Champions of Minutia

To the casual observer, Los Angeles City Council meetings appear to involve a great deal of serious and far-reaching work. But a closer look gives pause. A Times story pointed out Monday that the council spends just 27% of its time on new legislation, setting policies and overseeing them to ensure they are carried out.

More time (32%) is spent on administrative minutiae such as approving the bylaws of a community group that advises a city department on how to manage its Japanese garden. Constituent favors--like allowing a “special event” to block traffic--take up an additional 26%. The council devotes just 15% of its time to important land-use issues. This is the odd reality in a city with a population of more than 3.4 million and a budget larger than that of some countries.

The City Charter is responsible for these anachronisms, having set up the City Council as the ultimate arbiter of management decisions. You might think that council members would be anxious for the kind of charter reform that would free them to focus on the larger issues. But that’s not so. The council has jealously guarded its status to maintain overwhelming political and municipal authority.

One result is the illusion of serious and prodigious work, like the council’s 300 budget-related votes last May on changes involving just 1% of the city’s $4-billion budget.

Another is the illusion of serious debate and deliberation. Only one of 989 votes analyzed by The Times resulted in defeat for the member or members who proposed them, suggesting that it is routine to give council colleagues what they want in exchange for the same.

Finally, department heads are left in a Catch-22 situation. They can’t manage effectively because the council has the power, and this enables the council to declare that its stranglehold on power is necessary because the city bureaucracy does not perform well. That imbalance also sends constituents flocking to the council for help.

A reasonably reformed charter would more equitably delegate power. A reasonable City Council would welcome that kind of change.