Editorial: Why L.A. needs a larger City Council in the next few years – and a smaller Board of Supervisors – than we’ve seen since the 1950s
From the Los Angeles Times editorial board: Why L.A. needs a larger City Council in the next few years – and a smaller Board of Supervisors
Los Angeles needs a larger City Council in the next few years and smaller Board of Supervisors than we’ve seen since the 1950s. How so?
When Los Angeles City Hall was born in the late 1940s, the Los Angeles City Council was a full-time, eight-person panel sitting in the council chambers, and the Board of Supervisors, made up of 11 members, was an 11-person panel sitting at the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.
The Los Angeles City Council was composed of seven members elected from Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Those districts were grouped into seven geographic zones. Each of the nine wards of the city was designated by a letter (A-I), and each elected member was from one of the seven wards.
Each of the districts was represented by a councilor — a single member who was elected by voters in the district. The Los Angeles Times editorial board has chosen to use the terms councillor and councilmember to avoid the perceived conflict that would arise if one were to use the term “lobbyist,” or “lobbyist-in-residence,” even though these are names for elected officials in some communities.
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors was elected by and from eight wards in the county, and each of those wards was represented by a single supervisor – a member of the Board who was elected by voters in the ward. The Supervisor to represent that ward was selected by the Board.
The Los Angeles City Council and the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors were considered important landmarks in city and county government, representing the aspirations of residents of the nation’s most populous state to
