Ballot measure puts end of Los Angeles Board of Public Works within reach

Los Angeles voters face a decision on Tuesday that could effectively end the existence of the Board of Public Works. Measure LA, a charter amendment currently on the ballot, includes a provision allowing for the elimination of or changes to the board. The five-member body has overseen streets, sidewalks, and sewers since 1905, though its dissolution would require a two-thirds vote from the 15-member City Council if the measure passes.

The board generally convenes three times a week in a high-ceilinged room on the fourth floor of City Hall. A recent two-and-a-half-hour session included a review of seven bids for sidewalk repairs, with amounts ranging from $1.9 million to $2.47 million. Commissioners also discussed a budget boost for a storm drain project in Pacific Palisades ahead of El Niño storms and voted on the removal of protected trees on Mulholland Drive. All items were approved unanimously.

The five board members are full-time city employees earning slightly less than $200,000 per year. They are appointed by the mayor and supervise more than 5,500 workers across bureaus handling sanitation, street lighting, and engineering. Supporters of the measure argue that a single director would streamline repairs and improve accountability. Councilmember Bob Blumenfield noted that the current system can create silos between bureaus, slowing progress on projects that require coordination.

Panel President Marqueece Harris-Dawson described the current setup as confusing. He cited an example where a street lighting employee told him to consult Engineering, and Engineering said the task was not on their list. "It just feels like it’s bounced around, and there isn’t any one person that can say, 'Here’s how the problem gets solved,'" Harris-Dawson said. Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky, a supporter, contrasted this with Los Angeles County, which has a single director of public works, Mark Pestrella.

Opponents warn that concentrating authority in one person increases the risk of corruption. Councilmember Monica Rodriguez, who served on the board from 2013 to 2016, stated that a single director would not be omnipotent. "If we want to talk about the real problems, we’ve got to talk about the resources and staffing support of each of these bureaus," Rodriguez said. She added that the current system allows for better interaction with elected officials and the private sector.

Valerie Lynne Shaw, a former board member from 1996 to 2013, described the panel as a coordinating mechanism. "Power in the hands of many better serves the city as opposed to power in the hands of one," she said. A former member who asked not to be identified noted that the board provides frequent public interaction through neighborhood councils and town halls. "A director can do some of that, but not all of that," the member said.

The City Ethics Commission database shows no money spent by groups supporting or opposing Measure LA. Critics argue the controversial board change is bundled with less divisive proposals, such as a two-year budget cycle. Rodriguez called the package a way to "swallow the poison." If approved, the measure would set the stage for a later council vote, which would require 10 votes to pass, or 12 if the mayor vetoes the change.