Perfect Opportunity for Judge Kenyon : Make L. A. County Government Fairer and Better

Starting today, U.S. Dist. Judge David V. Kenyon will preside over the final phase of the historic redistricting lawsuit lost by the self-preservationist Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.

Kenyon will be trying to end discrimination against Latinos--and that’s good--but he could also lay the groundwork for a better system of government for all county residents. That would be even more helpful.

The plaintiffs in the case have already proved that the five white men on the county board violated the Voting Rights Act by discriminating against Latino voters when they redrew district lines in 1981. What begins today is the remedy phase of the case. The parties to the lawsuit must now present alternative district plans, and Kenyon has three maps under consideration.

The supervisors, true to form, came up with a new plan that tries to preserve the status quo. The conservative majority ganged up on Supervisor Edmund D. Edelman and drew new lines that would put the liberal Edelman in a heavily Latino district. Black activists argue that it also puts so many new white voters in Kenneth Hahn’s South Side district that it could be impossible for an African-American to get elected to the board. We can’t see Kenyon being swayed by the supervisors’ map, given the blatant disregard they’ve already shown for the rights of minority voters.

The other maps before Kenyon have been submitted by the plaintiffs. They assume that Kenyon will opt for keeping the board at five members, and simply redraw district lines to improve the odds of a Latino being elected by combining the Latino barrios on Los Angeles’ East Side with the increasingly Latino suburbs in the San Gabriel Valley. That’s a safe legal strategy because there’s already a possibility that a Latina, Sarah Flores, will be elected supervisor in that area in November’s general election. But while Flores is widely regarded as the front-runner in that race, voters can do unexpected things. Nobody can assume that Flores’ possible election makes the case against the county moot.

Under the Voting Rights Act, a federal judge has considerable leeway in ordering a remedy to discrimination. He can even order changes in the size and structure of local government. That’s what Kenyon should do here, because the problems with the board stem not just from discrimination, but from the fact that it’s a decaying white elephant.

With the county’s population now exceeding 8 million people, there’s no way a five-member board can govern responsively or very effectively. If anything, a system that gives five local politicians more power and money than many governors and most in Congress practically invites the abuse of power.

Los Angeles County needs a bigger board of supervisors--seven or nine members--and also an elected chief executive in order to have the checks and balances found in other systems of government.

Like most federal judges, Kenyon is no radical. So he might understandably hold back from unilaterally ordering an expansion of the board. But he should at least consider giving residents a chance to vote on that option. Expansion plans have been defeated in past elections, but given the way folks from Acton to Malibu have lately been trying to wrest control of their communities from a board seen as arrogant and distant, the next election just might turn out differently.

Kenyon should at least give county voters a chance.