City government for the future, p. 90 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 90 of 253 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
Loading content ...
Chapter 1 1
Intergovernmental Relations
and the
Metropolitan Environment
The City of Los Angeles is the political-, Social, and
economic center of the nation's second most populous
metropolitan area. It functions along with seventy-six
her municipalities and more than 400 school and special
rict governments in a sprawling, highly decentralized
metropolis. In addition to the large population concentration, decentralization of activities, and governmental fragmentation, the urban complex is characterized by high
degrees of mobility and social and economic interdependence. At the hub of the interacting parts is the City of
Los Angeles. Accordingly, its stability and continued vitality are crucial to the general well-being of the entire area.
Because of its social, economic, and political power,
Los Angeles has an inherent responsibility to exercise
leadership in solving problems common to all jurisdictions
in the area. Its initiative and leadership are the most important forces in metropolitan development and improvement
With the importance of the urban environment in mind,
the Charter Commission undertook an extensive study of
intergovernmental relations and metropolitan problems.
Its objective was to become thoroughly familiar with metropolitan conditions and to determine what could be done
to improve them. Underlying this objective was the question of whether the Commission should recommend
changes outside the control of the cfty charter.
The basic elements of the Commission's study were (1)
an examination of three metropolitan reform efforts with
emphasis on their applicability in Los Angeles; (2) a re-
*-;ew of the status of intergovernmental relations in the
s Angeles metropolitan area; and (3) a survey of other
city charters to determine their content on intergovernmental relations.
METROPOLITAN REFORM
Increasing urbanism and metropolitanism have produced numerous social, economic, and public service
problems. In most cases the problems extend beyond individual local governmental boundaries. The inability of the
existing units to cope effectively with these problems has
resulted in several types of proposals for governmental
restructuring. Some have been implemented but most of
them have not gained acceptance.
The Commission studied three successful metropolitan
governmental reforms to determine their possible relevance
to the Los Angeles situation.1 They were the Nashville-
Davidson County consolidation, the Toronto federated
plan, and the Miami-Dade County comprehensive
urban county plan. All three involved substantial reorganization of local governments, and in each instance the origin, development, characteristics, and progress of the
metropolitan government were examined, with particular
attention to its pertinence to the Los Angeles area. The
conclusions are as follows:
1. A major stimulus for the formation of each of these
metropolitan governments was a need to alleviate serious
service deficiencies. For example, in each area water supply and sewage disposal were critically deficient in the
pre-reform period. In the Los Angeles metropolitan area.
levels of service are relatively high in both the cities and
unincorporated sections, and area-wide problems have
77
Object Description
| Title | City government for the future, 1969-07 |
| Description | Section 2: City government for the future: report of the Los Angeles City Charter Commission. Los Angeles, California: Los Angeles City Hall, 1969 July. 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. |
| Coverage date | 1809; 1850/1974; 1984 |
| Publisher (of the original version) | Los Angeles City Hall |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California, USA |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California |
| Date issued | 1969-07 |
| Type | texts |
| Format | 253 p. |
| Format (aat) | reports |
| 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 | Los Angeles City document index |
| Box and folder | box 21, folder 7, item 3 |
| 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-box21-07-03 |
Description
| Title | City government for the future, p. 90 |
| 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 | Chapter 1 1 Intergovernmental Relations and the Metropolitan Environment The City of Los Angeles is the political-, Social, and economic center of the nation's second most populous metropolitan area. It functions along with seventy-six her municipalities and more than 400 school and special rict governments in a sprawling, highly decentralized metropolis. In addition to the large population concentration, decentralization of activities, and governmental fragmentation, the urban complex is characterized by high degrees of mobility and social and economic interdependence. At the hub of the interacting parts is the City of Los Angeles. Accordingly, its stability and continued vitality are crucial to the general well-being of the entire area. Because of its social, economic, and political power, Los Angeles has an inherent responsibility to exercise leadership in solving problems common to all jurisdictions in the area. Its initiative and leadership are the most important forces in metropolitan development and improvement With the importance of the urban environment in mind, the Charter Commission undertook an extensive study of intergovernmental relations and metropolitan problems. Its objective was to become thoroughly familiar with metropolitan conditions and to determine what could be done to improve them. Underlying this objective was the question of whether the Commission should recommend changes outside the control of the cfty charter. The basic elements of the Commission's study were (1) an examination of three metropolitan reform efforts with emphasis on their applicability in Los Angeles; (2) a re- *-;ew of the status of intergovernmental relations in the s Angeles metropolitan area; and (3) a survey of other city charters to determine their content on intergovernmental relations. METROPOLITAN REFORM Increasing urbanism and metropolitanism have produced numerous social, economic, and public service problems. In most cases the problems extend beyond individual local governmental boundaries. The inability of the existing units to cope effectively with these problems has resulted in several types of proposals for governmental restructuring. Some have been implemented but most of them have not gained acceptance. The Commission studied three successful metropolitan governmental reforms to determine their possible relevance to the Los Angeles situation.1 They were the Nashville- Davidson County consolidation, the Toronto federated plan, and the Miami-Dade County comprehensive urban county plan. All three involved substantial reorganization of local governments, and in each instance the origin, development, characteristics, and progress of the metropolitan government were examined, with particular attention to its pertinence to the Los Angeles area. The conclusions are as follows: 1. A major stimulus for the formation of each of these metropolitan governments was a need to alleviate serious service deficiencies. For example, in each area water supply and sewage disposal were critically deficient in the pre-reform period. In the Los Angeles metropolitan area. levels of service are relatively high in both the cities and unincorporated sections, and area-wide problems have 77 |
| Filename | indep-box21-07-03~090.tif |
| Archival file | Volume68/indep-box21-07-03~090.tif |
