Council fails to override mayor’s veto on Office of Finance measure after daylong charter debate; unanimously overrides veto on youth BRIDGES program

The Los Angeles City Council on May 16, 2000, debated where new charter functions should sit in the city’s reorganized administration and failed by one vote to override Mayor Reardon's veto of an ordinance that would place a suite of responsibilities in a new Office of Finance.

The veto override motion on the Office of Finance question drew extensive discussion about revenue forecasting, debt management and risk management. Councilmember Chick argued the council was acting to protect “the will of the people,” saying the charter commissions had rejected a stronger mayoral Office of Finance and that the council should implement the compromise the voters approved. Councilmember Goldberg urged that revenue forecasting and debt management remain in an impartial office accountable to both mayor and council, saying, “I don’t think revenue forecasting should ever be in the Department of Finance.” Councilmember Walters said the council needed “access to unfiltered information” for bond raters, lenders and the public. Councilmember Wax and others pushed for a compromise that would place risk management in the Office of Finance while leaving forecasting and debt functions elsewhere to preserve independent analysis.

After daylong debate and multiple procedural motions, the council held a roll-call override vote on the mayor’s veto. The tally recorded in the meeting transcript was 9 ayes and 5 noes; the override requires 10 votes and therefore failed. Because the mayor’s veto was not overridden, the ordinance as presented will not take effect as written and the council and administration signaled plans to return to the issue at committee and in a later session.

Nut graf: The council’s vote leaves in place the mayor’s veto of the Office of Finance ordinance for now and ensures the Office of Finance implementation will be revisited in the short term. Council members emphasized competing priorities: preserving independent fiscal oversight versus consolidating operational accountability for functions such as risk management, workers’ compensation and revenue forecasting.

What happened and why it matters

- What the council voted on: A multi-part ordinance implementing portions of the city charter that describe the Office of Finance’s duties, including revenue forecasting, debt management and risk management. The mayor vetoed the ordinance, prompting the override attempt. - Result: The override motion failed (9–5). Because overriding a mayoral veto requires 10 votes, the veto stands; council members said they will continue work in committee and could bring revised ordinances back for another vote. - Why it matters: Placement of forecasting, debt and risk functions determines whether critical financial analyses will come from a mayor-aligned department or from an office intended to provide neutral information to both the council and the mayor. Council members said the outcome affects transparency for bond-rating agencies, budget watchers and residents.

Key positions expressed in debate

- Councilmember Chick (speaking in support of preserving the charter commissions’ compromise): argued the council should implement the charter as the voters intended and insisted on public debate before changing the allocation of duties.

- Councilmember Goldberg (urging independent forecasting): said revenue forecasting and debt management should be kept in an office that reports to both the council and mayor to avoid politically filtered information.

- Councilmember Walters (emphasizing unfiltered information): said accurate, impartial forecasts are necessary for bond ratings and long-term planning.

- Councilmember Wax (seeking compromise): pushed for a split solution, saying risk management could be more effective in the Office of Finance while forecasting and debt remain in a jointly accountable office.

Other council actions and related items

- Charter-implementation ordinances: The council also approved multiple technical ordinances to align municipal code and planning processes with the new charter language; staff said those changes were needed in order to make the transition effective on July 1. Councilmembers requested follow-up and cleanup amendments where the new charter’s text constrained specific details.

- Related procedural next steps: Several council members urged committee hearings (the ad hoc committee on charter implementation and the Planning/Land Use Management committee were mentioned) and a date-certain return to resolve outstanding placement and drafting questions.

Votes at a glance (selected items from the May 16 meeting)

- Office of Finance veto override (Item 5): Motion to override the mayor’s veto of the Office of Finance ordinance — Mover recorded in discussion as Councilmember Walters; second not consistently recorded in the transcript. Vote: 9 ayes, 5 noes. Outcome: override failed (did not meet 10‑vote threshold). Note: council discussion produced multiple amendment proposals and a plan to continue deliberations in committee.

- BRIDGES youth-program veto (Item 34): Motion to override mayoral veto of funding/ordinance for the BRIDGES youth program — motion carried unanimously. Vote recorded in the transcript: unanimous override (council recorded single roll call with all present voting to override). Outcome: mayoral veto overridden; matter to move forward as council directed.

- Censure / council code of conduct rules (Item 25): Motion to adopt rules implementing the charter’s censure provisions and procedures. Vote recorded: 12 ayes, 2 noes. Outcome: motion approved; the adopted rules implement procedures described in the new charter (including standard and voting thresholds) and will be used by the council going forward.

- Ambulance transport contract (Item 7): Motion to renew arrangement allowing field medics to transport patients to Kaiser facilities when clinically appropriate and consistent with patient preference and insurer coverage; amended technical language on revenue treatment was included. Vote recorded: 13 ayes, 1 no. Outcome: approved. Council discussion clarified that clinical need and base-station medical control establish destination in emergencies, and that Kaiser reimbursement applies when the patient is a Kaiser enrollee.

- Domestic-partner legislation (Item 28): Motion to send a support communication to state legislators backing bills to expand domestic-partner rights (medical decision, inheritance/incapacity protections) and to request technical amendments; vote recorded: unanimous (14 ayes). Outcome: approved — council recorded support while asking Sacramento sponsors to consider specified clarifications.

What the council did not decide today

The Office of Finance veto override failed, leaving the mayor’s veto in place. Several council members repeatedly said they wanted more time for public briefing and committee review (the city attorney advised caution on whether all changes could legally be enacted immediately). Multiple members suggested a date-certain return after the ad hoc committee and Planning/Charter implementation committee meet to refine ordinance language.

Who spoke (selected)

- Councilmember Chick — spoke at length about implementing the charter and the “will of the people.” - Councilmember Goldberg — opposed placing forecasting solely in a mayoral Office of Finance and urged continued joint oversight. - Councilmember Walters — emphasized need for “unfiltered information” for the council and for bond raters. - Councilmember Wax — sought a compromise division of functions. - City Attorney representative (Echeverria) — advised on Brown Act and ordinance timing/legal risk. - William Wells, Captain, Paramedic Division — answered questions about ambulance destination policies.

Clarifying details

- Override threshold: overriding a mayoral veto requires 10 votes (charter requirement discussed repeatedly). The recorded override vote on the Office of Finance ordinance was 9–5 and therefore failed. - BRIDGES override: recorded as unanimous on the roll call called for that item. - Censure rules: the council adopted procedural rules implementing the charter’s censure standard; transcript shows a 12–2 vote in favor. - Ambulance/Kaiser contract: recorded vote 13–1 in favor of the contract renewal as amended; the department confirmed clinical need and base-station medical control remain determinative for destination selection.

What’s next

Council members and staff said they will bring revised ordinances or committee reports back to the full council on a near-term timetable to resolve placement of risk management and to finalize Office of Finance implementation details. The council also approved several housekeeping charter-implementation ordinances that staff said were necessary for a smooth transition to the new charter on July 1.

Ending: The council meeting ran several hours, produced high-stakes votes on charter implementation, and left the central Office of Finance question open for further committee deliberation and a future vote.