Los Angeles County’s charter reform accidentally abolishes anti-incarceration voting measures

Last November, voters approved a major overhaul of the Los Angeles County government.

They did not realize they also abolished the county’s landmark criminal justice reform.

Eight months later, county officials just realized that they had unknowingly committed the age-segment administrative screw-up.

Supervisor Lindsey Horvath and Janice Hahn co-wrote Measure G, which changed the county charter to expand the five-member committee and elect new county-level executives, among other major shifts.

But no one seems to realize that the new licensed language will be abolished Measurement jvoters approved in 2020 to dedicate hundreds of millions of dollars to services that provide alternatives to imprisonment.

“We can confirm that Measure J was not included in the county's charter after it was adopted in 2020, due to unintentional administrative errors in the administration of the executive officer,” the county legal counsel said in a statement. “So, when voters passed Measure G, they abolished Measure J, which came into effect in December 2028.”

The error appears to stem from the failure of the county executive office to update the county charter after the adoption of Measure J in 2020. County lawyers then failed to include measure J language when selecting the 2024 voting measures.

Therefore, when voters approve measure G, they accidentally abolish measure J.

The mess was discovered by former Dualt City Councilman John Fasana, a county governance reform task force whose mission is to implement a government overhaul. He said he first raised the issue with the county in early June.

“Someone fooled it,” said Fasana, who was appointed to the task force by supervisor Kathryn Barger. “When I saw it, I couldn’t believe it.”

Megan Castillo, the coordinator of the league with Reimagine La, pushed measure j to the vote in 2020, said she was upset last week and learned that the results of years of advocacy will soon be eliminated.

“It shouldn't be undermined just because people are rushing to formulate policies,” Castillo said. “We know that voters have more voters to J than to measure G. It's been found that this may have happened unintentionally, and it's disrespectful to the will of the people.”

Measure J requires 10% of locally generated, unrestricted Los Angeles currency (estimated between $360 million and $900 million) to use for social services such as housing, mental health treatment and other prison transfer programs. The county is forbidden to spend money on carceral systems – prisons, prisons or law enforcement agencies.

Castillo said she fears that the abolition would have “deep economic impact” on the plans, and county funds could be transferred to the expenses required by measure G, such as the salaries of new politicians and their employees. Measure G Bars County raises taxes, which means the money must come from elsewhere in the county’s budget.

Castillo said she first brought the issue to Hahn and Horvath's representatives last week.

“They were also shocked,” Castillo said.

Holvas, who led the Measures G allegations, said in a statement that a proposal would soon correct “the county bureaucracy has a wrong with Measures J.”

“This measure is the result of the hard, community leadership efforts that I wholeheartedly support and still stick to,” Hovas said. “This situation clearly shows why it is urgent to measure G.

Kathryn Barger, the director who opposes overhaul of the county charter, sees differently.

“This also reinforces one of the key issues I have had with G from the very beginning. When a major change in the county charter without sufficient time to analyze, public opinion and transparency, errors become more likely. Such oversight can happen,” Bag said in a statement. “This error may and should be caught before voters are asked to make a decision.”

Supervisor Hilda Solis said she was “surprised and concerned” to understand the error, but was confident that the funding envisioned by the measure would “continue to be unaffected.” She said she hopes the money can prioritize “to meet the needs of the communities we serve in the context of ongoing immigration attacks and wildfire recovery.”

Time has contacted two other supervisors and has not received their response yet.

County prosecutors said in a statement that they are working with the Administration Office to “resolve this situation” and ensure that the Executive Office “collects” the charter amendment in a timely manner. They stressed that despite the imminent measures J, the county will continue Align the budget There are measurement goals.

Assn head Derek Hsieh. For Los Angeles Deputy Sheriff and members of the Governance Reform Task Force, the error is called a “cluster.”

“I think voters and county employees want to know when the board knows this error and what they intend to solve the problem,” he said, the outspoken Hsieh of Measure G and Measure J.

The union representing sheriff’s deputies spent more than $3.5 million on television and social media to fight measures J. Alliance also joins other county unions Challenge measures in court.

“There is no doubt that the will of voters and the decision of the California Supreme Court is that measure J is the law of land,” Hsieh said.

On Wednesday night, at the Task Force's second meeting, it was screwed up. Fasana told his fellow countrymen in the heart of Bob Hope's Patriotic Hall that he discovered “a major problem”.

The news caused a commotion at the meeting, which should have focused on more mundane issues of bureaucracy. Some members said they wanted to wait to discuss it until everyone was saying to him.

Others say they don't understand how to talk about anything else.

“For me, we're talking about all the work we're going to stop, and it's a very important, basic,” said Derek Steele, appointed by the Superintendent Holly Mitchell.

“In fact, we might need to restore the G of the quantum to the people,” Steele said. “Let's make sure we have a solution for this.”

Both Mitchell and Barger oppose Measure G, believing it has been rushingly put together and provide too much power for uncertain county executives.

Sara Sadhwani, who was appointed to the task force, said she found the accidental abolition of measures J “incredibly worrying” but found the way the news was passed to the task force “blocking”.

“This raises a lot of questions for me and raises concerns about the sincere operation of this task force,” Sadhwani said. “If it's a sincere effort, aren't we going to post this question instead of putting down bombs that people don't know?”

The task force has requested a report from the county attorneys' next meeting.

Jaclyn Cosgrove contributed to the story.