County LA accidentally canceled its own reforms of justice

From Robert GreenCalmness

This comment was originally published by CalmattersS Register about their ballots.

The unknown composition of the preparation threatens to spoil years of careful work to make the government of Los Angeles County more responsive to the needs of its 10 million people. The magnitude of the screw, who became public last monthSlowly enters the focus.

There may be national consequences.

The controversies are two voting measures, each of them prepared by LA County’s lawyers, and each of them changes the Charter of the County. Measure J, Accepted by voters with a healthy margin Against the background of “considered” in 2020, it carries out a significant part of the county budget each year to repair generations of economic and racial injustice through mandatory costs of health care, housing, work training and alternatives to imprisonment.

Measure J makes La County to split. Other state and local authorities have made symbolic gestures to systemic reform during the laid and chaotic months after the George Floyd police murder and the protests calling for the government to refer how it serves marginalized communities.

Few actually did something essential. But with measure J, LA County put his money where his mouth is.

And then last November, measure J was stupidly overwritten by Measure gwhich will expand the Council of Supervisory Body and set up an elected Executive Director and Ethics Committee.

The aim is to make the district government more responsibly, finally imposing the same inspections and balances that Americans accept for granted at other levels of governance. We choose the president, the governor, the mayor. Will now Choose the County CEOAnd the bigger advice of the supervisory authorities will look at the presentation of this person.

The two important measures cover a very different basis and would not usually be eliminated – except for the fact that the district’s lawyers prepare “G” to be placed in exactly the same place in the Charter, which was already occupied by “J.” So when the main part of “G” came into force in December 2028, it would cancel “J.”

Don’t worry, district lawyers said in a statement. “As a practical question, the cancellation will not affect,” given that the advice of supervisory authorities can simply continue to spend as if measure J remains in force.

This misses the question, as the lawyers certainly know. Measure J was intended to bind all future supervisory tips, allowing long -term planning and budgeting for current programs. Without it, future supervisors can shift the costs elsewhere when political winds change and it is no longer fashionable to dismantle racial inequality.

And isn’t it where we are now? The spirit of 2020 is a distant memory. Democratic legislators are Back to writing strict accounts for a crimePublic attention was paid to fires and floods, and municipal budgets were bound.

Moreover, President Trump sets on fire over everything that hits him as “awakened” including health fundingTake care of the mentally ill, homes for homeless And most of all, Dei – initiatives for diversity, justice and inclusion of this kind, proudly supported by Los Angeles County and funded by Merka J.

As the largest local government in the nation and with measure J as its standard, LA was Noah’s ark to protect and maintain the spirit of 2020 through the storms of Trump, the ambassador of the rest of the nation of justice and justice programs. LA County, constant hard, could help other state and local authorities find their foundations.

But instead, the vote on FiaSco throws Culture War Crusaders Unitned Win. He puts at risk the divisional and hard-to-win confidence between the LA community activists, the district officers and the employees-to some extent even law enforcement, who gathered in the name of health alternatives to imprisonment. The preparation error means the Reimagine LA coalition, which organizes support for measure J, may need to return to the newsletter to do what they have already done again. They are understandably angry with perspective.

And since times have changed, it is by no means certain that the voters will go the second time. Or, on this point, measure D. Seven months in Blubicose Second Trump Administration, LA voters may have a second thoughts about strong executive power.

County LA moves too slowly and too fast

Now there is a tension between the champions of every Charter repair and open the conversations about which measure should be defective to keep the other.

As mayor of West Hollywood in 2020, testifying in favor of measure J, Lindsay Horwat has called on the Council of Supervisory Authorities to put him on the newsletter. “Care systems and accountability systems should go hand in hand,” she told the advice.

Four years later, as a district leader, Horwat is leading the effort for measure.

A negligent mistake in drawing them in contradiction.

Supervisor Catherine Barger opposed the two newsletter measures, arguing that they were hit together, with insufficient time to check.

It is also correct.

But it is worth remembering that in January 2023, the Supervisory Authority Council ordered a survey of LA County Management to improve transparency, representation and ethics. A year and a half later, the district had not even hired a contractor to do the study. It may take a little hurry to break this kind of crazy stagnation.

Los Angeles County is moving at the same time too slowly and too fast and, as a result, achieves too few of the high and commendable goals of its leaders. Was it too fast to order measure G, leaving the lawyers too little time to understand that they were rewriting measure J? Or too slowly in putting a measure j in the charter so that lawyers have no idea that it is there when they put measure G in the same place?

The District Attorney’s Office blames the clerk of the clerk on board that he did not update the Charter, although lawyers not only wrote measure J but live with her every day for three years as he was invalidated in the court court and Revived in the Court of Appeal In July 2023, it is difficult to believe that they will not remember it a year later or that they have no obligation to find it when they kill with measure G from above.

A The special management reform group meets To unfold the details of the application of the measure G. His three matches so far seem to emphasize the ongoing battles for “J” and “G”, well after the election is completed. At their first meeting, about a third of the members revealed that they voted against the measure or represent organizations that opposed it. At his second meeting, one of his members announced the preparation error, which seems to be likely to do not do not do measuring J, or measuring G or both.

At the third meeting, three attorneys from the District Attorney Office were ready to offer a preliminary report on the incident and what could be done to eliminate the situation. They waited patiently during three hours of discussion on the tasks of the committee.

And then the audio crew had to leave and the meeting ended sharply without the lawyer’s report. Obviously, no one thought about the audio crew. It was a very moment of Los Angeles County – and another reminder that the biggest local jurisdiction in the nation needed a bad renewal.

This article was Originally Published on CalMatters and was reissued under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Noderivatives License.