Comments
THE VIEW FROM HERE - No one in power wants reform. Nor, is there an excuse for the public not to know the problem and the solution. Yet, they refuse to acknowledge reality. The crux of Los Angeles’ disaster is the One and Done Rule, where a developer needs to bribe only one city councilmember, i.e., the one where he wants to construct something.
The genius of the One and Done Rule rests in the city council rule that every councilmember has to vote Yes for each and every project which another councilmember places on the city council agenda. This council rule is why a councilmember can guarantee a developer that his project will get unanimous approval. Without that guarantee, developers would not be willing to pay so much to one councilmember and nothing to the others. Once the developer is nice to the councilmember and his project is placed on the city council agenda, each and every councilmember present must vote Yes, and in return, their future projects will be unanimously approved. This quid pro quo voting was specifically criminalized for councilmembers in the 2006 version of Penal Code, § 86. Each traded vote carries a maximum four year prison term.
The statute was amended in January 2023. Here is the current form. Warning: Extreme Legalese ahead. You are not alone if you think that having to read this statute is cruel and unusual punishment.
California Code, Penal Code - § 86 (Current as of January 01, 2023)
“Every Member of either house of the Legislature, or any member of the legislative body of a city, county, city and county, school district, or other special district, who asks, receives, or agrees to receive, any bribe, upon any understanding that his or her official vote, opinion, judgment, or action shall be influenced thereby, or shall give, in any particular manner, or upon any particular side of any question or matter upon which he or she may be required to act in his or her official capacity, or gives, or offers or promises to give, any official vote in consideration that another Member of the Legislature, or another member of the legislative body of a city, county, city and county, school district, or other special district shall give this vote either upon the same or another question, is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years and, in cases in which no bribe has been actually received, by a restitution fine of not less than four thousand dollars ($4,000) or not more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) or, in cases in which a bribe was actually received, by a restitution fine of at least the actual amount of the bribe received or four thousand dollars ($4,000), whichever is greater, or any larger amount of not more than double the amount of any bribe received or twenty thousand dollars ($20,000), whichever is greater.” End of Pen C. 86
The Vote Trading Rule by which the LA City Council has operated for years is that each councilmember must vote Yes on all projects placed on the city council agenda. As a result, horrible projects which devastate the city receive 100% approval.
Vote Trading Also Violates The Brown Act
When the decision how to vote on a project is based upon an agreement which was made before the project arrives at the city council for public consideration and that prior agreement how to vote is not part of the official record, the city council process violates the Brown Act. The predetermined Yes votes are highlighted by the fact that the council’s vote tabulation machine votes Yes for the councilmembers. Watch a council meeting. No councilmember leans forward to press his Yes bottom. Sometimes, councilmembers who are not even in the room vote Yes because the machine registers a Yes for everyone it thinks is present. When this embarrassment was brought to light, the city claimed that the restrooms were part of the city council chamber. Not only was the answer false, but it was nonsensical.
What Would LA City Council Be like Without its Criminal Vote Trading
Without the One and Done Rule, developers would have to individually bribe a majority of city councilmembers. With 15 councilmembers, that is 8 bribes – which would be a helluva lot more expensive than being nice to only one councilmember. There would be a lot less corruption. Not only would it cost the developers big bucks, but it would be very hard to coordinate as each councilmember would want to tweak the project to his/her liking.
The Solution Has Been Known for Well Over a Decade
Eradicating corruption is simple but it will never be enacted. Why? Because no one really wants reform.
The heart of the problem is geographic exclusivity, i.e., each council district has only one representative on the city council. We think geographic exclusivity is always the way it is done. Not so. The US Senate does not have geographic exclusivity; each Senator represents the entire state, and each Senator has his/her own vote.
The Solution Is Simple – The 3/15/45 City Council
Each district will have 3 councilpersons elected at the same time and each has jurisdiction over the entire district, like Senators have over their states. Thus, each district will have three councilpersons voting on each item. Thus, the 3/15/45 system destroys Vote Trading System. Remember, the One and Done Rule works only because one councilmember can guarantee unanimous city council approval, which is impossible under the 3/15/45 system. Why? It goes back to how the councilpersons are elected.
In the district election, the top three vote getters become the three councilmembers. The developer candidate may receive the most votes, but candidates with other priorities will also be elected at the same time. Thus, the non-developer councilpersons are beholden to their voters with different priorities. They will have to vote for measures which their voters want; otherwise, they are likely to be voted out of office. Also, many will have genuine, good faith beliefs in their positions and will not sell out.
Under the 3/15/45 System, There Is No Way to Enforce the Vote Trading System
One councilperson will be unable to deliver the votes from the two other district councilpersons. Since he/she will be unable to deliver all his own district’s votes, the bribed councilperson cannot do what the developer wants – guarantee that his bribe will get his project’s unanimous approval. All he can deliver is his own vote which is 1 out of 45.
Why the Name “3/15/45 City Council”
It is called the 3/15/45 City Council” because each district will have 3 at large councilpersons (elected in the same election). Fifteen (15) district times 3 is 45 councilpersons total. Forty-five is in line with other large cities.
It Makes Democracy Real
When one tyrant controls a district, most of the residents are actually disenfranchised. If residents of CD 13 do not want one-half the travel lanes on Hollywood Boulevard removed for bike lanes, they have a councilperson to say No. Soto-Martinez obviously does not give a hoot what Hollywoodians want or need. He like Donald Trump is a Me, Me, Me person. When each district has three councilpersons who were elected by voters with different interests, those other interests have a real say (vote) in the democratic process.
How To Kill L.A. City Council Corruption
Please see this article, Kill Corruption It explains in more detail how the 3/15/45 Plan kills off corruption at LA City Council. It also shows why the other so-called reforms perpetuate the corruption but with fancier clothing.
(Richard Lee Abrams has been an attorney, a Realtor and community relations consultant as well as a CityWatch contributor. You may email him at [email protected].)
