CommentsEASTSIDER-After being passed by the voters in November 2018, Measure W disappeared into a black hole.
Now, suddenly, on June 30, the LA County Board of Supervisors passed a 180 plus page Measure W Ordinance with recommendations to fill all the committee slots. What gives?
While they were asking for a new parcel tax, the County was absolutely awash with promises of transparency, independence, and wonderful inclusion if the voters approved. We did, all 69 plus percent of us. Now questions are being raised as to what we really bought.
What the Actual Measure W Said
To start with, let’s take a look at the actual ballot arguments, which you can find in their entirety here.
The Language was full of promises:
“Shall an ordinance improving/protecting water quality; capturing rain/stormwater to increase safe drinking water supplies and prepare for future drought; protecting public health and marine life by reducing pollution, trash, toxins/plastics entering Los Angeles County waterways/bays/beaches; establishing a parcel tax of 2.5¢ per square foot of impermeable area, exempting low-income seniors, raising approximately $300,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring independent audits, oversight and local control be adopted?”
Later on, the main mechanism to oversee all these projects, committees, subcommittees, and such was described as follows
An independent Regional Oversight Committee consisting of subject matter experts shall prepare progress reports on whether the goals of the Measure are met, and submit recommendations to the Board. The Board shall cause independent financial audits to be conducted to determine compliance with the terms of the Ordinance. All Tax funds shall be deposited in a special account. The County Auditor-Controller shall file an annual report with the Board stating the amount of funds collected pursuant to the Ordinance.
Notice the magic word “independent”.
What the Vote Meant
Measure W passed in November 2018 and will generate something like $300 million dollars per year based on a permanent new parcel tax of “2.5 cents per square foot of impermeable area, except as exempted.” Exemptions here are defined as government owned parcels, and those owned by “non-profit organizations.”
The split on the tax money gives 10% to the Flood Control District (aka LA County Board of Supervisors) for administration, 40% directly to the municipalities within LA County, and the final 50% goes to actually fund projects and programs under the Measure.
The WASC, the ROC, and the SC
As only a County bureaucrat could invent the names for the three sets of Committees set up under the Measure; (1) 9 Watershead Area Steering Committees (the WASC), the big time main Regional Oversight Committee (the ROC), and a Scoring Committee for projects (the SC).
If this isn’t mind-numbing enough, you have to wade through the entire 182 page document to discover that, gasp, all of the members of the WASC, the ROC, and the SC have already been decided on, and are listed in the last five pages of the document.
Want to take a bet on how many people read that far?
The Odor, and I Don’t Mean the Water
First, a shout out to the Community Repower Movement and its head, Rev. Mac Shorty. Also, to William W. Funderburk, Jr., who readers might remember as a former Commissioner on the DWP Board. Bill is currently pro bono counsel for Community Repower.
But for their shining the light on this behind-the-scenes coup, the 10 plus million residents of our county would never have even known that anything was happening at all -- with a final ordinance suddenly appearing on the Board’s agenda, including the regulations, and the anointment of all of the committee members for the WASC, the ROC, and the SC.
Nowhere in the process were there references to the promises made when LA County sought a YES vote for Measure W. Heck, the Flood Control District didn’t even mark the item urgent on the Board’s agenda.
What the Flood Control District Did Not Do
--There was no indication of any transparency and outreach in the selection process of the 11 committees suddenly announced on July 30.
--Community Repower correctly notes that there was no indication of outreach to black and brown areas as promised, or for that matter, any advertisement in the Sentinel or La Opinion about the selection process and/or how to apply.
--Neighborhood Councils were totally ignored in the process, even though the City of Los Angeles represents about 30 percent of the total municipalities which are to receive 40 percent of the taxes. That is a significant sum of money. Yet no outreach.
--There was no indication of any outreach at all in the Recommendations, nor was there any mention of an attempt to utilize demographic breakdowns of basic stuff like homeowner, multifamily, race, ethnicity, gender, immigration status, sexual orientation, inconsiderableness, as utilized by our very own DWP in their analysis. These criteria are central to looking at how various segments of our community are impacted by decisions of the elected officials’ appointed surrogates.
--How about basic financial disclosures from the applicants for the positions, and for that matter, who even applied for each of the positions?
I could go on, but the point is clear. This under-the-radar unilateral implementation of Measure W, including the appointment of all of the committee members without any attempt to involve any of the residents of the county and all of the cities within, smells.
With no appeal process, it would appear that the LA County Board of Supervisors, in this instance, acting as the LA County Flood Control District, have ratified the kind of bait and switch tactic that we Angelenos have come to expect from the City of LA, but not from the county. I really hoped for better from them and can only hope that the Board of Supervisors was not apprised of the failure in drafting the Ordinance.
The Board of Supervisors Quandary
While it would be tempting to blame this outcome on the Board of Supervisors, that would probably be misplaced. You see, the five Board members control a sprawling empire of around 40 discrete departments, in excess of 100,000 employees, and an annual budget of over $30 billion.
Unless it is a project of special interest to one or more of the Board members, there is simply no way in which they can micro-manage all or most of what goes on. They have to rely on their key executives and the bureaucracy.
In this case, the bureaucracy involved is the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, which, since 1984 has been a part of the County’s Department of Public Works. Their budget is well over $1 billion a year, with over 3500 employees.
I would be very surprised if the Board actually knew all of the promises broken by the Flood Control District when they presented the Board with a 180-page plus Ordinance and a “Do Pass” recommendation.
The real question is, now what?
The Takeaway
So, I reached out to Community RePower, a really good group which tries to make sure that all of our diverse communities have a voice in government, and which worked very hard to get this parcel tax passed. They also speak truth to power.
Here’s the response from their Attorney:
Community RePower continues to support Measure W but sees no reason to rush the process of public notice and comment on a highly technical and detailed framework document. Lack of due process in promulgating the rule making package is not excused by delay on the part of the County in meeting its schedule. But for the reputations of the esteemed members of the board, we would have difficulty continuing support for the rollout. We trust them as individuals but does all the public?
We hope that the various proposed projects receive more public notice and opportunity to comment than the latest package. Using an equity metrics mapping tool can send an important and potent message that the process was and will continue to be transparent in the eyes of all taxpayers, residents and stakeholders. It’s better to get this right than to rush.
Amen. The communities of color particularly worked hard to help pass Measure W and believed that the process of implementation would be inclusionary. They have long been under-represented, and this action does nothing to change that perception.
So here is a plea to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors: You are all better than this, and the work product that staff recommended you vote on needs to be referred back, directing them to do the basic inclusion that was promised when Measure W was on the ballot.
These are all large-scale multi-year projects, and the delay involved to keep the promises of the Ballot Measure clearly outweighs any loss of time.
(Tony Butka is an Eastside community activist, who has served on a neighborhood council, has a background in government and is a contributor to CityWatch.) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.
