[ad_1]
As local governments emerge from one corruption scandal after another, the city and county of Los Angeles each took voting measures this election season to crack down on unethical behavior by public officials.
The city hopes to strengthen its nearly 35-year-old ethics commission with a charter amendment that would give the oversight agency a minimum annual budget of $7 million.
Meanwhile, the county hopes to form its first ethics commission with Measure G.
The county’s Ethics Commission and Office of Ethics Compliance do not have a set budget. But the ethics reforms in Measure G could cost as much as $21.9 million a year, with salaries and employee benefits accounting for the bulk of that cost, according to an analysis of the county Thursday by The Times. It is said that there is.
If voters approve Measure G on Nov. 5, it would create a special committee to determine the form of the ethics commission, including the number of members.
The cost estimate has shocked supporters and critics alike.
“It’s so absurd,” said Rob Quan, an organizer with Unrig LA, which advocates for city and county anti-corruption measures. “I’m confused by this.”
Quan previously told county supervisors that he thought Measure G’s ethics reforms were “half-baked,” but said, “We’re not up to the right standard yet.”
“If the city can do it for $7 million, why does it cost so much more than the county?” said political science professor Fernando Guerra, director of the Los Angeles Research Center. At Loyola Marymount University.
But Guerra, who co-authored the voting argument in favor of Policy G, said he still thinks ethics reforms are a given for a county with a $49 billion budget.
“Even at that price, it’s very cheap considering what you’re getting,” Guerra added. “That’s a drop in the bucket.”
Five county supervisors are divided over Measure G, which would create an ethics commission, nearly double the size of the board of supervisors and bring in an elected official to serve as associate mayor. .
Supervisors Hilda Solis, Janice Hahn and Lindsey Horvath promoted the measure, arguing it would make the county more responsive to its 10 million voters. Supervisors Kathryn Berger and Holly Mitchell said the pricing was too vague and misguided.
But he said anyone can weigh in on the idea of an ethics committee. The board voted unanimously last month to ask the county attorney to study how much it would cost to implement ethics reforms, regardless of whether Measure G passes.
Its preliminary report, filed last week, estimated annual costs to be between $16.8 million for 73 employees and $21.9 million for 93 employees.
“It’s an amazing, amazing staff,” said David Tristan, chairman of the city’s Ethics Commission, which has a budget of $6.3 million and employs 45 people. “I would appreciate it if you could give me a budget like that.”
Approximately 13 percent of the annual cost goes toward services and supplies, and the rest goes toward labor costs, according to a county report.
The report does not include the cost of establishing the committee. The Comptroller’s Office previously said the one-time cost of implementing all of Measure G’s proposals, including board expansion, would be approximately $8 million.
The “Yes on Measure G” campaign called the county’s report hasty, short-sighted and “intended to dissuade voters ahead of a critical election.”
“Measure G is historic, and it’s no secret that special interests and long-time bureaucrats are afraid of real accountability and reform,” campaign chairman Morgan Miller said.
The majority of supervisors said they still wanted to move forward.
“The cost estimates in this report seem high, but I wonder how they arrived at these numbers,” Hahn said. “But we can’t afford not to do this.”
Berger and Mitchell, who have opposed Measure G, similarly said they recognized the need for an ethics commission, but Berger said the cost range was “given the county’s financial outlook,” and Mitchell “We will look for locations where we can make cost-effective adjustments,” he said. ”
For those who were already skeptical that the commission would do much to root out corruption, its high cost was further evidence that it was a bad idea.
“What can they cut? Firefighters? Child welfare workers? What’s in the sheriff’s budget? I don’t think they’re proposing pay cuts,” said former Los Angeles City Council member Ruth Galanter. spoke. “If there’s that much money sitting in the county budget, all of them for crying out loud should be fired.”
Galanter, who held the job from 1987 to 2003, vehemently opposed the city’s ethics commission when it was created in 1990, believing it would do little to combat corruption.
Galanter said his concerns were justified after two former city council members, a former vice mayor and a former city commissioner were convicted on corruption charges. She suspects the same is true of the county’s efforts.
“What an incredible waste of time and money this ethical issue is,” Galanter said. “It doesn’t produce more ethical elected officials. What does that mean?
If Measure G passes, counties would be required to establish an independent ethics commission and ethics compliance office by 2026. The commission will be responsible for investigating misconduct by county employees and updating county rules regarding conflicts of interest and lobbying. The Committee will be supported by the Office of Ethics Compliance, headed by an Ethics Compliance Officer.
Language in the ballot measure prohibits counties from raising taxes to pay for the changes.
Horvath, who led the measure, said the county’s budget would allow the county to hire employees who already do similar ethics-related work in the executive branch, registrar-recorder, and auditor-general departments. He said there was enough money to spend on reforms. office.
“Nothing is more important than preventing corruption,” she said. “The staff and funding already exists in our current form of government.”
Sean McMorris, an ethics and accountability expert at the advocacy group California Common Cause, said he’s not daunted by the price tag. He said that typically only large cities have ethics committees because a full-fledged ethics committee is expensive.
He is more concerned about what form the committee will take. He said many of the details regarding the ethics commission will be worked out after voters have already approved the bill.
“It’s kind of a wait-and-see kind of thing,” he said. “I’m nervous.”
[ad_2]Source link
