LA City Council Members Wrestle With Increasing Their Numbers

The move to increase the number of people on the Los Angeles City Council has slowed in recent weeks as council members raise questions about how it would affect a range of issues, including the balance of power between the council and the mayor, and the delivery of city services.

The council’s Ad Hoc Committee on Governance Reform delayed a decision on whether to move forward with the proposal until at least January and is considering handing the question over to a yet-to-be-created charter reform commission.

City Council President Paul Krekorian, who chairs the ad hoc committee and has promised to get council expansion on the 2024 ballot, said last week that a commission might help build a “citywide consensus” on the issue.

But others warned that delaying could jeopardize expansion entirely.

“I am deeply concerned about the issue of momentum,” said Gary Segura, dean of the Luskin School of Public Affairs at UCLA, who co-chairs the LA Governance Reform Project, a group of academics across the city advocating for reform. “Why would they prefer a charter commission? Because it pushes the window out later."

A call for reform

Local government reform activists have long argued that the 15-member council is too small for a city of 4 million people. The panel has been the same size since 1925, when the city replaced an at-large system with a district system.

Supporters of expansion say a larger city council could better reflect L.A.’s diversity and make council members more responsive to their constituents because they would be representing smaller districts. But others say a bigger council could weigh down decision-making and place a bigger burden on city departments.

Calls for increasing the council’s size grew after the release last year of secretly recorded audio that featured members of the council discussing ways to hold onto their power through the decennial redistricting process. They were also heard making racist and derogatory remarks about colleagues and the Oaxacan community.

The scandal prompted then-council president Nury Martinez, who led the discussion, to resign. In October, she broke her silence about the affair in a podcast produced by LAist.

Another participant in the conversation, Councilmember Gil Cedillo, had already been voted out of office by the time the tapes were released. Councilmember Kevin de León has remained on the council and is running for reelection. The powerful leader of the L.A. County Federation of Labor Ron Herrera, who was also in the meeting, was forced to step down.

The scandal has created the most momentum for government reform since charter changes in the 1990s. Already, the council has voted to place on the November 2024 ballot a measure that would create an independent redistricting commission.

What is the right number of council members?

Opinions vary on whether the council should expand and by how many seats. Some activists argue the council should be as large as 31, doubling its size. Council members have also suggested expanding to 21, 23 and 25.

Supporters of expanding the council say it would make council members more responsive to their constituents because they’ll represent fewer people. Right now, one council member represents about 260,000 people.

In contrast, New York has 51 council members who represent about 170,000 people each.

Chicago has 50 aldermen who represent 54,000 and comprise the city council. Houston has 16 council members who represent 143,000 each.

“It's easier to hold them accountable,” said Ange-Marie Hancock, a former USC political science professor who co-chairs the LA Governance Reform Project. She is now at Ohio State University.

Hancock added that a larger council would likely result in a more diverse panel whose members would be more familiar with their districts.

“One of the advantages of a larger council is that it makes it possible for smaller communities to maintain a voice,” Segura added, noting a larger council means members would represent smaller districts.

But at a recent meeting of the ad hoc committee, members raised various concerns about the proposal, including that interest groups could exert more pressure in smaller council districts.

Councilmember Bob Blumenfield recalled approving a housing project opposed by a small group of residents and facing intense protests.

“For a while that community was literally at my front door,” he said. “There’s good and bad in that.”

Councilmember Traci Park said city departments would be inundated with more requests for services from more council members “based on whatever issue or rabbit hole we are going to go down next.”

“We are struggling to deliver basic city and constituent services right now,” she said. “There is basically no department in the city of Los Angeles that isn’t in the middle of a staffing crisis.”

Park said she would be unwilling to support expansion without more analysis of its impact on services.

“If we had eight more people, that’s eight more pathways that these departments are going to get requests from,” Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez added.

Worries about balance of power

More council people might make it even more difficult to develop citywide strategies on key issues like homelessness and housing, some council members argued. Mayor Karen Bass and her predecessors have struggled to tackle the crisis in part because council members hold virtual veto power over housing and other development in their individual districts and are subject to NIMBYism, or "not in my backyard" sentiment.

“The fact that our decision-making structure here is so fragmented between the mayor and 15 council districts has direct connections to why we are in the position we are in today on this particular issue,” said Councilmember Nithya Raman, an urban planner by training, in referring to homelessness and housing.

Krekorian, the council president, had the opposite concern. He said he worries about the balance of power between the council and the mayor.

“If the number increases too much, that makes a stronger mayor,” he said.

Corruption lately has been centered on the city council, in part because members control development projects in their districts. Three members have been convicted of corruption in five years. Two others currently face allegations of corruption.

“What are the pathways to corruption that we’ve seen take place on this body, and how can we make sure that council expansion doesn’t make them worse?” Raman asked.

Despite the concerns raised by his colleagues and himself, Krekorian said he remains optimistic council expansion will get onto the November ballot.

“We’ve started to develop a momentum now towards this,” he said. “I hope.”

Krekorian’s reform committee is scheduled to meet next in January.