[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",5985454,"mediaKeyId","5772371-319199a41de0c5b89ac072c72889e8f2","parentId",5772371,"title","Charter Reform Commission’s outreach plan approved; commissioners promise broader, targeted engagement","audioSeconds",1494,"startMs",1229000,"endMs",2723000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5772371-319199a41de0c5b89ac072c72889e8f2&start=1229&end=2723","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5772371-319199a41de0c5b89ac072c72889e8f2/thumbnail_1229000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/5985454/Los-Angeles-City/Los-Angeles-County/California/Charter-Reform-Commissions-outreach-plan-approved-commissioners-promise-broader-targeted-engagement","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5985454-9e169de8cd2406a000710b442151660b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771183998&Signature=dszzfbdgLj~bLhX~dgYR-X-vzEK7lW3ga5RStSQNCWRiHl~sxfCSa7ooZVmfeEC5pkM8MuF7mA60u57yDkGYY26HHimLeUySfNEyCBw1rn~YNZb93V19ifRCAnfPl3RI73wLDxLydysf3afu-58ze4CS4teuJNTU3odtM9TuypgL~bqXhxcLfXuTqHm9Vuw9MVnwYdwryuroV03x8fR5uqHaG4XLrHIKgBhiuzQRWYkVRCChuqzDmefcYUr35sZmyxsziLqy-ZAeYdEFqQiEexAHJUVDEJrRljR~3g6SFSYae3Qj4nHXxYLJmpNd1pJgV8H3hSJOzYIuZjHXRFo~~w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Los Angeles City, CA","date","2025-09-13T05:00:08Z","article","The Rules, Elections and Intergovernmental Relations Committee approved the Charter Reform Commission’s outreach and engagement plan, with five votes in favor, after commission representatives described a multi-pronged outreach effort intended to reach all 15 council districts and underrepresented communities.

The commission presented the plan as a framework of in-person district meetings, evening and weekend events, pop-ups, virtual forums and partnerships with community organizations and said it had retained an outreach contractor to expand outreach beyond traditional town halls.

Commission staff member Mr. Ramirez told the committee that the plan \"is a product of what started with, of course, your ordinance that was passed, and laying out, a framework for outreach engagement, including, you know, timing of meetings, both on weekends, after 6PM, and meeting in all of the 15 districts.\" He said the commission had already added meetings beyond the plan and was using community events, pop-ups and virtual sessions to reach residents where they are.

Raymond Messa, chair of the Charter Reform Commission, said the engagement plan should be treated as a floor, not a ceiling. \"The only thing that I would add is we've used this engagement plan as a floor,\" Messa said, adding the commission had scheduled additional committee meetings specifically on government structure and planned multiple passes through council districts.

Commission staff gave several details about current outreach activity: the commission has held about 10 meetings to date, maintains an email list of roughly 500 addresses, sees about 50 to 60 people joining meetings on Zoom and about 50 people attending in person at typical sessions, and has a staff of four dedicated employees. The commission said the contractor agreement specifies types and numbers of events and includes community partnership grants, but does not set a single citywide numeric target for total participants.

Council members pressed for clearer, quantifiable goals tied to demographics and turnout. Council member Raman said she was \"delighted\" by early engagement but asked, \"What does success look like for community engagement?\" She requested specific expectations for the contractor, including target numbers and demographic metrics, and asked that those expectations appear in the council file before a full council vote.

Mr. Ramirez and Chair Messa responded that the contractor agreement lists the number and types of events and that the commission intends to provide metrics showing how many people were engaged, how many surveys were completed and which communities were reached. Messa added that the commission would consult council offices on lists of organizations to target and planned to provide numerical goals before the item goes to full council.

Committee members also urged outreach to internal city staff and to organizations that already have community relationships. Council member Villasovsky recommended early, repeated engagement with council offices, the mayor’s office and department staff to surface operational constraints in the charter and to gather subject-matter expertise.

The committee voted 5-0 to approve the outreach and engagement plan. The commission said it will continue district and thematic meetings, pursue multilingual and multicultural outreach, use the contractor to expand reach to college students and younger Angelenos, and provide the council with metrics and lists of partner organizations moving forward.

The commission said it must deliver final recommendations to the council by mid-April to allow time for council review and possible placement on the November 2026 ballot.

Among next steps, commissioners said they would continue rolling meetings through the council districts, provide the requested numeric outreach goals to council staff before a full council vote, and deepen engagement with both community organizations and city departments.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Rules, Elections, and Intergovernmental Relations Committee - 9/12/25","oneSentenceSummary","The Rules, Elections and Intergovernmental Relations Committee approved the Charter Reform Commission’s outreach and engagement plan, with five votes in favor, after commission representatives described a multi-pronged outreach effort intended to reach all 15 council districts and underrepresented communities.","taxTitle","Los Angeles City, Los Angeles County, California","taxId",4025,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},5985451,"Committee backs city position on SB 34 despite objections from AQMD board member and environmental groups",2352,612000,2964000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5772371-319199a41de0c5b89ac072c72889e8f2&start=612&end=2964","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5772371-319199a41de0c5b89ac072c72889e8f2/thumbnail_612000.jpg","/articles/5985451/Los-Angeles-City/Los-Angeles-County/California/Committee-backs-city-position-on-SB-34-despite-objections-from-AQMD-board-member-and-environmental-groups","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5985451-cfe48809cbb829be2709bf2e4f321b77/orig.mp4?Expires=1771183998&Signature=n1QeDxKmeJO9BU5rG2R5pX7CSyfIfYtwTDRKITUY1RVrMYVG5vRlizCYYuloYMQrdirQCdb7O5t3DE-ZauqG4SyhHyw0hksSyr4qb11vcbU47qS2BM5AigvmSP~nQaAMhtV1K~HHM0UcNnna3MoRuffsQShfEOAOKfAGNL~wVXSbxkrFfFBZgqFnpQDKHMhofqmydcGxnPHuWzIBoDcrMZ1IeGY7moqoTN7FxHXZA3cQNdz7Fiv6WdZI7gFgzNOIOkhzAEbOch1zMX22ar5hmOFLHB-R2nYVvm5O5XNlIXq7FwRZS29ZJ~9azpDj~WCVgJgt7i8V-f6IJEFYS20Fwg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Rules, Elections and Intergovernmental Relations Committee voted to approve a resolution on the city’s position regarding Senate Bill 34 after members debated whether the bill would limit the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s ability to regulate port-related pollution.

Council member Raman, who serves on the AQMD board, urged the committee to vote no. \"I'm asking for your no vote on this resolution as SB 34 would undermine years of collaborative work between AQMD, ports and the surrounding communities,\" Raman said, arguing the bill would curtail local regulators’ ability to adopt emissions rules for ports and related activities.

Environmental groups and a representative of Move LA and Coalition for Clean Air also testified in opposition. Chris Chavez, deputy policy director at Coalition for Clean Air, told the committee, \"We are in opposition to both the motion, as well as, SB 34 in Sacramento.\" Chavez said the bill would \"restrict the ability of the South Coast AQMD ... to reduce emissions from the region's largest source of NOx pollution in the smoggiest space in the country, the ports and related activities.\" He said the rulemaking effort has been ongoing since 2022 and that an infrastructure-focused proposal on the table is \"very modest. It is just an infrastructure plan.\" Chavez added that the South Coast AQMD estimates more than 1,500 premature deaths a year in Southern California are associated with the region's poor air quality.

Raman said opponents’ claims about a hypothetical cargo cap were \"fear mongering\" and that no AQMD rule under consideration has proposed a cargo cap. She warned SB 34 would \"take away any kind of leverage that we have to push the ports towards meaningful emissions reductions\" and said port-side communities experience higher levels of toxic exposure and related cancer rates.

Chavez also raised concerns that a proposed \"cooperative agreement\" between the ports and the AQMD has interrupted the multi-year rulemaking process and that SB 34 would impose restrictions from Sacramento rather than allowing local regulators and communities to complete their work.

After discussion the committee recorded three votes in favor and two opposed; the resolution was approved. At roll call, Council members Harris Dawson, Sotto Martinez and Lee voted yes; Raman and Jaroslavsky voted no.

The committee did not adopt any amendments during the meeting. Committee members and speakers emphasized the ongoing local rulemaking process at AQMD, the health risks to port-adjacent communities, and the need for planning and infrastructure investments to reduce emissions.

The resolution does not itself change AQMD authority; it records the city's position for legislative or administrative action. Committee members who opposed the city's stated position urged further local action to preserve AQMD's regulatory authority and to avoid preemptive statewide restrictions on local air-quality rulemaking.

Next steps identified in the discussion included continued monitoring of AQMD rulemaking, review of any cooperative agreements between ports and AQMD, and further outreach to port-side communities about health and infrastructure planning.","The Rules, Elections and Intergovernmental Relations Committee approved a resolution on the city’s position regarding Senate Bill 34 after committee debate over whether the bill would limit the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s power to regulate port-related pollution.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Charter Reform Commission’s outreach plan approved; commissioners promise broader, targeted engagement

Committee backs city position on SB 34 despite objections from AQMD board member and environmental groups