Valley Deserves a Larger, More Coherent Showing on the Council

With two unanticipated vacancies on the Los Angeles City Council, the mayor and City Council have a unique opportunity over the next few months to improve council district boundaries and address concerns about the lack of adequate representation for the San Fernando Valley.

The unfortunate death of City Council President John Ferraro has created a void in the 4th District, which will be filled via a special primary election scheduled for Sept. 11; if necessary, a run-off election will follow Oct. 23.

Councilman Joel Wachs announced that he will vacate his 2nd District seat Oct. 1 to work for the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts in New York. The election to replace him likely will not be held until early next year.

In the past, the city has used vacant seats as an opportunity to redistrict. However, it has not always done so with the interests of the Valley in mind. After the death of Councilman Howard Finn, who represented the northeast Valley, the city redrew the boundaries so that his 1st District was shifted to the Central City area.

The new City Charter requires the creation of a 22-person appointed redistricting commission, which will be charged with submitting an “advisory” plan to the council for consideration. The council has requested that this advisory plan be submitted by March 1, 2002, although there is no reason why it can’t--and shouldn’t--be done earlier. The charter requires that the City Council approve the final redistricting plan by July 1, 2002.

Nothing prohibits approving a redistricting plan sooner. And a compelling reason to do so exists: Why would Los Angeles want to conduct elections knowing that the district boundaries will change within months of the election? The newly elected council member could end up with a significant constituency that didn’t select him or her.

This is not the way to ensure quality representation for voters. The key to effective representation is ensuring that the elected official reflects the interests of the communities in which he or she is elected. When boundaries change, so too do issues of constituent concern.

However, the redistricting process is not always logical or fair. For example, in the 1990 redistricting process, Van Nuys was divided into five districts. The city also crafted 15 districts with portions of the Valley divided into seven districts. Of these, only four were entirely in the Valley; the other three districts had a majority of citizens outside the Valley. Thus, no Valley resident was elected to these seats during the entire decade.

A closer look at the existing council district map reveals a number of equally curious alignments. In the North Hollywood area, a one-mile stretch of Ventura Boulevard passes through three districts. How likely are constituent concerns to be addressed in such an area?

Valley leaders have long suspected that the gerrymandering that took place in the redistricting process was intended specifically to limit true representation for the Valley on the council.

By availing itself of the opportunity to have two open council seats and moving forward aggressively on redistricting actions, city leaders can undo some of the fragmented representation created by the last redistricting process.

The goal should be better alignment of district boundaries with community boundaries. The goal should be to create one, two or even three more council districts north of Mulholland Drive to provide greater opportunity for Valley residents to be elected to the council.

To continue to make the people of the San Fernando Valley, Hollywood and San Pedro feel like second-class citizens would only fuel the flames of the secession movement and bring us closer to a breakup of Los Angeles.