Of course the
Now what's this going to cost us in legal fees? And who's to blame?
The Times criticized Supervisors
But the board's two Republicans wouldn't have made their move if they weren't counting on a third supervisor joining them. That would be liberal Democrat
The supposed rationale for this new cross is historical accuracy. You see, in 2004, the real San Gabriel Mission didn't have a cross on top, but it does now, so the depiction of the mission in the seal must be modified too. Or something like that.
But for the sake of historical accuracy, and to finally put this seal mess to rest, perhaps the Board of Supervisors should use its pre-1957 seal, which served the board so well for so many years in welcome and appropriate obscurity. It featured a bunch of grapes. There aren't a lot of commercial vineyards in Los Angeles County these days, but then there isn't much of a ranching or tuna fishing industry anymore either, and the various cross-in, cross-out seals we have had over the last half-century all feature a cow and a tuna fish.
Courts have generally and appropriately frowned on crosses in government insignia. There are occasional exceptions, as in the case of Las Cruces, N.M. Its seal has crosses because that's the city's name.