New L.A. Charter Would Benefit Business, Region

It would be better for business if charter reform wins in Tuesday’s Los Angeles election for reasons that go beyond the routine of companies wanting faster business permits, less onerous regulation and lower fees and taxes.

Simply put, a reform of the Los Angeles charter could give the city of 3.8 million residents a political structure as flexible and responsive as the hundreds of thousands of small businesses in this area.

The city and county of Los Angeles, with a combined population of 9.6 million, have a real chance to become the capital of the 21st century--the region embodying all the dynamism of a diverse U.S. culture and the global economy.

But at present, rhetoric about being a world capital exceeds political reality in a city hamstrung by high-cost big government. The city of Los Angeles has higher taxes and a lower reputation among businesspeople than almost all the other 87 cities of Los Angeles County. Not to mention cities in Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, San Diego and other counties in this region.

If reform of L.A.’s charter wins in Tuesday’s election, the innovation of neighborhood councils and perhaps more members on the City Council will make it possible for city government to be more responsive to the needs of the community and small business.

If charter reform loses in Los Angeles, then the city will be that much closer to breaking up, experts say, with secession of the San Fernando Valley followed by departure of the San Pedro-Wilmington district, the Westside, Eagle Rock and other areas.

Yes, a breakup would produce smaller, more locally focused cities, too. But such a split would be costly in terms of money as well as time--it would mean years of distraction from important priorities. The communities of the San Fernando Valley and of East, West and South Los Angeles should be putting heads together to discuss how best to cope with the opportunities ahead rather than calculating how to divvy up spoils in a divorce settlement.

The city will grow by almost 1 million people in the next decade, with population growth of 2.7 million people to almost 19 million for the five-county area. Planning for housing, transportation, water resources and other needs should be the priority.

Elsewhere in the state and in the region, intelligent local governments are planning for the future. In the Central Valley, local government councils are preparing for population growth, says David Abel, Los Angeles businessman and publisher of the Planning Report newsletter.

In Burbank, the City Council and economic development department are taking a hard look at what kinds of businesses the city should attract for the next decade.

Nothing so organized is going on in Los Angeles, where City Council members argue over airport expansion and deny that greater housing density will be needed to cope with a 25% increase in population.

The sad irony is that Los Angeles should set an example for others. Like it or not, its name alone makes it the standard-bearer for Southern California. The whole region has a stake in what it does, whether as home of the entertainment industry or co-owner along with Long Beach of the twin port complex that make this the largest port city in the nation.

Los Angeles is owner of two airports, the development of which is vital to the region’s economy.

Los Angeles is the largest city in the most populous, economically and technologically advanced state in the country.

And yet its influence is not seen in the halls of state government. Sacramento, for one reason or another, has reduced the autonomy of every city by taking authority over the property tax. A vibrant Los Angeles government might have fought to prevent or change that.

But the city has been dominated by an unimaginative City Council and large city government--more than $2 billion in annual expenditures--that guards its patronage and privilege.

Los Angeles’ reputation among businesspeople is laughable. Companies typically locate in other cities in the region. When they have to do business in Los Angeles, says a typical construction company owner, they add the costs of coping with city regulators and inspectors onto the clients’ bills.

The city has a regulatory structure suitable to a past age of big companies, not to a new time of small companies, quick decisions and economical operation. Los Angeles County has more than 200,000 small companies. Big companies over the years have departed.

So what would charter reform do to improve the present sorry situation? It would introduce neighborhood councils and start the decentralization of authority. Businesses today say they get more efficient--but not more lenient--permitting and oversight from smaller cities. The neighborhood groups could bring that spirit to the many parts of the big city.

Present City Council members represent 250,000 residents apiece, the largest council districts in the United States. Enlarging the council would bring representation closer to local residents and businesses.

To be sure, neighborhood councils, whose power would only be advisory, won’t work miracles. But they could relieve the tensions now building toward a political earthquake in the San Fernando Valley. And new voices could restore vibrancy to a city that should be an example for the state and the nation.

Ironically, Los Angeles stood as just such an example in the worst times of the early 1990s. As critics wrote off the city and the region because of recession, riot and earthquake, it coped and changed and emerged with a brisk and growing 21st century economy. Now it needs a political structure to match.

*

James Flanigan can be reached at [email protected].