LOS ANGELES – A measure that would increase the number of elected county supervisors from five to seven in counties with more than 2 million residents — such as Los Angeles — was approved Tuesday by a Senate committee.
The proposed Senate Constitutional Amendment 8, approved by the Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee, will now go to the Senate Appropriations Committee. It will need to be approved by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature and then by a majority of voters during the November 2016 statewide general election.
Sen. Tony Mendoza, D-Artesia, who authored the measure, said the change would create a more representative and responsive county government.
Sen. Sharon Runner, R-Antelope Valley, said she typically opposes government expansion, but she co-authored the amendment.
“A mountain range and over 60 miles of driving separate the communities I represent in northern Los Angeles county from the main county offices. Increasing local representation for our area is necessary,” Runner said.
The largest California counties include Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Riverside and San Bernardino.
The five members of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors represent 10.4 million residents spread out over more than 4,000 square miles.
In 1992 and 2000, bids to increase the number of Los Angeles County supervisorial seats from five to nine were rejected by voters.
Mendoza pointed to a lack of diversity and Latino representation in particular, noting that only two of 25 board members in the largest California counties are Latino. In Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Riverside counties, Latinos make up almost half of the population, while in San Diego and Orange counties, the Latino population is nearly one-third of the total.
“Expanding the number of supervisorial seats … will provide the opportunity for these bodies to be more reflective of the people they represent and serve,” Mendoza said.
Calling the proposal non-partisan, Mendoza said increasing the number of seats would also increase the number of candidates competing to serve.
Supervisors Don Knabe and Michael Antonovich will both term out in 2016.
The race to replace Antonovich in the Fifth District has already drawn seven candidates, while three contenders are looking to take Knabe’s Fourth District seat.
Knabe has said increasing the number of board seats would add bureaucracy and increase taxpayer costs. Mendoza’s proposal requires that costs remain the same, something Knabe called unrealistic.
“I really see no need for more bureaucracy,” Knabe told the Daily News in May. “People have asked me for more libraries, more sheriffs, more firefighters. No one has ever asked me for more politicians.”
–
William says
When 1 large city in the Antelope Valley seems to be progressing fairly well despite several severe recessions and other setbacks and obstacles while another large city seems to stumble and fumble and is practically moving backward, there must be something more to governing than the problem of being under-represented in Los Angeles County.
What could that possibly be?
seer says
you could be right but the old clique ruling party up here with their names all over buildings in Palmdale and Lancaster has to change first. then go from there. pro’s and con’s next.
Jason Zink says
Expanding the board to seven members would not benefit AV. Only splitting AV into two different supervisor district would. Why does Runner waste her/our time on such Bills. We need a Local Election office and an AV Community Service District, State Senator.
Tim Scott says
I had to give that some thought. Splitting into two districts would give AV residents some influence with two supervisors rather than just the one, so I can see that would be an improvement…but we have never really had any significant influence on our one supervisor even with him “representing” all of us. I wouldn’t be surprised if the split left us with half of us being ignored by one supervisor, and half of us being ignored by another. In the grand scheme of the most populated county in the nation the needs of a few hundred thousand desert dwellers out in the hinterlands are never going to be a priority, no matter how their representation is arranged.
Greg says
I believe the split would be the Santa Clarita Valley as one district and the Antelope Valley as the second district with two different reps. That would give us a better voice for High Desert concerns like air management boards, water issues, land use, etc.
Tim Scott says
At the end of the day though that gives us one supervisor on a board of five or seven, with all the rest of the supervisors saying “my constituents that vote for me don’t even know that the AV is IN the county.” Hard for our one guy to really get anything done for us.
What we really need is some serious strengthening of our city governments. There was a county program to distribute stop smoking aids at one point. The county health department lined up hundreds of stores…none of which were in the AV. How many mayors in LA county do you figure could call the upper levels of the health department and say “you guys are blowing us off, fix it,” and get that corrected? How is it that our mayors can’t?
Trish Bogna says
Greg, we are already our own SPA. We are SPA 1 separate from Santa Clarita.
Greg says
Oh ok, thank you for the information.
Tim Scott says
“Sen. Sharon Runner, R-Antelope Valley, said she typically opposes government expansion, but she co-authored the amendment.”
Since she is coming up on her term limit and as a career politician needs something new to run for since getting an actual job is totally out of the question.