Municipal & county government secion of Town Hall, p. 94 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 94 of 109 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
Loading content ...
A STUDY OF THE CITY CHARTER
nances passed by the Council and over the entire budget or specific items
in ir, subject to the possibility of overriding action by the Council. As the
presiding officer, the Mayor should appoint the standing and special committees of the Council and should make appropriate referrals of matters
filed with the City Clerk or presented directly to the Council. Both majority and minority reports of Council committees should be possible. A
president pro tempore should be elected by the Council from among its
ciry-wide elected members to serve as presiding officer of the Council in
the absence of the Mayor.
This recommendation, it is emphasized, in no way makes the Council a
rubber stamp in legislation. The Council continues to have the independent
power of decision, including both approval and disapproval, over all proposed legislation. What the recommendation does accomplish is to provide a means for the Mayor and the Council to discuss public matters
together in open meetings, where misunderstandings have a better oppor-
runiry ro be resolved and clearer explanations can be made than through
the existing and unsatisfactory formal channels of communication. It
therefore offers a method that should facilitate serious consideration of the
proposals of each by the other.
And a further word should be said abour this recommendation. Authority for policy formulation at the national and state levels is primarily
the function of the executive office, where the respective executive
branches have both a traditional responsibility to initiate a program and
the sanctions and powers to bring on consideration of the program by the
respective legislative bodies and not simply by their committees. These
powers include the appointment of various officers (for example, the
President's appointment of judges and postmasters or the Governor's appointment of judges and his filling of vacancies on county and district
governing bodies and the resulting influence of these and other actions on
prompting legislative consideration of his proposals). A large city such
as Los Angeles, having many political factions and having involved and
interrelated municipal functions to perform, has a need to vest policy
formulation primarily in the executive office and to accompany this endowment with sanctions (the appointment by the Mayor of Council committees) which will prompt consideration (but not necessarily adoption)
by the full Council of the proposals.
The Council's authority to make policy is not diminished by this recommendation to have the Mayor serve as presiding officer of the Council
and appoint Council committees. Instead, this recommendation will decidedly improve the scrutiny given to proposed legislation. It puts the
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MAYOR
«87
Mayor in a position to place proposals before the Council in such a manner
thar the Council must publicly and responsibly acr on them.
Other Changes
The Mayor's budget-making authority should be enlarged by bringing
the Library and Recreation and Parks departments within the general city
budget and eliminating their independent financing power.
The Mayor should appoint the five members of each advisory board
and the Board of Public Works for a four-year term and should be able to
remove any member, in both instances with Council confirmation.
The Mayor should continue to appoint for five-year staggered terms,
with Council confirmation, the five members of the boards thar control
and manage the three proprietary departments (Airports, Harbor, and
Water and Power), the Civil Service Department, and the Department of
Pensions and to be able to remove any of them with Council approval.
Furthermore, the Mayor should continue to appoint, with Council confirmation, for five-year staggered terms three of the five members of the
City Employees' Retirement System.
The time available to the Mayor to consider vetoing Council ordinances
should be extended from ten to fifteen calendar days. Under the presenr
arrangement, when two weekends are involved only six work days are
available; this is a very short time to test public opinion and to reach a
decision about a matter that may be very important.
A
Object Description
| Title | Legal research regarding the history of the Los Angeles charter, 1850-1963 (3b of 3) |
| Description | Municipal and county government section of Town Hall. A study of the Los Angeles City Charter: a report. Los Angeles, California: Town Hall, Biltmore Hotel, 1963 December. PART OF A SERIES: A critical component of the Commission's investigation centered on the idea that governance of the LAPD was shared between the Office of the Chief of Police, an administrative body, and the Board of Police Commissioners, a citizen body. To better understand the dynamic between these two entities, the staff of Heller, Ehrman, White, & McAuliffe researched the history of the Los Angeles City Charter, focusing primarily on its provisions regarding the distribution of power and the structure and organization of the LAPD. Included in the series are reproductions of reports, dissertations, article clippings, excerpts from city documents, and charter amendments related to the charter's conception and development over time. The series also includes several summaries of expert witness interviews regarding the effectiveness of this structure. |
| Geographic subject (city or populated place) | Los Angeles |
| Geographic subject (county) | Los Angeles |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Geographic subject (country) | USA |
| Coverage date | 1850; 1887/1889; 1898; 1900; 1902; 1903; 1911/1916; 1918/1920; 1923/1963 |
| Creator | Town Hall, Biltmore Hotel. Municipal and County Government Section |
| Publisher (of the original version) | Town Hall, Biltmore; Anderson, Ritchie and Simon, printer; The Ward Ritchie Press |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California, USA |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California |
| Date issued | 1963-12 |
| Type | texts |
| Format | 109 p. |
| Format (aat) | books |
| Format (imt) | application/pdf |
| Language | English |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Part of collection | Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department, 1991 |
| Series | Heller, Ehrman, White & McAuliffe |
| File | Legal research regarding the history of the Los Angeles charter |
| Box and folder | box 21, folder 6, item 2 |
| Provenance | The collection was given to the University of Southern California on July 31, 1991. |
| Rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ All requests for permission to publish or quote from manuscripts must be submitted in writing to the Manuscripts Librarian. Permission for publication is given on behalf of Special Collections as the owner of the physical items and is not intended to include or imply permission of the copyright holder, which must also be obtained. |
| Physical access | Contact: Special Collections, Doheny Memorial Library, Libraries, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0189; specol@dots.usc.edu |
| Repository name | USC Libraries Special Collections |
| Repository address | Doheny Memorial Library, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0189 |
| Repository email | specol@dots.usc.edu |
| Filename | indep-box21-06-02 |
Description
| Title | Municipal & county government secion of Town Hall, p. 94 |
| Format (imt) | image/tiff |
| Physical access | Contact: Special Collections, Doheny Memorial Library, Libraries, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0189; specol@dots.usc.edu |
| Full text | A STUDY OF THE CITY CHARTER nances passed by the Council and over the entire budget or specific items in ir, subject to the possibility of overriding action by the Council. As the presiding officer, the Mayor should appoint the standing and special committees of the Council and should make appropriate referrals of matters filed with the City Clerk or presented directly to the Council. Both majority and minority reports of Council committees should be possible. A president pro tempore should be elected by the Council from among its ciry-wide elected members to serve as presiding officer of the Council in the absence of the Mayor. This recommendation, it is emphasized, in no way makes the Council a rubber stamp in legislation. The Council continues to have the independent power of decision, including both approval and disapproval, over all proposed legislation. What the recommendation does accomplish is to provide a means for the Mayor and the Council to discuss public matters together in open meetings, where misunderstandings have a better oppor- runiry ro be resolved and clearer explanations can be made than through the existing and unsatisfactory formal channels of communication. It therefore offers a method that should facilitate serious consideration of the proposals of each by the other. And a further word should be said abour this recommendation. Authority for policy formulation at the national and state levels is primarily the function of the executive office, where the respective executive branches have both a traditional responsibility to initiate a program and the sanctions and powers to bring on consideration of the program by the respective legislative bodies and not simply by their committees. These powers include the appointment of various officers (for example, the President's appointment of judges and postmasters or the Governor's appointment of judges and his filling of vacancies on county and district governing bodies and the resulting influence of these and other actions on prompting legislative consideration of his proposals). A large city such as Los Angeles, having many political factions and having involved and interrelated municipal functions to perform, has a need to vest policy formulation primarily in the executive office and to accompany this endowment with sanctions (the appointment by the Mayor of Council committees) which will prompt consideration (but not necessarily adoption) by the full Council of the proposals. The Council's authority to make policy is not diminished by this recommendation to have the Mayor serve as presiding officer of the Council and appoint Council committees. Instead, this recommendation will decidedly improve the scrutiny given to proposed legislation. It puts the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MAYOR «87 Mayor in a position to place proposals before the Council in such a manner thar the Council must publicly and responsibly acr on them. Other Changes The Mayor's budget-making authority should be enlarged by bringing the Library and Recreation and Parks departments within the general city budget and eliminating their independent financing power. The Mayor should appoint the five members of each advisory board and the Board of Public Works for a four-year term and should be able to remove any member, in both instances with Council confirmation. The Mayor should continue to appoint for five-year staggered terms, with Council confirmation, the five members of the boards thar control and manage the three proprietary departments (Airports, Harbor, and Water and Power), the Civil Service Department, and the Department of Pensions and to be able to remove any of them with Council approval. Furthermore, the Mayor should continue to appoint, with Council confirmation, for five-year staggered terms three of the five members of the City Employees' Retirement System. The time available to the Mayor to consider vetoing Council ordinances should be extended from ten to fifteen calendar days. Under the presenr arrangement, when two weekends are involved only six work days are available; this is a very short time to test public opinion and to reach a decision about a matter that may be very important. A |
| Filename | indep-box21-06-02~094.tif |
| Archival file | Volume68/indep-box21-06-02~094.tif |
