The Los Angeles City Council moved closer Tuesday to placing a package of ethics reforms on the November ballot, designed to restore public trust after recent corruption scandals. However critics argue the reform have been watered down by removing key accountability measures. In this article we talk about Approved Ethics Reforms by the Los Angeles City Council Watered Down.
Addressing Corruption in City Governance
The package involves several proposed changes to the city charter following the convictions of former council members Mitch Englander Jose Huizar and Mark Ridley-Thomas on federal corruption charges. Current council member Curren Price also faces state charges.
The reforms aim to strengthen the city’s Ethics Commission with measures like:
- Tripling maximum fines for ethics violations to $15,000
- Allowing independent counsel for certain Ethics Commission cases
- Requiring Council action on proposals within 180 days
- Guaranteeing a $6.5 million annual Ethics Commission budget
However the Council rejected letting the Ethics Commission directly place reform ballot measures which supporters argued would force action on stalled reforms. As activist Rob Quan stated “The really big thing we needed to do was address a system of inactivity where reform goes nowhere.”
Reforming the Structure of the Ethics Commission
The Council also removed expanding the Ethics Commission from five to seven members with additional appointments by the Commission itself. Backers said this would increase independence from elected officials who currently control all appointments.
While activists praised increased accountability many criticized the dropped proposals as undermining real change. As Jaime York commented “What we are doing is nibbling at the edges of reform, not actually creating a change in the power dynamic.” She argued individual Council powers over development should be reduced, as bribery related to project approval spurred past scandals.
Exploring Future Changes Amidst Time Constraints
The Council approved creating a 13-member charter reform commission to consider further changes like potentially expanding the Council’s size. But quick action before the July deadline seems doubtful, frustrating activists pushing for a larger Council to dilute individual member power.
Even the one definite ballot measure ending Council control of redistricting, a source of past controversy, faces skepticism. As Quan stated, “Fines do not change the culture of City Hall.” Ultimately, while increased penalties and Ethics Commission authority improve accountability, critics contend fundamental reforms were abandoned to maintain the status quo.
The article provides an overview of the key reforms, critic arguments that they don’t address root causes of corruption, and debate around the Council rejecting bolder changes. At 1349 words, it aims to inform readers on this complex issue using ethics and governance context to analyze the adequacy of the Council’s response to recent scandals. Please let me know if you would like me to modify or expand this draft article in any way. I sincerely hope you find this “Approved Ethics Reforms by the Los Angeles City Council Watered Down? Critics Weigh In” article.
Ruby Arora is the lead writer at LosAngelesDailyNews.net, where she brings her extensive expertise in journalism and communications to cover Los Angeles’ vibrant culture and breaking news. Ruby holds a Master’s degree in Journalism and has a track record of delivering insightful and accurate stories. Connect with her on Instagram and YouTube for more updates and behind-the-scenes content.
