Comments
THE BOTTOM LINE - Los Angeles promised its residents that the corruption scandals which shook City Hall would become a turning point for government reform. Nearly four years later, one of the most significant reforms born from those scandals has once again been pushed into the future. While the Los Angeles City Council deserves credit for advancing several important City Charter amendments that will appear before voters this November, its decision to postpone council expansion until at least 2028 overshadows those accomplishments. Measures designed to strengthen transparency, accountability, and ethics are meaningful steps toward rebuilding public confidence. But delaying one of the most important structural reforms sends a different message: when it comes to changing the balance of power at City Hall, hesitation still prevails.
The independent Charter Reform Commission was created for exactly this purpose. After an extensive public process that included hearings, expert testimony, commissioned studies, and public input, the commission concluded that Los Angeles should expand its City Council from 15 members to 25. The recommendation reflected a simple reality: Los Angeles has dramatically outgrown the governmental structure it adopted nearly a century ago.
Today, each councilmember represents roughly 260,000 residents one of the largest constituent populations of any major city in the United States. Larger districts mean reduced accessibility, weaker neighborhood representation, and greater concentration of political power.
That concentration of power was precisely what the 2022 "Fed Tapes" scandal exposed. The leaked recordings shattered public confidence and fueled demands for meaningful governance reform. For many Angelenos, the Charter Reform Commission represented an opportunity to rebuild that trust through independent analysis and public engagement. Instead, one of its most significant recommendations has been postponed once again.
Rather than acting on years of research, City Hall chose another committee, another review, and another delay. L.A. Forward Institute Deputy Director Godfrey Plata captured the frustration shared by many reform advocates when he said, "It feels like we're going in circles." His observation rings true because the research has been completed, the recommendations delivered, and the public has waited long enough. At some point, "further study" becomes another way of saying, "not now." Government loses public trust when leaders repeatedly promise reform but postpone the decisions that matter most.
Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson has argued that council expansion requires additional analysis because of implementation costs, administrative challenges, and its effect on the balance of power between the Mayor and the Council. Those are legitimate questions. But they are also the kinds of questions voters are fully capable of evaluating. Democracy works best when elected officials trust the public to weigh competing arguments and make informed decisions.
Los Angeles County demonstrated that approach through Measure G, allowing voters to decide whether to expand the Board of Supervisors while providing years for implementation after approval. Los Angeles could have followed the same path by asking voters this November and then working through the details over time. Instead, City Hall decided not to let voters weigh in.
Former Councilmember Mike Bonin observed that opportunities for major political reform rarely remain open forever. Public outrage fades. Political momentum disappears. Institutions naturally drift back toward protecting the status quo. History shows that meaningful reform rarely dies through a dramatic vote. More often, it slowly disappears through repeated postponements until the public simply moves on.
To its credit, the Council advanced several worthwhile Charter reforms that deserve public support. But genuine reform cannot become an exercise in approving only the politically comfortable proposals while indefinitely postponing those that would fundamentally reshape City Hall. Council expansion was never a secondary issue. It was one of the central reforms born from Los Angeles' worst ethics scandal in decades.
Bonin also raised a larger question worthy of future discussion: whether independent Charter Reform Commissions should have the authority to place reforms directly before voters without first obtaining approval from the very officials whose power could be affected. History offers an important lesson governments rarely volunteer to reduce their own authority.
Los Angeles cannot continue governing nearly four million residents with a governmental structure designed for a much smaller city generations ago. The Charter Reform Commission fulfilled its mission. Residents participated. Experts completed the research. The recommendations are on the table. Leadership now requires action instead of additional postponement.
City Hall often speaks about restoring public trust. But trust is not rebuilt through speeches or promises. It is rebuilt when elected leaders are willing to let the people decide. If council expansion is the wrong idea, voters will reject it. If it is the right idea, voters will approve it. Either outcome strengthens democracy because the decision belongs to the people.
Los Angeles has studied this issue long enough. The scandals exposed what was broken. The Charter Reform Commission proposed a path forward. The public is ready to vote. The only remaining question is whether City Hall is willing to trust the people enough to let them.
(Mihran Kalaydjian is a seasoned public affairs and government relations professional with more than twenty years of experience in legislative affairs, public policy, community relations, and strategic communications. A respected civic leader and education advocate, he has spearheaded numerous academic and community initiatives, shaping dialogue and driving reform in local and regional political forums. His career reflects a steadfast commitment to transparency, accountability, and public service across Los Angeles and beyond.)
