This story is the second installment in a series on the efforts to explore East L.A. cityhood. Read the full series.
Lea este artículo en español.
Efforts to make East Los Angeles a city are nothing new – they’re a significant part of the region’s history.
The introduction of Assembly Bill 2986 has once again renewed discussion among those who seek greater autonomy and local representation. The bill calls for a study exploring whether East L.A. has the tax base to be able to sustain itself as its own city or special district.
But what is right for a region of nearly 120,000 mostly Latino residents, the largest unincorporated area in California?
We asked East L.A. representatives state Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo, who introduced the bill, and L.A. County’s 1st District Supervisor Hilda Solis to share their perspectives.
East L.A. is ready for local representation
By Wendy Carrillo
East L.A. is a beloved community known the world over. It’s the heart of California’s Latino community, whose culture has influenced and cultivated generations of political leaders, entertainers, activists and scholars. Yet, East L.A. lacks community-specific elected leadership that can advocate for the families and neighborhoods from the bottom up. East L.A. is not part of the City of L.A. and is represented locally by one sole L.A. County Supervisor who represents two million residents.
AB 2986 was introduced to give voice to the community of East L.A. and ensure transparency in government with the support of community, business and non-profit leaders as well as tenants and homeowners who deserve a real East L.A. Community Development Plan. The bill has received legislative bipartisan support since it was introduced. Surprisingly, because of various degrees of misinformation, it has also faced opposition from the county, labor groups, neighboring cities and even the Los Angeles Democratic Party which has caused a lot of confusion within the community. East L.A.’s nearly 120,000 residents have sought a stronger civic voice for decades, but have been met with resistance to silence their voice every step along the way. To the residents of East L.A., it has felt like David vs. Goliath. But it’s important to remember that in the story, David won.
In response to the original policy in AB 2986, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors adopted two motions, on April 23 and May 21, that ask the County’s Chief Executive Officer to conduct a feasibility study for East L.A. to become a special district or its own city, and to provide all L.A. County unincorporated areas with 10,000 or more residents with annual reports on all financial investments relevant to their communities. These represented good steps forward. As a result, I recently amended AB 2986 to better align it with the reports produced by the county – reports pushed into action by the grassroots movement of East L.A. community members who have consistently advocated for more local control.
We can all agree the board and the offices and departments overseen by the county’s CEO are responsible for maintaining financial records of all L.A. County communities, including unincorporated areas like East L.A. The fact that L.A. County estimates the cost of AB 2986 at $14 million demonstrates the need for more transparency in county government and reveals the need to better track financial data and make it readily available to the public.
On July 3rd, the board acknowledged that one supervisor cannot appropriately represent over two million people and is asking voters to increase its size from five to nine members on the November ballot. With this action, it is even more prudent and financially responsible to provide data on unincorporated communities to the state.
Transparency in government is good. We all deserve to know how our tax dollars are being used. East L.A. is a community whose quest to independently govern its local matters spans over 90 years. By codifying the board’s motions into state law, AB 2986 will ensure that L.A. County is accountable to East L.A. and all unincorporated communities. Because the bill specifically allows the Board of Supervisors to provide the Legislature with “an existing report or reports containing substantially similar information,” the county can provide the state with the same reports it is already putting together, at no additional cost.
It took residents of East L.A. going to Sacramento for the board to respond and be held accountable. And it will take residents staying engaged with their current and future representatives at the county and state level to win long overdue change. As residents said at the meeting held in East L.A. in April, “this issue goes beyond the current elected officials associated with it, those reps will come and go, East L.A. will stay.” East L.A. residents need to be represented in a way that gives them a real say. The community deserves a future as bright as the promise of its past. Fortunately, AB 2986 has laid the groundwork for a conversation about the future: one in which we can all “Stand and Deliver” for East L.A.
Wendy Carrillo represents the 52nd State Assembly district, which includes East Los Angeles.
East L.A. deserves a strong county partnership
By Hilda Solis
East Los Angeles is a fiercely proud community, and rightfully so. Residents want accountability and transparency when it comes to how their tax dollars are being spent. I agree.
I have always valued and sought the opinions of East L.A.’s residents and business owners. I have spent the last 23 years advocating for this community – to lift up those who are struggling and open doors that have been closed for too many for too long.
The question now is: How do we build on the county’s decades-long partnership with East L.A. to continue to deliver resources to residents and businesses who need them most?
Right now, a disingenuous narrative is being presented that incorporation is somehow the answer to this question. It comes in the form of a special-interest bill disguising itself as “just a study”: AB 2986.
Since AB 2986’s introduction, I have worked to highlight this bill’s deep flaws and the potentially devastating economic impact it would have on the children, families, and business owners in East Los Angeles.
This includes AB 2986’s nearly $14 million price tag as well as its attempt to circumvent the state’s established incorporation procedures, which require every incorporation initiative to collect petition signatures from roughly 25 percent of eligible voters. If AB 2986 is passed, it would set a dangerous precedent that L.A. County’s 110 other unincorporated areas could follow and use as a model to subvert the state’s incorporation process in the future.
Fortunately, on July 3, the state Senate Local Government Committee rejected AB 2986’s text and replaced it with language from my two motions, which were unanimously approved by the L.A. County Board of Supervisors.
The decision represents a win for the community over special interests, and further validates my vision and longstanding commitment to the residents of East Los Angeles. Together, we have developed plans and programs that direct the future of housing, social services, transportation and economic development in East L.A.
Additionally, I have invested over $500 million in East L.A. over the last decade to fund affordable housing and rent relief, build new parks, repair streets and sidewalks, and support senior and low-income residents, on top of the $103 million the county invests every year in East L.A. for municipal services.
The proponents of AB 2986 claim that the state Senate local government committee’s vote was a vote in support of their bill. However, the committee’s action was a clear repudiation of the author’s problematic legislation.
And, while the committee’s action validates the county’s approach to provide a full and transparent accounting of our ongoing investments to support the people and businesses in East L.A., this new version of AB 2986 is an unnecessary overreach of state authority to oversee work the county is already undertaking.
The fact is that most East Los Angeles residents and businesses oppose incorporation. More than 2,200 residents have signed a petition opposing AB 2986. Dozens of unions, community organizations, the County Board of Supervisors, the County Chief Executive Office, which is responsible for overseeing L.A. County’s fiscal health; and the Local Agency Formation Commission, which oversees the viability of incorporation, all oppose this bill. They agree that it’s a bad deal for East L.A.
While I appreciate the work of the committee to align the bill with work the county has already initiated, this new version of AB 2986 does not add anything to the county’s commitment and existing efforts to support East Los Angeles.
The analysis approved by the Board of Supervisors, which is now the de-facto language of AB 2986, should be completed within 120 days. Our analysis will be completed and issued to the public before the provisions of the AB 2986 take effect. Therefore, AB 2986 continues to be a flawed bill – and now a duplicative and unnecessary one – and I continue to oppose it as amended.
We’re also working to form a town council or municipal advisory committee to provide residents a dedicated platform to advise the county on issues related to East L.A.
I will keep meeting with community task forces like Vision City Terrace, the East Los Angeles Small Business Roundtable and the East Los Angeles Advisory Committee to make sure we continue to work together to grow and thrive and preserve the essential fabric of this community.
Extending East L.A.’s alliance with the county and finding new ways to work together is the right path forward.
Hilda Solis is a Los Angeles County Supervisor representing District 1, which encompasses East L.A.