Los Angeles County Board of Supervisor meetings can be lengthy, with constituents often waiting hours only to be limited to one minute to have their say on a board motion that they barely know anything about — but a motion that could change their lives.
On Tuesday, Oct. 22, the Board will consider letting in more sunshine by giving stakeholders, advocacy groups and the general public a preview of the dozens of board motions to be voted up or down at the next board meeting.
Supervisors Holly Mitchell’s and Kathryn Barger’s joint motion would require actual board motions to be presented at so-called “topical cluster” meetings. The gist of the two supervisors’ motion is to present board motions for advanced screening by the public, and to do it five days before the motions are taken up at their next board meeting.
The topical cluster meetings are lesser-known, less formal, advance public meetings that currently air board “letters” — not board motions — for input.
The “letters” are from department directors, usually providing data on how they would institute a new policy from a referenced motion that is up for a vote on a board meeting day.
The proposed sneak preview aims to draw out criticism, support, or changes to the motions, which are the meat and potatoes of every Board of Supervisors meeting.
“This will create greater public opportunities for input into the policies we are bringing forward,” said Second District Supervisor Mitchell during a virtual meeting on Friday, Oct. 18. “It creates a more authentic public engagement process.”
Barger, who represents the Fifth District, said by expanding the cluster meetings to include the actual language of the board motions gives the public more time on the front end to digest what gets voted up or down five days later on the back end.
“Accountability and transparency. This is implementing exactly that,” Barger said on Friday.
What are cluster meetings?
They are open meetings held in county buildings that are open to the public.
The meetings are divided by topics — or clusters — ranging from public safety and jails to homelessness, public health, social services and parks.
The two supervisors want to expand the existing cluster meeting agendas by adding the supervisors’ board motions for discussion.
“We are merely expanding the current cluster meeting structure to include the motions being brought forward by the Board of Supervisors,” Mitchell said.
Eric Preven, a board gadfly from Studio City who faithfully speaks at every meeting and on every motion, said the changes suggested by the two supervisors are cosmetic, and don’t address the real problems of transparency.
Preven said the public is kept in the dark about the origins of the motions themselves. He also said it won’t help the public digest the more than 100 items that are often up for a vote at the weekly board meetings. Agendas are available late Thursday night for Tuesday morning meetings, and many say that is not enough time to comment intelligently.
Preven said cluster meetings are usually cut-and-dried, with the outcomes already determined by staff and department heads.
“It is not really what we need,” he said on Friday in an interview. “We need real transparency during the meetings before us. This is more of an opportunity to empower those not-for-profit groups by giving them a little more of a window to talk about what they need. I just don’t see how the public benefits from it.”
The text of the Mitchell-Barger motion says the expanded cluster committee process will help “community groups, advocacy organizations, experts and concerned residents” participate in the board process in a more meaningful way.
The county relies on many nonprofit agencies to carry out board policy, including dozens of groups that perform homeless services, mental health counseling and drug addiction programs on county contracts. Often, these groups testify at board meetings on related motions.
Barger also cited the idea of putting motions for county budget approvals on the cluster meeting agendas. This would make funding issues public for a longer period of time, and in turn would create more input and discussion, she said.
Adding transparency to the county budget is included in Measure G, a county reform charter amendment on the Nov. 5 ballot.
Supervisors Hilda Solis, Lindsey Horvath and Janice Hahn voted to move ahead with the measure, but Barger and Mitchell voted against putting it out to vote and have expressed strong opposition to it.
Preven said the cluster meeting expansion motion from the two supervisors who opposed the other three supervisors on Measure G is a way to show their dissatisfaction.
Mitchell had complained that if approved by voters the charter reform Measure G would add four new supervisors to the board, making nine seats, which she saw as a run around her motion to wait for a report on expanding the board before acting.
Measure G calls for creation of an Ethics Commission and Barger has since called for the same thing, saying waiting for charter reform is not necessary.
“This will help those supervisors who’ve had runs around them. They will do anything to disassemble what happened,” Preven said.
The two supervisors did not comment on Measure G during the virtual meeting held Friday.
If Mitchell and Barger get a third board member to vote for their motion on Tuesday, it would require the county’s chief executive officer to redraw the rules about how the Board works, requiring all motions — except for declarations of emergencies, setting rewards for solving a crime, and honorary meeting adjournment motions — to be introduced at cluster meetings.
That revision would come back to the Board for a vote in 45 days.
Originally Published:
