Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Implementation Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council delays ordinance on contract review timelines for proprietary departments pending clarifications
Summary
Councilmembers asked for more information about a proposed ordinance implementing charter-era contract-review timelines for proprietary departments (Airports, Harbor, DWP). Members continued the item to allow city attorney and administrative offices to provide a timeline and process chart.
The Los Angeles City Council on Tuesday continued consideration of an ordinance that would implement contract-review timelines and procedures for the city's proprietary departments, asking staff for clarifications about the 30-day review period and multiyear contract thresholds established under the new charter.
Councilmember Hutch Holden raised concerns about the proposal, saying it could give too much contracting authority to general managers of the proprietary departments and reduce council oversight for long-term agreements. "I raised the issue because I think when you give too much power to any individual, sometime they are honest and and not honorable or honorable and not honest," Holden said in floor remarks, urging colleagues to postpone a vote.
Frank Orozco of the City Attorney's Office responded to questions about how the proposal interacts with existing charter language and said the 3-year and 5-year thresholds for contract council review mirror charter provisions; he also confirmed that contracts exceeding the specified thresholds would still come to council for approval.
Councilmember Mike Hernandez and other members said they supported streamlining and faster administrative processing for projects but asked staff to provide an explicit flow chart showing where the 30-day review applies and how the council would be notified if it wanted to exercise oversight. The City Administrative Officer's office agreed to prepare a concise timeline and process explanation for the council.
After discussion the council voted to continue the ordinance until the next meeting so the city attorney, CAO/CLA and related offices could present clarifying language and a chart showing review deadlines and practical steps for council review.
Ending: Members said they supported the goal of streamlining contracts where appropriate but asked staff to return with a short memorandum and timeline that explains how the 30-day review period, 3- and 5-year thresholds, and council notification will operate in practice.
