What's Next, Los Angeles? with Mike Bonin
Los Angeles is at a turning point. We are living in a defining moment. What happens next is up to us. Over the past few years, problems and challenges have shaken this city -- and tremendous opportunities for change have presented themselves. How do we rise to this moment and emerge a better place to live? What will it take to create a more just and a more equitable community? Working together, how are we going to create a stronger, forward-thinking Los Angeles? Mike Bonin, writer, teacher, progressive activist and former City Councilmember, looks at the issues and problems facing Los Angeles, examines ideas, and talks with the people who will lead us to a brighter future.
Produced in partnership with LA Forward.
What's Next, Los Angeles? with Mike Bonin
Measure G: Who Wields the Power?
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
The official title for Measure G is “LOS ANGELES COUNTY GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE, ETHICS AND ACCOUNTABILITY CHARTER AMENDMENT.”
That sure makes it sound dry, boring and wonky. It is anything but. It is about power. Incredible power. Who will wield it? And who will they represent?
We discuss Measure G on this episode of WNLA with County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, author of the proposal, and Supervisor Holly Mitchell, who opposes it.
More Info:
Unpacking the impact of Los Angeles County's ballot measures
Why proposal to expand the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors is such a big deal
What's Next, Los Angeles? is produced and hosted by Mike Bonin, in partnership with LA Forward.
The official title for Measure G is Los Angeles County Government Structure, Ethics, and Accountability. That sure as hell makes it sound really dry, boring, and wonky. It is anything but it is about power. Incredible power. Who will wield it and who will they represent? County Supervisors Lindsay Horvath and Holly Mitchell joined me to discuss Measure G on this episode of What's Next, Los Angeles. Hi everyone and welcome. It's Mike Bonin. Thank you so much for joining me. The government of Los Angeles County is often invisible and little understood, but it touches all of us every day in ways great and small. Consider this. Los Angeles County is massive. Nearly 10 million people live here. Our population is larger than 40 other states. The county is more than 4,000 square miles large, and it includes 88 different cities. LA County's government has 166,000 employees working in 38 departments. Its budget this year is a whopping forty-five point six billion dollars. LA County government touches our lives in various ways. Here are just some of the things LA County government provides or manages. The public health system, the mental health system, social services and safety net programs like CalFRESH, child protective services and foster care, homeless services. The county handles felony prosecutions and runs the local jails. The county does property tax assessments and sets the sales tax. The county runs water conservation programs and youth job programs. The county conducts restaurant inspections. The county operates cultural activities, including owning the Hollywood Bowl, the Museum of Art, and the Music Center. The County operates more than 73,000 acres of parkland and recreation space and manages most of our beaches and harbors. The county even operates the policing, firefighting parks, and libraries of approximately half of its 88 cities and all of the unincorporated areas of LA County. That is a lot. So who governs LA County? Who has the power over all of that? Well, the county is run by a five-member board of supervisors, each one of whom represents about two million people. They serve as both the legislative and the executive branches of county government. Not only do they pass laws and unilaterally set the budget for every county department, they also have the power to hire and fire the heads of all those department agencies, except for the three who are elected directly by the voters, the district attorney, the sheriff, and the assessor. They have enormous power, and most people don't even know their names. They're Catherine Barger, Janice Hahn, Lindsay Horvath, Holly Mitchell, and Hilda Salise. We are going to hear from two of those members today discussing Measure G, which would reorganize how LA County government is run. Measure G would expand the board from five members to nine members, and it also creates a new countywide elected position. A county executive. Basically a county mayor. It is a big change, and an elected executive creates an entirely different government dynamic and changes who has power. This proposal comes from Supervisors Lindsay Horvath and Janice Hahn and is opposed by Holly Mitchell and Catherine Barger. Today we're going to talk with Supervisors Horvath and Mitchell. First up is Supervisor Horvath. She was elected to the Board of Supervisors in 2022 after serving as council member and mayor in West Hollywood. Her district includes most of the West Side and San Fernando Valley and a big chunk of Los Angeles City. Supervisor Lindsay Horvath, thanks for joining me on What's Next Los Angeles.
SPEAKER_00Thank you for having me.
SPEAKER_02Always great to see you. You've had a busy uh summer at the Democratic National Convention in Paris with the Olympics.
SPEAKER_00Yes, it's been a busy time, lots of learning, lots of excitement, and hopefully good things for our future.
SPEAKER_02Hopefully. And uh one of the things for our future is what's uh going to be on the ballot in November. And you've got a very big government reform measure for Los Angeles County on the ballot. Before we get into the the details about what it does, tell me first, what problem are you trying to solve with this charter amendment?
SPEAKER_00Well, I think it's worth noting that the Los Angeles County Charter hasn't been changed in terms of governance since 1912, when the population was 500,000 people before women even had the right to vote. And so, you know, we are clearly in a different time and need a government that meets this moment. The governance model that we are seeking to bring about through this uh charter amendment and through the active participation of all Angelinos and stakeholders is to have a governance model that is uh more effective, more representative, and accountable to Angelinos. We've heard uh in so many ways that there are problems that have come to the county that have really uh that the board has brought forward solutions in terms of really um excellent policy, really uh bold ideas and big thinking, but the execution and the implementation um sometimes get stuck. And some of that is attributable to Los Angeles County size and the complexity that um that exists within our county. Uh so a larger board uh with an elected county executive to serve the county wide interests and be that check and balance to each other and provide that sort of accountability, I think, is is long overdue and people are excited about it.
SPEAKER_02So tell me specifically what the elements of the the charter amendments are and how do they solve those problems?
SPEAKER_00Sure. So it's uh there are basically three parts. Uh the first is the expansion of the Board of Supervisors, and that that would increase from five seats currently to nine seats. That process would uh take place in consolidation with the next uh census. So we're not sort of uh spending a bunch of money to do something outside of that process. In fact, we're working within that process to make sure that as we are doing that count and we are making sure that we are representing all of the voices throughout Los Angeles County, that we add more seats at the table to re reflect the diversity of the county and to make sure that more voices are at the table. We're also trying to make the districts a little bit more manageable size. Right now we have we each have about two million in our districts. And um, you know, for certain policy areas that's great, but for the direct constituent services, especially for the unincorporated areas, we've heard that people really want to have more access to their supervisor. They want to have more regular and different types of engagement that really are required when you're a local elected official. And so by decreasing the sizes of the size of each of the districts, um, we're able to bring that government more accountable and directly representative to the people. Um the second piece is an elected executive. And I think as we've been having conversations, there's been some confusion. Are we asking the CEO to run for office? We are not. Um there will continue to be, you know, the kinds of expertise within the government bureaucracy that that helps it to run and make sure that we are, you know, uh bringing forward a sound budget and and uh managing the risk and and all that comes with leading a county. Uh, this position would be an elected position, much like the mayor is to a city, um, that provides the executive leadership and sort of separates that out from the board. Right now, the board is the executive, it is the legislative body, and it is a quasi-judicial body. All of those powers held in one body does make it a very powerful board, but it doesn't provide the check and balance in terms of accountability and implementation that I think people are often looking for. And we've uh heard in my short time being on the board, some of the challenges that department directors have faced. Um, you know, I can give you any number of issues from jail closure to homelessness and beyond, uh, where we've heard that um not having someone who has who is embodied with that authority to bring uh directors together and to get them to solve the problems by working together has been a challenge. And, you know, even the CEO has expressed that to us, you know, she's been excellent, and yet um, you know, we still face some of these challenges. So having somebody empowered by the people uh to draft the budget, to make sure that we are executing the directives of the board and most importantly, the vision of the people is incredibly important. And then the third component really encompasses an ethics commission, which uh brings about transparency and helps to build public trust. But there's also, you know, a charter reform commission that makes sure that we're not waiting another hundred years before we're talking about what kind of government is best for the moment. It gives us an opportunity to have this conversation at least every 10 years to make sure that we're looking at what other amendments, if any, we want to bring to county government and the charter. It creates uh a task force that will hold public meetings and offer opportunity for people to engage within that process as we go forward. So this is a starting for you know, a going forward process. This is a starting point if this ballot measure passes. And over the next period of time, we'll be implementing these changes. We have deadlines uh so people know what we're marching towards. And it gives everybody an opportunity to really understand what uh role they can play in that change and how they can have more accountability inside their county government.
SPEAKER_02And going from five supervisors uh to nine supervisors, how did you get that number? Five five of you represent two million people each, nine would represent still, I guess, over one million each. How does that solve the problem and how'd you settle on nine?
SPEAKER_00Yes. Well, this is a number that's been studied for decades, honestly. Um, and it's a number that Angelinos are quite comfortable with. And um it's also a number that, you know, at just as you said, it gets districts to about a little bit more than a million, which is uh about the size that state senate districts are um in our state. So we have comparable districts that are already sort of in play, and um that size has ostensibly been working for state senators. Um I think for this kind of government, we could certainly explore another number, um, but I think nine is a good starting point, especially because we're committed to working within our budget to implement these changes. And, you know, this this is a number that um that Angelinos have been talking about for a while too. While um it's fewer than uh the number of seats that exist on the LA City Council, and LA, the city of LA is, you know, less than half of the of the county, um, there's certainly room to grow, but I think uh nearly doubling in size is a good place for us to start in terms of getting more representative uh diversity um at the table when we're having these important decisions being made at the county.
SPEAKER_02Tell me a little bit more about this this concept of a of a county executive. When you when you think about it, it it strikes me as this would probably probably probably be the second most powerful elected official in the state of California behind the governor. Uh big position. The LA City Charter has very specifically prescribed duties for the mayor versus the council. Uh what would the roles of the county executive be and how prescribed is that in this amendment before the voters?
SPEAKER_00Sure. So it could be, as you described, um, it could just be a great partner uh to the legislative body uh in terms of getting things done. I I think um what's really great about this charter amendment is we have created the architecture for what um where we want to start, what sort of changes we want to prescribe in the Charter Amendment. And then we have a going forward process to make sure that there's a lot of public input in terms of the how. And it it allows us to make those uh choices by ordinance. So if we find that what we are looking to implement doesn't quite work as intended, we have the ability to change it within our existing bodies without having to go back to the voters to change it. And I think that was uh critically important because we want to make sure that we have the opportunity for everybody to have their voice be heard and that this is uh going to be a work in progress over a number of years. Um, the elected executive, though, I think is really intended to make sure that we are implementing the change that the that the Board of Supervisors sets out in their policy vision. Having an elected representative lead the executive branch, separating out that executive branch and having somebody lead it is the norm for most democratic governments. As you identified, there we have a governor, we don't just have a legislature, we have a president, we don't just have a Congress. In fact, we fought a war to have that. Um, so it's a very fundamental American government idea, but it also is something that will make sure that we have somebody who's focusing on countywide interests. A lot of times uh when we have the Board of Supervisors as it's currently constituted, thinking about leadership, um, and people think about, oh, when they have their year as chair or things like that, how they get to shape the agenda, sometimes those interests can be more district-specific. By having an elected executive who's focused on the whole county, uh, those countywide interests like homelessness, like uh jail closure, like some of the very bold policies that the board has initiated, we'll have somebody who's uh focused entirely on implementing those countywide changes, while we also have elected representatives representing each of those districts and and their respective interests.
SPEAKER_02So the the charter amendment would create the the title and the mission. And then am I correct in understanding that the specific job description would be worked out for public participation?
SPEAKER_00So most of it, yes. Um we have identified that that um in separating out that authority, there will also be a director of budget and management. So there will be uh somebody who's uh a staff level person um supporting that executive. That could be somebody who leads a department under that executive if that's what the process allows for. It could be somebody who's, you know, a chief deputy to that person. We have really yet to work out exactly how that will work. And I think um that's for good reason. We want to make sure the public has a say in how that has worked. Um, there are um a number of interests that have spoken with me about what it's been like to work currently with the CEO, what has worked well, and where things kind of get stuck. And um I've heard that from the CEO herself. I've heard that from department directors. Um, one of the things that we spell out in uh this ballot measure is that the executive will have the uh uh power to hire and fire uh department directors, but they will be hired with the concurrence of the board. The board will also have to vote on that. And should uh the executive decide to remove someone from their position, the board has the ability to reinstate them with a two-thirds vote. So um some of those um basic operational things we outlined in the Charter Amendment and really tried to do so in a way that balances the power of each of these branches. Um but we know that in in terms of day-to-day operations and and how all of those powers get separated out will be um outlined through that going forward process.
SPEAKER_02As an outside observer and as a student of government, I get a sense that the bureaucracy at the county, which is massive, yes, um, has an ability under the current structure of five supervisors, none of whom is the chief executive, to sort of play the supervisors off each other and exercise, in many ways, a a bureaucratic slowdown or veto on stuff. Is is this something the county executive is meant to address?
SPEAKER_00Well, what you know, I've heard in the past that past CEOs have even identified themselves as the quote unquote sixth member of the board. And so um, you know, people have talked about the the kind of power that this seat can hold, and that's true. Um we want to make sure that it does have the authority to get things done. Um, but we also expect that it will be something that uh that a seat that will work in partnership with the board, much like a mayor in a city council. Um, you know, we we know that um right now this this moment is about returning power to the people. I think there's been a lot of mistrust. Um, there's been a lot of questions about what's been happening um at the local level. You know, for more than a decade, I've been hearing these questions. I think about the crisis that happened in Bell and so many other things. What we really want to do is make sure that we are empowering a government that works for the people, that we're separating out the authority and quite frankly, doing the bold thing that people are asking us to do. And that's make sure that the government works for them. And so we, you know, there have been times where things happen behind the scenes and people are like, well, how did that get decided? And, you know, because of the authority that exists, you know, there are lots of different interpretations about how decisions can be made. If a majority of the board um believes something and the CEO uh has delegated authority, can she move forward with making decisions, knowing that a majority of the board will back her up, even if it wasn't done through a public process? That's happened since I've been on the board. And so, you know, things like that we want to make sure are changed so people have a voice in how the government is working for them and what decisions get made and how people are a part of them.
SPEAKER_02So a couple of your colleagues have been uh not supportive of the proposal and have been critical of the process, uh, saying it was rushed and sort of came suddenly. How was the proposal developed and and what do you say to those criticisms?
SPEAKER_00Sure. So I, you know, this process started at the beginning of 2023. Uh I co-authored a motion that Supervisor Mitchell brought forward to take a look at govern um all aspects of governance. And um the initial motion failed. Um then we sort of there was public support that uh there was an LA Times article written, don't abandon the you know your uh your commitment to governance reform. And so uh then two proposals came back, a modified version of the original one, which I also co-authored with Supervisor Mitchell, and another motion uh by Supervisors Hahn and Hilda Sole and Supervisor Hildes Lees that was strictly expanding the board of supervisors, and that was it. And um, you know, the expansion alone did not pass, but the board was unanimous in uh this time saying if we studied it a bit more, um maybe uh maybe there would be governance reform measures that the board would want to undertake. And we uh delegated that authority to um the executive office to hire a consultant to start us on that process. You know, more than a year and a half later, we still hadn't hired a consultant to do that work. And in fact, the RFP that uh eventually went out to hire that consultant what didn't actually go out until after the window in which somebody could have put a ballot measure on the ballot from the board of supervisors. Now, if I were being skeptical, I would say, you know, maybe there was a purpose to that. Um, but I I think what really happened is institutional inertia took over in the county, much like a lot of things. We've seen the board bring forward bold vision on a number of policies that just really get stuck. And this was yet another bold potential change to come to not only county governance in terms of the elected seats, but really the day-to-day operations. How do we fundamentally change the way that we're doing the work inside the county, which we have heard from, you know, business interests, labor interests, community stakeholders who are just wanting to see themselves reflected in the budget. You know, there are so many people who have come to us saying they want to access their county government more and they just don't know how. And so, um, you know, especially for young people who have expressed losing faith in government, we need them to be involved. And this is an opportunity for everybody to be reminded that the government belongs to you, that this is your government to shape. And so, um, you know, I I thought that there is no time to waste with that at stake. Um, you know, this is a presidential election. Typically, this is these elections turn out the most number of people. We want as many uh participants in this conversation as we possibly can get. And so, um, and there's also a conversation happening uh next door in the city of Los Angeles about um, you know, whether they expand their council, what other sort of reforms they want to bring to the city government. So this is really top of mind for a large part of Los Angeles. And so we want to make sure that we are capitalizing on that and making sure that we're also uh taking a look at ourselves and how we can be doing our work better at the county, and that's really. What this ordinance is about, bringing it forward in a timely fashion and giving the people that opportunity to have their voice be heard.
SPEAKER_02It's been really interesting to see who's in favor, who's not. I know some labor has been supportive, some labor opposed, but I've really noticed uh you have have joined with many in the um AAPI community, uh, which have voiced enthusiastic support saying they've been underrepresented historically on the board. Um the other hand, uh, there have been a lot of opposition voiced, particularly in the black community, uh saying they're concerned about diminished representation. Uh what do you say to that?
SPEAKER_00Well, I think uh, you know, five people to represent 10 million just doesn't work. And, you know, in the progressive politics that I've been a part of, we've always been encouraging a bringing more seats to the table to have more and different voices part of the conversation. We need to reflect the diversity of Los Angeles County at the Board of Supervisors and in how we're doing this work. And so this is an opportunity for greater representation. Currently, uh only two of the five seats are held by people of color. Um, you know, in a county that is majority minority and near majority Latino to only have one Latino seat held currently of the five seats just doesn't make sense. Um, you know, we're uh the API community has never had representation on the Board of Supervisors. So yes, they have been enthusiastic about, you know, just having the opportunity to ever have their voices reflected in the conversation. And I think there are also important conversations to be had about how uh how we do the these changes to make sure that the concerns that are being raised by black community members, um also by the actually to your point about the labor unions, the public safety unions are the ones who are raising their voices, saying um that they uh have questions. And that's been sort of interesting to me. Um but uh, you know, I I don't think that we should be creating a system where we're fighting against one another and pitting these communities against one another, making governance a zero-sum game. We need a bigger table. We need one that's reflective of the diversity of Los Angeles. And, you know, we need to give that opportunity to the people to say how they want to be governed. And I don't think the five of us should be gatekeeping the the ability to do that.
SPEAKER_02Uh before we go, anything else that you'd like voters to know about the uh charter amendment uh before they decide how to vote?
SPEAKER_00Absolutely. You know, Supervisor Hahn and I uh brought forward this motion, uh, as I said, to give the power back to the people. But we also did so uh being mindful of the past. We know that different aspects of this have been brought forward in the past, but we believe that this package of bringing all of these form reforms together and making sure that we are not costing the taxpayers one additional cent. We have written into the ordinance that uh you cannot raise taxes in order to implement this change. You know, that was important to us. We believe that uh we can be a more responsible, responsive, and accountable government to the people of Los Angeles County. And we think that the voters deserve to have the opportunity to weigh in. And so I'm excited. I hope people will join us in this effort, not only to vote yes on Measure G and make sure it gets passed in November, but to embark on that process with us while we create an ethics commission by 2026, we implement an elected executive by 2028 and put that on the ballot, and then in our next redistricting process, create more seats at the table to allow more of Los Angeles to have a voice.
SPEAKER_02Supervisor Lindsay Horveth, one of the architects of Measure G, thank you so much for joining me.
SPEAKER_00Thank you.
SPEAKER_02Next up is Supervisor Holly Mitchell, who represents a district that stretches from the South Bay through South LA to Koreatown. She was elected to the board in 2020 after serving several years in the state legislature. Supervisor Mitchell has championed previous efforts to reform the governance of Los Angeles, but has been sharply critical of this effort. Supervisor Holly Mitchell, thanks for joining me on What's Next, Los Angeles. It's good to be with you again. Thank you. Thank you for being here to talk to me again. Uh today's topic is uh Measure G. Uh it's a it's a wonky topic. It's probably not the thing that the voters are talking about most uh over breakfast with their spouse, uh, but it's an important measure uh and it's about governance reform. Um the people who are advocating for this, uh advocates say that the county is old, its charter is outdated, it doesn't functional anymore. They say supervisorial districts are way too large, and the system in the county means that the execution and implementation of ideas gets stuck in sort of a dysfunctional bureaucratic maze. Before we discuss the merits of their proposal, I just want to discuss the the problem they have identified. Do you do you agree that the way LA County is set up is is problematic? And would you describe the problem the same way they do?
SPEAKER_01Uh I I don't know that I um agree with the proponents uh in the notion that it's at a level of dysfunction that we can't get anything done. I you are part of a bureaucracy. Uh sometimes government can be slow, sometimes politics comes into play. Um, but I was proud to join the Board of Supervisors in 2020 in the middle of a dual pandemic. And I saw local government in action, I saw LA County get, you know, millions of dollars into programs passed through directly from the federal government to help Angelinos every day. I saw amazing work happen. And I've been so impressed with um the people in LA County, our department heads, um, who work really hard every day to deliver services. Um, does it always happen as quickly as we like? Not always, but uh I don't think it's it's it's the level of dysfunction, as some would argue. I I was surprised, frankly, when I joined the board, um, coming from the state legislature. Um, in terms of our policy making process, um where we have no committee structure like the city of LA did, um, uh where I was concerned that I thought that there wasn't enough policy analysis done, enough budget analysis done. So I was really interested in looking at other counties, uh like all of them across the state, but us, who have committees where you have a budget committee or whatever. Um, so you know, I introduced a couple of motions, one that didn't get any support other than my own, uh, a second one that then got unanimous support to study and look at models of governance across the country to get a report back that we could then figure out as a board what made sense for us. So is there room for improvement? Absolutely. I'm not sure that this measure really focuses on um the right elements that we could have the opportunity to make some adjustments to.
SPEAKER_02So you wanted to look really at the at the whole structure, compare it with other places. This measure has has done a a a couple uh distinct pieces of change. The the first one, the one I think that people are more familiar with, is expanding the size of the board from five to nine, which is bring them from serving about two million people to, I guess, a little over one million people. Um uh what's the objection to that?
SPEAKER_01I don't know that nine is the right number. Um, I I understand the proponents that they polled and polling numbers told them nine, but I don't even know what the polling questions were. Was the the the did the poll give you a choice? Do you think it should be nine, eleven, or fifteen? You know, Cook County that has a countywide elected board president, not CEO, but a board president, I think has 15. You know, we're one of the top three at Houston, Cook County, and LA. And so uh as I talk to some of the um advocacy organizations that are doing, have done the analysis around redistricting to really look at underrepresented communities and communities of color to really figure out how maps should be drawn. You know, some of them are concerned that that nine may not be enough for us to get to the true diversity that an LA County board really should have. So my question is not about should we expand the board? I carry those early motions to study it. My question is I don't know that nine is the right number. And all of the money and effort and resources it takes to get a ballot measure passed, um, I wanted it to be right. I want to make sure that what we put before voters has been well thought through, analyzed with input. Um, that's you know, not um kind of held in secret, but is really as expansive as possible as possible. So I just don't know that nine is the right number. And I'm concerned based on what I hear from people who do this work, that they're concerned that it won't get us the stated goal, which is to authentically uh diversify ethnically the board of supervisors.
SPEAKER_02Uh the other piece of their proposal, the other big piece of their proposal that I gotta say I'm I'm struggling with with understanding is the creation of an elected county executive. You just made a distinction between a a board president who was elected and a county executive. What are your concerns about this proposal?
SPEAKER_01Well, I'm uh there are a number of them. Uh, first of all, because the person is elected countywide, the term limits rules don't apply to this position. So the balance of power would be really very interesting. Um, you would have an expanded board um with term limits and a county executive that has none. Uh in our effort to try to uh diversify the board, you know, the the only woman and woman of color to ever win countywide, there's you know only been one. So we're gonna go from this wonderful experience of a diverse all-female board to a countywide elected. I'm not sure who could win that. Thirdly, it's the balance of power issue. Um, as it is written in the measure, um, they would have hiring and firing power, um, and all 40 department heads would report to this countywide elected. So when my constituents in Florence Firestone and Lennox are complaining about parking enforcement, or when my constituents in in La Dera want public works to make their streets safer after that horrible collision at the intersection of La Cieniga and and of La Brea and Sloss. And when when my constituents are calling, when my constituents are calling me because they're being overwhelmed by the street takeover, I, as their representative, can call Department of Public Works and get action. Um under this new structure, all of the departments would report to this countywide elected. And I'm not sure how they will prioritize the needs of 10 million. If you think the districts are too large with each of us representing 2 million, how can this one person fairly and equitably represent 10 million? Um it just seems to run counter to the stated concern about an antiquated bureaucracy where nothing gets done and and uh five people representing 10 million doesn't work. But we are going to empower and elect with no term limits one person who will have a disproportionate weighted kind of power dynamic over the board when it comes to critical decisions around the budget and department heads and and particularly around their termination. I think there has to be, you know, the board has to um vote to support a hiring. But I see as I read it, I think they have the power over termination. Would they be able to veto actions of the board as well? Good question. I don't think so, but there is this notion that the board could veto actions of this countywide elected. And the example that was given to me when I asked that question in the board hearing was, well, I've a legislature. And my comeback was and how many times um are you aware in state history that the state legislature overrode a gubernatorial veto? Yeah. So, you know, structurally it may be on paper, but practically, um how do we get there?
SPEAKER_02See, you served in state government for for a number of years before you came to the county. Uh the way I look at this position, it seems like it's creating the second most powerful political figure in California behind the governor.
SPEAKER_01Um, I would say one could argue more powerful because the governor has term limits. This position has none. Our countywide electeds don't uh aren't don't have term limits. And when I asked that question, um, the proponents um responded, oh, we could just change that at the state legislature. Well, how about we change that first and then take this to the voters? There's no guarantee that you'll get a bill across to change it. And the voters pretty overwhelmingly supported term limits, but again, this power dynamic um I think is questionable. The last piece I'll add, Mike, because I said, you know, in our previous conversation on measure A, that I'm a budget wonk. Uh, this measure explicitly states no additional revenue needed to build this expanded infrastructure, explicitly. Uh, my assumption is um, you know, this, you know, expanding the board has been brought before the voters any number of okay previous times, and it's failed. And I think when you ask the question why people think, well, they don't want to pay for more government. So I think it's explicitly stated. Well, it's a lot of infrastructure expansion. It's it's an LAO equivalent, which is something I wanted to look at. An independent entity to do the policy analysis. That's not one person, that's a team of people. This elected CEO is gonna have to have a staff, and I would think community offices all over the county. So they could have, you know, outreach to community, right? Um, if we add four um uh new board members, that's salaries for the the elected themselves, staff, community offices. Uh, I don't see how within our current budget allocation, those additional resources could just be covered. I I was surprised, Mike, to discover that we up until now didn't do an independent fiscal analysis of county measures. At the state, we did. That was my orientation. So if the legislature puts something on the ballot, the legend analyst does an analysis, and they report to the joint budget committee that I chaired in the legislature for a number of years. So when it occurred to me, when I'm like, what is this gonna cost? Proponents are saying nothing, I happen to firmly believe different that there was no independent entity to give us an analysis. So I introduced a motion that passed, um, uh uh allowing our county auditor to do an analysis of county measures. So one was done on this, but the measure leaves uh quite a bit to be determined later. Measure G creates this, a couple of task force that will make decisions later. So I think the treasurer, you know, really had difficulty really quantifying what the true full costs of implementation of Measure G will be. We have no idea how many staff at LAO would hire or this new CEO would hire. So um I think his score was very conservative because it was limited based on the language in the measure now, but the but the measure is very permissive in terms of future actions these appointed bodies can take and and these new positions can can can do.
SPEAKER_02You you voiced a lot of concerns when this came to the board about the process that brought it to the board. If it fails, uh what process would you like to see to bring forth a different governance reform?
SPEAKER_01Well, ironically, the measure that I authored and Chairwoman Horbath co-authored is still in place. And that's the study piece. Um it's still in place, um, uh where a consultant, you know, uh somebody who actually does governance like work and research for a living. Um that's still in process. And so that report will still come to the board because whether it passes or not, I'm clear that there are still other work that should be done. Um if it fails, I hope that we could then uh um reorg and come and have a process much like I've experienced at the board since I've been there. You know, measure A a number of years ago was a result of a study done by the board that brought the board options that we selected from, created a motion that became Measure A several election cycles ago. That was the method I experienced and what I was attempting to do with our governance to give us information based on experience and examples that we could point to to see what's worked, what hasn't worked in other counties, um and fashion a oh a governance overhaul that we believe works for LA County, one that we can accurately tell voters what it would cost them. Because, you know, there's no my father used to tell me, Mike, there's no free lunch. And so even though it is explicitly stated in the measure, it won't cost anything, it will cost. It will cost us either in the reduction of services. Uh uh we'll have the money will have to come from someplace and it will have to come from existing services or employees or something. When I asked the question in committee, uh the chairwoman said, Well, you know, we have a number of um vacancies perhaps we could sweep. Well, those vacancies aren't just extra positions that's icing on the cake. Those are social workers and behavioral health specialists. Those are people we need to do the services. We're just having a hard time hiring them fast enough. Um and if you do that, that's a one-time cost if you sweep those vacancies. I don't know how it could provide ongoing funding for this new expanded infrastructure. So I think that we could have time to figure out real costs, how we roll it out, what makes sense, what we should do first. I just think it could be a much more thoughtful, transparent, inclusive process. All right, Supervisor Holly Mitchell, thank you so much. I appreciate you always.
SPEAKER_02And that does it for this episode of What's Next, Los Angeles. If you would like more information on this or other ballot propositions, I have helpful links in the show notes, including the official Secretary of State Voter Guide, the official ballot arguments, and other resources, including this year's Progressive Voter Guide from LA Forward. Again, you can check that all out in the show notes. Thank you to Marta Ivery, my friend, for sound editing. My thanks to LA Forward for partnering with me on this podcast, and my thanks, of course, to you for listening. Until next time, thank you. Take good care and peace.