Council hears unified charter proposal, debates neighborhood councils, mayoral authority and implementation steps

The Los Angeles City Council held a special meeting on Feb. 11, 1999 to hear the unified charter reform proposal from the Charter Reform Commission and discuss questions from councilmembers and the public. George Kiefer, chair of the appointed commission, and Raphael (Rafe) Sonnenschein, the commission’s director, outlined a two-volume unified charter that would reorganize governance, civil service and pension rules and add new structures such as advisory neighborhood councils and area planning commissions.

The commission presented the charter as “our best thinking to you, from our commission,” Kiefer said, and described three guiding goals: flexibility (moving operational detail from charter to ordinance), accountability (clarifying lines of authority and strengthening oversight) and responsiveness (creating neighborhood councils and at least five area planning commissions).

Why it matters: The charter proposal would change how Angelenos interact with city government and how the mayor, council and professional offices share management and oversight. Supporters told the council the reform is a major step to increase participation and update a document that has been amended hundreds of times over decades; critics warned of new risks if safeguards are not strengthened.

Major elements summarized

- Structure and volumes: The unified charter is presented in two volumes — governance (officers, departments, budget, elections) and civil service/pension — and totals about 330 pages, with roughly 150 pages for volume 1 and about 100 pages for volume 2, the presenters said.

- Neighborhood councils and Office of Neighborhood Empowerment: The charter would create advisory neighborhood councils that are “self-selected and participatory,” certified through a new Office (Department) of Neighborhood Empowerment. The office would develop a plan and regulations for certification, training and resources; the council would have a set period to adopt or revise that plan, otherwise it would go into effect.

- Area planning commissions and planning appeals: The proposal eliminates the Board of Zoning Appeals and establishes a nine-member citywide planning commission plus at least five area planning commissions with quasi‑judicial power over local variances. Commissioners for area planning commissions would be required to live in the relevant area, and the council would set boundaries by ordinance.

- Mayor’s management authority and executive directives: The unified charter strengthens the mayor’s authority to manage departments in several ways — giving more flexibility to structure the mayor’s office, authorizing an executive budget office within the mayor’s office, and allowing the mayor to issue executive directives that would be binding unless contradicted by ordinance or charter language. Presenters and council members discussed the need to ensure those directives are publicly reported.

- Office of Research and Administrative Services (CAO rename) and Office of Finance: The current Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) office would be renamed Office of Research and Administrative Services to emphasize its independent research/audit role serving both council and mayor. A separate Office of Finance would take over revenue collection functions now with the city clerk; details and oversight thresholds would be set by ordinance and subject to council oversight and audits.

- General managers, commissions and Prop 5 (legislative veto): The proposal modifies how general managers are appointed and removed. The mayor would appoint general managers and the council would confirm; a general manager subject to removal would have an appeal right and the council could reinstate a removed manager by a two-thirds vote. The commission recommended retaining Prop 5 but reframing it primarily as a legislative veto (an oversight tool) rather than a management mechanism, to allow the council to block commission actions deemed harmful while avoiding putting the council in direct management roles.

- Civil service and exempt positions: The unified charter keeps a cap on exempt positions at 150, with council ability by supermajority ordinance to expand the cap. Presenters noted the charter removes some distinctions among exempt categories and leaves implementation detail to ordinance.

- Other changes: The charter would explicitly enshrine in the charter certain protections and rules that are now ordinances — for example, a living wage provision, strengthened police commission inspector general independence, campaign finance rules and anti‑discrimination protections. The charter would also add retired-employee representation on certain pension boards for the first time and create an advisory redistricting commission to hold hearings and advise the council on district maps.

Council and public reaction

Councilmembers asked detailed questions about implementation, transparency and checks and balances. Councilmember Goldberg requested that the City Administrative Officer and the City Attorney (CLA) review the draft and return a candid list of potential opportunities for mischief, gaps, and cost estimates; the council approved that request by unanimous consent. Councilmembers also questioned how neighborhood councils would be certified and how the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment would avoid concentrating selection authority downtown: presenters said neighborhood councils would propose selection methods when they apply for certification, and the Department’s plan (approved or revised by the council) would set minimum criteria and protections to ensure areas are not left out.

Several councilmembers pressed for stronger public reporting on mayoral executive directives and on thresholds and reporting requirements for transfers and contracts that could be used to circumvent limits. Presenters said many procedural thresholds would be set by ordinance and that the charter intentionally moves operational detail into ordinance so the council can set safeguards and adjust them over time.

Public commenters including Julian Bromley, John Mack (Los Angeles Urban League), Cindy O’Connor (League of Women Voters) and other civic and business groups urged support for the unified charter as a consensus package. Some speakers, including Jose Andrade and others, warned against continued political corruption and urged stronger accountability safeguards.

Next steps and implementation deadlines

Commissioners told the council the deadline to place a charter on the ballot for June was March 5; the presenters said any separate amendments (for example, to expand the council from 15 to 21 or 25 members) must also meet that deadline and are structured as separate yes/no measures that would only take effect if the main charter passes. The elected commission was scheduled to meet Feb. 16 to review language changes and the commission and staff said they would continue to work with council offices on drafting edits prior to the March deadline.

Ending note

Council members and the commission agreed to continue public hearings and to return at additional meetings before the March ballot deadline; the council set a further special meeting for Feb. 22 to continue charter consideration.