In Unity, a Promise of Real Change

Although key differences remain and language revisions need to be worked out, the efforts by both the elected and appointed charter reform commissions to submit a single, unified city charter to the voters in June provides the best hope for change that will significantly benefit the residents of the San Fernando Valley.

There are critics who are upset because they didn’t get everything they wanted, but the fact is, as stated by Councilman Joel Wachs, the compromise points included in a draft unified charter represent “a consensus for change, real change.”

But the promise of change must be assured by clear language that implements the decisions agreed to by both charter panels, one appointed by the City Council and the other elected directly by the voters. A unified charter must stop the rape of representation in the Valley and provide for a greater voice on the City Council.

Today, despite the fact that the Valley makes up more than one-third of the city’s population and cast more than 50% of the votes in the last municipal election, only four of 15 council members live there. The redrawing of council districts must protect communities instead of protecting incumbents. We cannot allow areas such as Van Nuys to be butchered into five districts, with one portion gerrymandered into the same district as Pacific Palisades, or Studio City lumped with Hancock Park, or Woodland Hills put into the same district as West Los Angeles.

Under the existing charter, Los Angeles has one of the worst ratios of local representation of any city in the world--15 council members who each represent a quarter of a million people. Although this structure made sense with a smaller population 75 years ago, it is no surprise that most people feel disconnected from a City Hall that is distant both geographically and in true local representation. Voters must be given a choice for expanded representation by separate ballot measures proposing 21 or 25 new districts with a limit on costs not to exceed one-half of 1% of the city budget.

If approved, every area of the city, especially the Valley, would benefit from an improved representation structure. The Valley would gain greater local control over planning and zoning decisions by having its own area planning commission under the draft unified charter. No longer would important decisions--which affect the Valley’s quality of life and economic vitality--be made by people who don’t live here, don’t work here and never have to endure the consequences of their decisions. Local decisions would be made by local residents at public meetings held in the community. A streamlined planning process would reduce delays and costs.

To provide a greater voice to every community in the city, there would be a system of neighborhood councils and a new office of neighborhood empowerment. However, the unified charter must include language that preserves the independence of such councils from City Hall. Local communities must be given the right to decide their own organization and selection of officers, subject to the requirement that they include all diverse stakeholders. City officials must be required to provide notice before decisions are made. No longer would City Hall decisions be influenced only by downtown business interests, public employee unions and other politically powerful forces.

For the first time, local residents would have real clout over what happened in their communities: They would be able to say no to proposed giveaways of tax dollars, to stop golden parachute payoffs to city officials forced to leave because they weren’t doing their job, and they would be able to make sure that the priorities of local communities were reflected in the city budget.

To give area residents impacted by Van Nuys Airport a greater voice--and a vote--the unified charter requires that the Airport Commission include at least one local resident.

Finally, the vast city bureaucracy must be held accountable to the mayor, as chief executive, instead of multiple layers of council members, commissioners and other city officials. There must be greater accountability over city litigation and the payment of millions in tax dollars, greater accountability over debt management and the performance of audits, and a reform of city contracting procedures to reduce costs and improve efficiency.

Some argue that these reforms don’t go far enough. As one who has worked tirelessly on this effort as an unpaid, elected representative, I share the disappointment that some proposed reforms are not included in the draft unified charter. But in our cherished democratic process, nobody can get everything he or she wants.

Mayor Richard Riordan, who fathered the charter reform initiative, has agreed to compromises on several issues that he championed. Labor and management interests have reached consensus on difficult issues. Most of the community, civic and business leaders and organizations involved in the charter reform debate, such as the League of Women Voters, have expressed support for a unified charter even though many of their recommendations were either revised or not included.

Even those who want a separate city for the San Fernando Valley would benefit from the proposed reforms. The legal, financial and political barriers to secession will take years to resolve without any guarantee that there will even be a public vote. Even if those seemingly insurmountable obstacles can be overcome, Valley cityhood would still require approval by a majority of all Los Angeles voters, a result that many observers believe to be highly unlikely. In the interim, Valley residents will have greater representation, greater local control and greater accountability from a mayor they elect, instead of a City Council majority that does not represent the Valley.

Just as the drafters of our Constitution did more than 220 years ago, the effort to create a new constitution for the city of Los Angeles requires that those involved bring together the strong and diverse differences of views for the broader common good. To compromise to achieve consensus and an improved system of governance is not a sellout but rather is fundamental to our process of democracy.

A unified charter must deliver the real change that has been promised. Valley residents will not accept a two-year delay in the implementation of reforms if approved by the voters in June. The charter provision for neighborhood councils must be strengthened to assure their independence and resources to hold elected officials accountable. And other important charter sections must be revised to reflect the consensus points approved by the elected charter reform commission.

Irrespective of its imperfections, a unified charter, subject to the revisions that must be made, represents the most far-reaching, comprehensive package of reforms submitted to the voters since 1925. It provides real reform--real change--to make City Hall more accountable, more efficient and to give Valley residents greater local control and improved representation.