DRAFT: Minutes, GPLAC County Council meeting, August 16, 2020

DRAFT Green Party of Los Angeles County, County Council Meeting Minutes, Sunday, August 16, 2020
Teleconference information shared via County Council email list
Check in/socializing: 1:30pm to 2pm
Business meeting: 2pm to 5pm

County Councilmembers present (9): Doug Barnett, Marla Bernstein, Mike Feinstein, Diana Little, Danielle Mead, Cordula Ohman, Linda Piera-Avila, Ajay Rai

County Councilmember alternate (1): David Rockello (for Annie Goeke, appointed by Goeke via email to County Council list at 2:12)

County Councilmembers not-present (2) Annie Goeke, Ava Kermani


Others Greens present (2): Cesar Flores, Andrea Houtman, Margaret Villa

Quorum reached at 2:02 (7): Barnett, Bernstein, Feinstein, Little, Mead, Ohman, Piera-Avila, Rai


Drew joined at 2:18
Houtman joined at 2:22
Ohman joined at 3:04

Flores joined at 3:25
Villa joins at 3:25

Facilitators: Timeka Drew, Ajay Rai
Minutes: Mike Feinstein
Time Keeper:  Linda Piera-Avila
Vibes Watcher: Cordula Ohman

1. Welcome and Introductions - All attendees
In the interest of time, introductions were skipped, because everyone knew each other 

2. Reviewing our process 
In the interest of time, review of process was skipped, because everyone was familiar with it 

3. Decision: Opportunity to amend agenda and/or add emergency items 

Proposal (Feinstein): Approve the addition of the items on the draft marked with an asterik * below as late items, 2/3 vote required; and add additional two items - Endorsement of state Proposition 23 and Inquiry into the state of the GPCA State Treasuer.

Approved by consensus

4. Discussion: Treasurer's Report*
Sponsor/Presenter: Doug Barnett, GPLAC Treasurer

Bernstein reported on behalf of Barnett that there was no change since the August 2, 2020 report.

Rai summarized issues in connecting the GPLAC's donation page to the GPLAC's bank account.

5. Discussion: Emmanuel Estrada for Baldwin Park Mayor*

Estrada presented his campaign for Mayor of Baldwin Park https://www.gpelections.org/races/emmanuel-estrada-runs-for-mayor-2020/ and took questions from the County Council. Estrada indicated he will be submitting the GPLAC candidate questionnaire, so the GPLAC can vote on his endorsement.

6. Decision: Outreach for Greens to fill vacant Los Angeles Neighborhood Council seats* 

Mead and Rockello presented an update and circulated draft text of difffernet outreach plans, with the intent to bring back a further developed version at the next GPLAC County Council meeting. 

7. Decision: Endorsement of County Measure J*

Proposal (Feinstein): Endorse County Measure J

Approved by consensus

8. Decision: Sign-On to Letter, A More Independent Redistricting Process for Los Angeles*
Sponsor/Presenter: Feinstein

Proposal: That the GPLAC endorse and sign-on this letter below, and contact the City of Los Angeles to learn where the GPLAC's position should be sent https://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewre...

Proposal: That the GPLAC calls for two Los Angeles City Charter Changes before 2030 - (1) establishing an independent citizens' redistricting commission for Los Angeles and (2) creating a 50+ member city council - similar in size to Chicago and New York - elected by ranked-choice voting; and connecting this to the 2030 redistricting process; and that a position paper explaining this position be brought back to the County Council.

https://www.commoncause.org/california/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2020/...
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vSchTPCwEC0_LnBc3V1nyf5Gcq6F...

August 11, 2020
RE:        A More Independent Redistricting Process for LA
Dear Honorable City Councilmembers,

We are writing to encourage the Los Angeles City Council to move towards a more independent, transparent, and accessible redistricting process.  With trust in LA City Hall waning, we cannot afford a repeat of previous redistricting efforts which not only divided communities and resulted in litigation, but further entrenched fierce divisions within City Council.  The decision to consolidate nearly all of Downtown LA into District 14 has come under renewed focus in light of recent corruption investigations.[1]

The City of LA has been left behind as the State of California, Los Angeles County, and nearly every major city in the state has adopted a truly independent redistricting process.  The conflict of interest with politicians essentially choosing their voters is only heightened as the City of LA adjusts to the transformational change of moving our elections into alignment with State/County elections, resulting in three to five times the turnout experienced in the last 20 years.

The City of Los Angeles’s redistricting commission is only advisory, and its members are directly appointed by elected officials.[2]  While moving towards a truly independent redistricting process would require a charter change, there are a number of potential changes that can be made that can make LA City’s redistricting process fairer, more transparent, and inspire greater trust from LA voters.

We encourage City Council to make the following changes:

• The Appointment Process:  The Charter does not provide for a specific appointment process. Past practice has been for elected officials to submit their appointment via a letter. Appointees should be required to include a brief form detailing their qualifications and demographic information and including a disclosure of any conflicts of interest and relationships with sitting Councilmembers.

• Timing: The Charter requires redistricting commission members to be appointed no later than when Census data is released. The current implementation plan requires the Commission to be seated by next month, months before that deadline. More time should be granted for City Councilmembers and Citywide officials to make a thoughtful decision about their appointee. Additionally on the subject of timing, the commission should be granted sufficient time to hold public meetings, solicit community input, draft maps, and deliver their proposed map to City Council. While changes to the elections calendar and the timeline for Census data release are currently pending, the commission should be granted at least 2-3 months after the release of Census data to carry out its work before issuing a report to Council.

• Removal process:  The Charter provides no guidance on removal of redistricting commissioners, and past practice has allowed the appointing authority to remove them at will, which significantly undermines the independence of commissioners. Removal should require a majority vote of the redistricting commission.  

• Independent Staffing:  Staff for the commission should be screened for conflicts of interest before hiring - any ongoing work or recent work on behalf of a political party, incumbent City Council member, or City-level political candidate should be disqualifying. Just as city officers and employees are prohibited from serving on the redistricting commission, current/recent city officers and employees should be prohibited from serving as Director or support staff.

• Independent Counsel: Under current plans, the City Attorney would advise the commission in its work. The City should follow the example of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission and grant the commission the ability to hire independent legal counsel who is not an elected official in the City of Los Angeles and thus does not have an inherent conflict of interest in the redistricting process.

• Ban Ex Parte Communications:  The city should embrace the California Citizens Redistricting Commission’s practice of prohibiting ex parte communications, ensuring that commissioners are not being influenced by back channel conversations.  

• Drawing the Lines Publicly:  The map-drawing process should maximize transparency and public participation, in contrast to the process 10 years ago.[3] Draft maps should be presented to the public multiple times throughout the process, accompanied by statements identifying who drafted them and what their rationale was for the district boundaries included.  Public comment should be accepted on draft maps online, by phone, in writing, and verbally at public hearings.

• Notice Requirements for Meetings:  The Brown Act only requires 3 days notice for meetings.  To ensure accessibility and public participation, the commission’s meetings should follow the California Citizens Redistricting Commission example of providing 14 days of notice for any meeting meant for the submission of public testimony about district lines.[4] 

• Ad Hoc Redistricting Committee:  Council has authority in determining which committee handles the recommendations of the redistricting commission.  Last cycle this was left to the Rules Committee, while in the previous cycle a five-member Ad Hoc Redistricting Committee heard the recommendations.  Council should ensure a larger and more representative committee of Councilmembers can weigh in during this critical period. 

• Language Access: All redistricting materials should be made available in all languages in which ballots are available in Los Angeles County.

If done well, the City of Los Angeles’s redistricting process can encourage greater public participation and civic engagement and restore public trust in City Hall. If done poorly or with manipulation behind the scenes by those in power, the City of Los Angeles’s redistricting process will deepen cynicism and distrust.

The legal requirements of AB 849 (Bonta, 2019) will mandate some degree of public outreach, transparency, and fairness in the line-drawing process. Given this unprecedented moment in Los Angeles city politics, we believe the City Council should go further and implement the recommendations above. Finally, we hope the Council will consider moving to a fully independent redistricting process in 2030.

Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Los Angeles (AAAJ)
CA Clean Money Campaign
CA Common Cause
Ground Game LA
LA Forward
Represent.Us LA-SGV
Unrig LA

Approved by Consensus

9. Decision: Sign-On to Letter, Stop Federal Executions*



Proposal (Piera-Avila) Sign-On to Letter  https://actionnetwork.org/forms/federal-execution-sign-on-letter/, Piera-Avila will communicate GPLAC position on behalf of GPLAC



Approved by consensus 

10: Decision: Endorse state Proposition 23


Proposal (Piera-Avila): Endorse Proposition 23



Approved by consensus (Little stands aside)

11: Discussion: Creating Word Clouds for GPLAC website, social media*

Houtman presented what word clouds are and how they might be used for the Green Party.

12. Decision: Nominate delegates for 2020-2021 GPCA Standing General Assembly*

Proposal (Drew, Rai, Feinstein):  Still contine the on-line vote, but forward the 27 names now to the GPCA so they can begin participating as soon as possible. If any of the 27 don't get elected, the GPLAC will notify the GPCA.

Approved by consensus 

13. Decision: Planning Fall Endorsements - candidates and ballot measures*

Proposal (Feinstein): That the GPLAC sent an email blast to its member for positions on the 54 city and special district measures.

Approved by consensus 

Additional discussion centered on how the endorsement process can be more explicit, by making more information available in one place on the GPLAC website and conducting bi-annual workshops on the GPLAC endorsement process.

14. Decision:  Re-schedule Zoom interview with George Gascon for LA District Attorney
Sponsor/Presenters: Feinstein

Proposal (Feinstein): That the GPLAC reschedule the Zoom conference with Gascon, on August 30 or September 13, based upon Gascon's availability, and schedule a brief County Council meeting beforehand.

Approved by consensus 

15. Discussion: Hearing from those seeking future appointment to County Council to fill unfilled seats from March primary election 

Flores and Houtman spoke about their interest in joining the Council

16. Decision: GPCA Treasurer 

Proposal (Rai): That the GPLAC Co-coordinators send a letter of inquiry about the party affiliation and status of the GPCA Treasurer. 

Approved by consensus