LA, Glendale, Burbank Seek Political Change With Independent Redistricting, Other Reforms

The cities of Los Angeles, Glendale and Burbank — three of the largest cities in the region — are in the midst of considering major political reforms amid calls for their governments to be more responsive to the needs of the people.

The movements for change occur as Americans are reconsidering how their democracy works after the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection in Washington, D.C. and a racial reckoning demanding better representation.

Los Angeles

On Monday, the L.A. City Council’s Ad Hoc Committee on Governance Reform met to discuss the possibility of setting up an independent redistricting commission. The idea of an independent panel arose from the release last year of a recording of three council members secretly plotting how to redraw political districts.

The City Hall tapes scandal led to the resignation of then-council President Nury Martinez and calls for council members Kevin De León and Gil Cedillo to step down. The idea behind creating an independent residents’ panel to take over the decennial task of drawing council boundaries is that taking redistricting out of council members’ hands would make the process more fair.

The council is also considering expanding its size from the current 15. Right now, each council member represents more than 260,000 people. In New York, council members represent about 160,000 people each.

Glendale

On Tuesday, the Glendale City Council plans to conduct its first public hearing on a proposal to end the practice of electing its members in citywide “at-large” elections. The council is considering placing on the March ballot a proposed charter change that would establish city council districts so that each member would run to represent one district.

At-large elections often result in under-representation of people of color in local government. Glendale is also considering electing a mayor instead of having the position rotate among council members.

Burbank

Burbank already has decided to move to council district elections and plans a series of community forums next month to discuss an initial map for five districts. The city made the move after receiving a notice of a potential violation of the California Voting Rights Act on behalf of a voter, according to the city’s website. “The notice referenced that [L]atino voters are not being represented and their power is diluted,” the website states.

In January, the city council unanimously adopted a resolution initiating a transition from at-large to by-district elections.

In 1925, L.A. adopted election by districts. Today, it is considering different reforms.

The discussion at the L.A. Council’s Ad Hoc Committee meeting

“This is an excellent opportunity to gain fair representation for all Angelenos,” said Daniel Jimenez, director of community organizing for Inner City Struggle, told Tuesday’s committee hearing. Jimenez spoke in favor of both a larger council and an independent redistricting commission.

Lionel Mares also spoke in favor of creating more council districts.

“San Fernando Valley has a large population and we deserve better representation,” said Lionel Mares of Sun Valley. “Expanding the city council will give us districts of a manageable size.”

The ad hoc committee heard from the city’s Chief Legislative Analyst’s office on the many details involved in creating an independent redistricting commission, including how much any panel’s members should get paid. City staff suggested a stipend of up to $100 per meeting. Some said that is too little.

“Commission members must be afforded a sufficient stipend, without which the applicant pool will be restricted only to those with financial resources,” said Carolina Goodman of the League of Women Voters of Greater L.A.

There was also discussion of whether any commission should be required to have a two-thirds vote to approve political maps.

Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, a former chair of the California Assembly budget committee, said requiring a supermajority is a bad idea.

“When we were required to have a supermajority, it gave a disproportionate power to a few extremists,” he said.

Councilmember Marqueece Harris-Dawson favored requiring a two-thirds map for any redrawing of political districts, noting the redistricting map approved last year did not achieve two-thirds support on the redistricting commission or city council.

“As a person who was a part of those extremists that were against the map, I definitely think more work could have been done to build a consensus — like a conversation maybe,” he said.

Key aspects of any proposals for reform in L.A. remain up in the air — how big should any redistricting commission be and how should its members be selected? And if the council is expanded, how large should it be?

The ad hoc committee conducts more meetings at the end of August and is expected to make a formal recommendation to the full City Council in September. Voters would need to approve the creation of an independent redistricting commission.

Several of the two dozen or so people who spoke at the meeting complained that the ad hoc committee isn’t holding meetings at night, on the weekends, or on a platform like Zoom to make it easier for working people to offer input.

A spokesperson for Council President Paul Krekorian, who chairs the committee, did not respond to a request for comment.