Supporters of Measure G declared victory this week, scoring a victory with about 51% support. Although changes to the Los Angeles County charter haven’t gotten as much attention as other high-profile measures on the ballot, make no mistake: This shaky governance reform package could be the most transformative decision voters in the county have done for decades.
By 2026, the county will have for the first time an ethics commission to regulate conflicts of interest and lobbying and investigate misconduct by elected officials and county employees. This is long overdue for a government with a $45 billion budget and 100,000 employees. A recent survey sparked by the federal corruption case against former Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas revealed significant problems in the county’s contracting process, prompting investigators to recommend a new ethics and compliance officer and d other measures to prevent conflicts of interest.
Additionally, in 2028, voters will elect an executive to run county government. The position – effectively that of county mayor – is also long overdue. For more than a century, Los Angeles County has been governed by a five-member Board of Supervisors, which was a good thing when the area had more cows than people. But today the county has a population and geographic footprint larger than many states. Imagine trying to run New Jersey with a five-member legislature and no governor.
An independently elected chief executive, capable of managing departments and making decisions, will be clearly accountable to the public. This should motivate progress on long-standing needs such as close dangerously decrepit men’s central prison and redirect qualified inmates to rehabilitation centers; resolve problems in the child welfare system; and provide adequate substance abuse and mental health treatment.
And in 2032, nine members will be elected to the Board of Supervisors, which should allow for greater representation of the county’s geography, politics and ethnic diversity. Supervisor Kathryn Barger’s 5th District currently stretches from Los Feliz to Lancaster, for example; it is an impossible task to understand and act on behalf of communities with such divergent needs.
With the establishment of a county executive, the work of supervisors will also change. The board will be primarily responsible for providing services to the unincorporated parts of the county, making laws and holding the executive branch accountable.
This should ensure a better and more transparent government. Countless failures and inefficiencies were never exposed because the country lacked even the most basic checks and balances essential to democracy.
This will be a monumental change for Los Angeles County that good government advocates — including the Times editorial board — have long called for. Four times since 1962, voters have rejected ballot measures to expand the Board of Supervisors or add a county elected official. The state Legislature considered bills making similar changes in 2015 and 2017, but none gained enough support.
Supervisors Lindsey Horvath and Janice Hahn deserve credit for co-authoring Measure G. They recognized that with a popular Los Angeles city governance reform package already on the November ballot, this year presented a rare opportunity to overcome voters’ historic skepticism about expanding county leadership.
Even though Measure G paves the way for a government overhaul, many details still need to be ironed out. A Governance Reform Task Force will be appointed in the coming weeks to make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on how to implement governance and ethics reforms. This will be crucial to laying the foundation for success and ensuring that special interests that opposed Measure G, including county employee unions, do not try to weaken or block the ambitious plans.
County voters ultimately accepted the change. They deserve a government capable of keeping its promises.
