The Los Angeles City Council Wednesday approved a package of proposed city charter amendments aimed at improving local governance, though they decided to table crucial measures for further study.
In a 12-0 vote, the council directed the City Attorney’s Office to draft language to place several measures on the ballot for November’s general election. The council is expected to take a final vote in the coming weeks on the ballot language. Any changes to the charter must be approved by voters.
Council members Bob Blumenfield, Ysabel Jurado and Curren Price were absent during Wednesday’s vote. They had been in attendance for the majority of the three-and-a-half hour discussion.
“The last time we had charter reform in this was in 1999, so we’re 27 years out,” Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson said. “Today, it’s a much different world.”
“As a council, we have a responsibility to ensure the charter reflects the reality of the days that we live in now, and that leaves us in a good position to respond effectively to the challenges that the future will bring.”
Four proposals aimed at addressing city governance were sidelined pending further study by a yet to-be-established council committee.
A proposal to expand the City Council from 15 to 25 members, plans to implement ranked-choice voting, lowering the voting age to 16, and to divide the city attorney’s role into an elected city prosecutor and appointed city attorney will be studied further, elected officials decided.
The council approved a proposal to establish a director of public works despite concerns from Councilwoman Monica Rodriguez, who served on the Board of Public Works from 2013 to 2016.
She argued that having a director could lead to challenges with transparency over how taxpayer dollars are used to fund contracts for city infrastructure such as streets, sidewalks, street lights, water and power.
Proponents of such a position countered that it could help reduce bureaucracy and streamline the construction and repairs of infrastructure.
The council supported the creation of a capital infrastructure plan, which would guide the maintenance, repairs and building of city infrastructure, as well as to implement a two-year budget cycle as opposed to an annual process that is in practice.
In a win for park advocates, council members backed a proposal introduced by Councilwoman Monica Rodriguez to double spending to maintain green space and create new ones.
Under the city charter, recreation and parks receives a minimum level of taxpayer dollars set to 0.0325% of the assessed value of all property assessed for taxes within the city’s jurisdiction, which comes to about $292 million. The budget for the 2025-26 fiscal year allocated $359 million, well above the minimum requirement.
Councilwoman Katy Yaroslavsky proposed an increase of 0.048%, which would have been an additional $175 million, over four years. The councilwoman heeded warnings from high-ranking city officials that a significant increase could jeopardize the city’s fiscal stability.
But on Wednesday, Rodriguez convinced her colleagues to increase the funding to 0.065%, or about $350 million, over the course of 10 years.
“Los Angeles ranked 93rd out of the nation’s 100 largest cities in the Trust for Public Land’s most recent ParkScore rankings. That is unacceptable,” Rodriguez said in a statement after the vote.
“Angelenos deserve safe, clean, and well-maintained parks, which is why I am proud to have worked with my colleagues to build support for a responsible compromise that puts a long-term investment in our parks before voters this November.”.
At the same time, the city would be able to temporarily reduce up to 30% of that money during a declared fiscal emergency.
Councilman Bob Blumenfield was the only member to oppose the proposal.
A discussion to give the city administrative officer the role of chief financial officer concluded in the matter being further studied, but the council agreed to explore giving the CAO responsibility of debt management via ordinance.
Council members advanced a proposal to remove charter rules related to their meetings, with the aim of lowering how often they meet at City Hall from three days per week to one day per week.
In a decisive 10-5 vote, the council approved a proposal introduced by Councilman Hugo Soto-Martinez to implement non-citizen or “residential” voting for city and Los Angeles Unified District elections.
Soto-Martinez emphasized individuals with some form of legal status such as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, Temporary Protected Status holders, legal permanent residents would be allowed to vote under such a program.
“This issue to me is really about fairness and representation,” Soto-Martinez said. “It just does not make sense to me that someone who moves to Los Angeles for a temporary job has more of a voice than a parent who has been here for decades, raising their children through our public schools.”
He noted that places like San Francisco allow non-citizen voting.
Council members Monica Rodriguez, Bob Blumenfield, John Lee, Tim McOsker, and Adrin Nazarain voted against the matter.
Rodriguez — who supported the notion but did not vote in favor of the matter — raised questions about the cost and the logistics because the city leans on Los Angeles County to administer elections.
Lee argued against the proposal, arguing that it could empower politically-motivated violations or abuse, or at least perceptions of such behavior.
“Election laws are different from ordinary policy decisions. They establish rules under which elected officials are chosen and held accountable, and because of that, changes to voting eligibility should be approached with the utmost public trust and legitimacy,” Lee said.
Chief Legislative Analyst Sharon Tso emphasized the proposal was written in a “permissible” manner, which if approved by voters would give the city time to create a non-citizen voting program, and answer vital questions from elected officials. Without approval, the city would not be allowed to pursue it.
The council also approved one police-related proposal, to clarify the City Council powers related oversight of the Los Angeles Police Department. Other proposals related to the LAPD were sent to committee for further discussion.
Certain proposals not approved by the council will be considered by a new ad hoc committee, Harris-Dawson said, which would be expected to discuss and study the measures with the goal of placing them on the ballot in 2028.
The City Council began the process to amend the charter following a leaked racially-charged audio recording in 2022. The conversation centered around abusing the redistricting process to coalesce power for themselves.
Four former City Council members faced separate corruption scandals that resulted in federal charges, which contributed to calls for governance reform, transparency and accountability.