The so-called “five little queens” will have to make some room.
The backers of a ballot measure to expand the L.A. County Board of Supervisors claimed victory Monday afternoon following days of returns showing voters closely divided on whether to approve the massive overhaul of the county government’s structure.
The measure, which also includes a proposal to elect a chief executive and create an independent ethics commission, had a narrow but stable lead, securing just over 51% of votes, with some ballots still left to be counted.
“The people of Los Angeles County have made history in passing Measure G,” said Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, who co-authored the measure with Supervisor Janice Hahn, in a statement. “We will now have the ability to fix what is broken.”
Voters have repeatedly rejected ballot measures aimed at expanding the Board of Supervisors, who are nicknamed the “five little queens” — or kings, when they are men — for the immense power they hold over the welfare of the county’s 10 million constituents.
But this time, the proposal, combined with the other restructuring measures, won over a slim majority of voters in the Nov. 5 election.
The measure’s passage will set the clock ticking for a host of changes, many of which will take years to come to fruition.
By 2026, the county will create an independent ethics commission, responsible for disciplining county officials found guilty of misconduct and cracking down on a “revolving door” from government posts to lobbying.
By 2028, voters will elect a county executive, who will function similar to a mayor, overseeing department heads, drafting the budget and wielding veto power over the board’s policies. The county currently has a chief executive appointed by the supervisors.
And by 2032, following a redistricting process, all nine supervisors will be elected. Supporters of Measure G argue that the larger board will be more representative of a county that is nearly half Latino and about 15% Asian. There has never been an Asian American supervisor.
“With Measure G, we’re moving toward a County government that truly reflects and serves all of us,” Manjusha Kulkarni, executive director of the AAPI Equity Alliance, which advocates for Asian American and Pacific Islanders, said in a statement.
The measure’s opponents argued that the government overhaul had been put together too fast, with too many details left to figure out after the vote — including how much it will all cost. The measure states that the county cannot raise taxes to pay for the changes, which will include salaries for the new politicians and their staffs, forcing the county to find places to belt-tighten.
Kathryn Barger and Holly Mitchell, two county supervisors who opposed the measure, did not immediately comment.
“What that also implies is that you’re going to have to pay Peter and steal from Paul,” said Arcadia Mayor Michael Cao, who opposed the measure. “What social service programs are you going to have to decrease funding for?”
The county auditor’s office has put one-time costs for the measure at about $8 million, but the ultimate price tag is expected to be significantly larger.
County attorneys estimated last month that the ethics reforms detailed in the measure could cost $21 million yearly, mostly because of staff salaries. The campaign for Measure G countered that the estimate was overblown.
