How LA County is trying to weaken its new ethics watchdog

Democracy rarely dies in dramatic, cinematic moments. It is suffocated in the agonizingly boring minutiae of government procedure, task force bylaws, and quorum and appointment protocols.

The public wants to look away from such dense bureaucratic mechanics. We’d rather celebrate broad strokes of reform and ignore the plumbing. 

But in Los Angeles County, people must overcome the desire to tune out, because while the public wasn’t looking, the county quietly stacked the deck against its new ethics watchdog.

It started with Measure G, an historic, once-in-a-generation referendum to improve county government. It passed in 2024 by a razor-thin margin, carried across the finish line by a coalition of voters and advocates — myself included — who recognized that LA County government has been captured by special interests, most notably public sector unions.

I know this firsthand. When I ran for LA County Supervisor in 2024, organized labor spent millions to protect the incumbent, making it nearly impossible for an independent voice to compete. 

We fought for Measure G because it promised to break that stranglehold by creating a new Ethics Commission to police a government serving 10 million people and managing a $49 billion budget. To design this new watchdog, the Board of Supervisors created the Governance Reform Task Force. 

But the outcome was compromised at its formation.

At a board meeting in November 2024, the Supervisors had a choice: they could staff this task force with independent civic leaders and governance experts, or they could hand the reins to the county’s most entrenched special interests. 

I watched with horror as they chose the latter. The board adopted a task force model that carved out seats to be hand-picked by powerful labor unions. 

Even worse, they quietly baked in a “functional veto.”  The bylaws dictate no major structural reform could advance without a supermajority of affirmative votes.

When you allow the establishment to design its own oversight, the outcome is entirely predictable — you get a watchdog engineered to sleep.

Look at the recommendations this compromised task force is now pushing. 

The true power of this new agency rests in the hands of seven ethics commissioners. Under Measure G, the voters demanded an independent panel whose mandate is to root out corruption. In practice, because of how these commissioners will be chosen, they will be deeply aligned with the powers-that-be.

Under the finalized recommendations, the power to appoint the foundational bloc of the commission is handed to county politicians: the newly elected county executive, the assessor, and the chair of the Board of Supervisors. Those three political appointees will select the remaining four members through a “public application process.” 

This ensures tight political control over all seven seats while creating an illusion of independence. 

The Ethics Commission is designed to investigate the offices of the Board of Supervisors, the Executive and the Assessor for corruption, campaign finance violations and lobbying conflicts. When elected officials appoint their own referees, the unwritten rule is to select “safe” allies who will avoid aggressive, headline-generating audits against the establishment.

And as a belt-and-suspenders way to render the commission impotent, the county is preparing to treat its ethics commissioners as glorified volunteers.

The draft ordinance offers a stipend of $250 per meeting, or $1,500 a year. This guarantees the time needed to do this job well won’t be devoted to it, even if the commissioners had the best intentions.

An Ethics Commission means nothing if it’s overseen by unpaid volunteers selected by the politicians they are investigating. The county must establish a professional monthly retainer to attract uncompromised talent.

If LA County is going to get a watchdog with actual teeth, the public must demand structural integrity from the ground up. 

The county must strip appointment power away from sitting politicians and instead adopt the model used by California’s Citizens Redistricting Commission — empower a panel of retired, independent judges to vet applicants and randomly draw the initial commissioners from qualified citizens. Those commissioners can select the remaining members. 

Leave the elected officials out of the loop.