week because residents throughout Los Angeles are hungry for change at City Hall.

They flatly rejected the status quo by backing a more accountable government, one that is closer to the people and their neighborhoods. At the same time, they rejected bigger government by defeating amendments that called for an expanded City Council.

The electorate is to be congratulated. Sixty percent of Los Angeles residents showed they are dissatisfied and seek structural changes in the way the city operates. They supported neighborhood councils, which the public hopes will bring government closer to the people. Residents don’t want a long-distance call to their city hall. They backed provisions intended to at last bring accountability to city government, giving the mayor’s office marginally more power to run the city. I believe the charter reform process was a referendum for more local, not larger government.

What will this mean to the San Fernando Valley’s efforts to explore cityhood through a study by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)? We believe the vote on charter reform confirms that Valley VOTE (Voters Organized Toward Empowerment), a group that has pushed the study, is on the right track. People want reform. People want smaller government and people want accountability.

Two questions remain: Did charter reform go far enough to satisfy the discontent that exists in the Valley and elsewhere? And will the City Council follow through with the new ordinances that will be required to implement the new charter when 12 out of the 15 members campaigned heavily against it?

Valley residents petitioned for a study of reorganizing Los Angeles into two smaller cities because they seek greater control over local neighborhoods and decisions affecting their quality of life, improved basic public services, lower taxes and fees, long-term planning based on the public’s priorities, a better business climate, safe and clean neighborhoods, equity in the distribution of city services and a government that is accessible, accountable and responsive.

In 1997, Valley leaders joined together and called on the city of Los Angeles to reform its charter as an alternative to Valley cityhood. The Valley, after 20 years, offered the city one more chance to reform itself.

For the past two years, the charter reform process has played itself out. Although many Valley residents acknowledge that the new charter may be better than the existing one, they believe it falls far short of the promise of true reform, does not provide the improvements sought and will not satisfy the discontent.

Still, in the face of a possible division of the city, most City Council members opposed even watered down charter reform.

The council’s manipulation of the charter process and council members’ ultimate opposition to what their own appointed commission recommended raise doubts about whether meaningful reform for Los Angeles is possible.

Be mindful that the neighborhood councils called for in the new charter are advisory to the City Council and that their powers and responsibilities are not spelled out in the new document but will be decided by the council.

Having made one last attempt to reform Los Angeles city government and seeing the boldness of some on the City Council to resist reform, many residents of the Valley and elsewhere believe a reorganizing of Los Angeles into two or more smaller cities may be the only means of achieving better local government.

With this in mind, Valley VOTE will continue its relentless effort to have LAFCO complete a comprehensive and fair study of reorganizing Los Angeles. Whether or not the Valley ever becomes a city, the LAFCO study process will benefit residents by providing a gold mine of information about how the city is run. It will also keep pressure on reluctant city officials who may attempt to delay or thwart the public’s vote for reform.

Reform of the city is not a them-versus-us issue. All residents want improvements but differ on how to restructure government. Cityhood and charter reform are not mutually exclusive. Charter reform was the electorate’s first call for change. It was the only choice on the ballot. The 60% majority vote sends out a resounding cry for government restructure, reform and, most importantly, the accountability of elected representatives. The LAFCO study is the next step to accomplish the goal of “government for the people and by the people.”