Letters to the Editor: L.A. needs more politicians? How a bigger City Council makes government smaller
Editor’s note: This is the second in a four-part series reviewing the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC). The first was in August and was titled “How the City Council made government smaller.” To read that first story in its entirety, go here.
Dear Editor:
Over recent months there have been two articles in the paper’s Business, Economic and Community Development section that have been very much to the point.
First, there was the one about the City Council creating a committee that the City Council’s own Board of Ethics called out for conflicts of interest – and the City Council actually did it.
The second was the one about how a City Council member was trying to get a city agency shut down – and actually did it.
Both articles were quite revealing – and in the end, I don’t think they were fair and balanced. Which is why I decided to write to the City Council and ask for the following:
1. Why do city council members have to recuse themselves on issues that they and their constituents have raised on the council? The facts are right there on the LAMC.
2. How can a council member get an agency shut down – or to just make sure that City Council members know what they are doing when they make those decisions?
3. If you want citizens to know what’s going on at City Hall, then you shouldn’t be making policy behind closed doors.
L.A. needs more politicians. The job of government is not to play politics, it’s to provide for all of its citizens. It’s not about voting the way of the candidates who are being most effective in what they’re doing. It’s about working with the constituents to make government as small as possible while providing for the people.
That does not mean that the council runs the government to suit them – that would be an exercise in futility.
I have lived and worked in Los Angeles for over 40 years – and during those years I have seen city government change – and that is a good thing.
