Los Angeles City Council members, earning nearly $250,000 annually, are considering reducing their meeting schedule to just one day a week, even as the city grapples with significant challenges.
The council recently approved base salaries ranging from $245,255 to $270,389. On June 30, they voted 12-0 in favor of putting a proposal on the November ballot that would adjust the minimum meeting requirements of the city charter.
During the vote, council member Monica Rodriguez staged a walkout in protest, and two others were absent.
Katie Yaroslavsky, one of the proponents for this change, expressed her frustrations about being constantly busy. She noted that her commitments extend from City Hall to her district and even into her home, where she’s also doing chores.
However, the proposal faced backlash. Councilman Rodriguez criticized his colleagues for appearing lazy and suggested this approach would not sit well with the public.
The City Council plays a crucial role in shaping the city’s future, as its members decide on vital issues like budget allocations, police funding, and housing projects.
Currently, meetings can last anywhere between two to eight hours, providing a platform for residents to hold elected officials accountable.
“The idea that we would ask people to spend less time here feels out of touch,” Rodriguez stated.
She emphasized that part of the challenge is effective time management rather than reducing the number of days they meet. “Good planning is key,” she said, reminding her colleagues of the public’s expectations for them to convene regularly.
Yaroslavsky suggested that the idea of fewer meetings stems from a desire to enhance efficiency. He claimed that he’s often restless and aims to optimize the council’s functioning. “I want to work more effectively,” he explained, even if it risks public perception of neglecting their duties.
In early 2024, Councilman Eunice Hernandez proposed the idea of scaling back meetings to once per week, using the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors as a potential model.
Yaroslavsky and fellow Councilman Tim McCosker formally proposed this change, arguing it would allow for better focus on other essential tasks.
Meanwhile, the proposal has surfaced at a time when Los Angeles faces pressing issues, such as the aftermath of devastating wildfires. Residents in the Pacific Palisades area have been struggling to rebuild their lives after losing homes and possessions.
One resident, Jeremy Padawer, voiced his concerns about the council’s decision-making frequency: “We didn’t vote for a once-a-week schedule,” he remarked, reflecting broader frustrations regarding governmental responsiveness during such crises.
Others, including business leaders, echoed similar sentiments, noting that the city already contends with layers of bureaucracy that slow down essential processes. They worry that a reduced number of meetings will further hinder progress on vital issues.
George Francisco, president of the Westside Chamber of Commerce, expressed that more engagement from elected officials is crucial to cut through stagnation in governmental processes. “LA needs action, and a decline in meeting frequency seems counterproductive,” he argued.
While there are calls for reform, many believe that cutting meetings could exacerbate existing challenges, citing recent lapses in addressing homelessness and housing issues as clear examples of what happens when council meetings become less frequent.
In the coming months, voters will have a chance to weigh in on this proposal on November 3, along with a set of charter reforms that could fundamentally change how Los Angeles governance operates in the future.
