By JOSE HERRERA
Los Angeles City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto on Thursday urged a City Council committee to oppose a proposal to split her office into two separate powers.
Currently, the City Attorney’s Office manages both civil litigation and criminal prosecution of misdemeanors. The proposal aims to establish an elected city attorney responsible for criminal prosecution of misdemeanors, and an attorney appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the City Council, who would provide legal counsel and guide legislative affairs.
“The commission’s proposal would erode the fundamental rights of Los Angeles residents to select an independent arbiter of law to represent the city and the people of the state of California,” Feldstein Soto said in a statement. “Maintaining the current structure of this office is critical to ensure that Angelenos have an elected city attorney — unlike an appointed city attorney — who is accountable only to the voters and benefits from the independence essential to serving the best interest of the city.”
Feldstein Soto’s warning came as the council’s Rules, Elections and Intergovernmental Committee conducted its first hearing Thursday on a 301-page report produced by the Los Angeles Charter Reform Committee. The report detailed several proposals to alter city governance, with the goal of improving City Hall and enhancing accountability and transparency.
Charter Reform Committee members have supported dividing the city attorney’s role, citing a need for separation of the office’s powers. The committee also recommended the creation of an Office of Inspector General that would be overseen by the Ethics Commission. Such an entity would address City Hall corruption.
LA has had an elected, independent city attorney since the city’s incorporation in 1850, though there have been several failed attempts to bifurcate the position.
The 1999 charter reform process included a proposal to split the office into three roles. Then-City Attorney James Hahn opposed the idea, arguing such a plan would create “chaos.”
“In instances where the lawyers for the mayor and City Council disagree, the only possible arbiter would be a court of law. It is difficult to imagine how deciding disputes between the mayor and the council by having them sue each other would increase the efficiency and responsiveness of our city government,” Hahn said then, in a quote that was included in a letter Feldstein Soto sent to the Rules Committee on Thursday.
Feldstein Soto added that changing the structure of the office would increase spending during a fiscally challenging time, as well as result in unnecessary redundancies. She added that dividing the office into separate civil and criminal entities would jeopardize the “working relationship” between the city’s elected representatives and the people’s prosecuting authority.
Deputy City Attorney Joshua Geller, who serves as the vice president of the Los Angeles City Attorneys Association, opposed the proposal as well. Speaking in an unofficial capacity, Geller said he feared that having an appointed city attorney would only amplify political influence and interference in legal work.
Rob Quan, an organizer with Unrig LA, raised concerns about the proposal as well, noting there are still questions left to be addressed.
“Who appoints them? I don’t think we’re depoliticizing it. We allow the mayor alone to appoint the council confirmation. I also worry that they don’t have, in this language, power to investigate city officials. We don’t have checks and balances,” Quan said. “We’re losing something with an elected city attorney being off the table.”
He pointed out the city clerk in Portland is appointed by the city auditor, not subject to council confirmation. Quan added, “That is something that would greatly change the system.”
The committee is expected to conduct five more hearings on proposed City Charter reforms. The next meeting is scheduled for May 5, where council members are expected to discuss proposals on government efficiency, planning, city powers and neighborhood councils.
The full City Council is expected to review and finalize any charter recommendations by June 9, with the goal of placing them on the November ballot for voters to decide.