Pastor Eddie Anderson - LA Council District 10
BACKGROUND & PERSPECTIVE
1. Experience: Please explain your past work on addressing corruption and advancing a more representative government.
Answer: I have advocated for Measure R - Civilian Sheriff’s Oversight Commission, also I have advocated for Measure J, which advocated to get money out of politics; My work as a redistricting commissioner led the call for independent redistricting, publicialy. I have been on the steering committee for People’s Budget LA; I have also been a public advocate for charter reform around ethics reform, specially around the LA City charter.
2. Priorities: Councilmembers have many issues on their plate, and limited political capital. List your top three policy priorities for addressing corruption or advancing government reform that you intend to lead on?
Answer: 1) Ethics Reform for the charter; 2) reforming the way planning and land use works in the city - making the process more transparent for stakeholders and residents; 3) police reform.
3. Fundraising: City candidates are prohibited from accepting direct contributions from city lobbyists, restricted developers, and certain contractors/contract applicants. Beyond the restrictions covered by city law, are there any industries or interest groups from which you are declining contributions? Any additional efforts you are making to run a “clean money” campaign?
Answer: No oil, No Super PACS, no lobbyists, no developers of any kind have been accepted by my campaign or will be.
OPEN POLICY QUESTIONS
4. Council Size: What is your perspective on potentially expanding the membership of the LA City Council? What Council size will you advocate for? (If you do not have a specific number in mind, you are welcome to provide a range. You are also welcome to suggest ideas other than single member Council districts, like multi-member districts or having a combination of district & regional representation on the Council)
Answer: The current size of the Los Angeles City Council was decided by voters in 1925 when Los Angeles was notably less equitable, diverse, and populated. We have a unique opportunity to change the makeup and size of our council districts and restore political power to those left out. And though there is no silver bullet to fix all of the wrongs of our past and improve governance and representation for our historically marginalized communities, council expansion between 23-31 council districts can help be the first steps towards a more racially and economically equitable Los Angeles for all.
5. Public Financing: Five years ago the City of LA expanded its public matching funds program. City Council will soon receive a report on a number of options for overhauling our public financing system. What is your vision for the future of public financing of elections in the City of LA? (Please specify if you would like to build upon the current program, move in a different direction with democracy vouchers, or utilize one of the hybrid approaches detailed in the motion to achieve full public financing).
Answer: I think we need to expand democracy vouchers, it is the way forward. We also need to limit the number of Independent Expenditures, and Super PAC involvement in our races.
6. Council Rules & Voting: Council Rules permit a member to be counted as present, even while off the council floor. In fact, so long as the audio of the meeting is running, a member may meet privately with lobbyists in rooms behind council chambers during a meeting. Unless a member is at their desk and presses a button, they are automatically registered as an affirmative vote on items being considered. What are your thoughts on these Council Rules? What do you think is the right approach?
Answer: I am of the opinion that if you’re a member of the council, then you should be present on the floor for any and all votes, which you want to take. It is preposterous to think that a member could be somewhere other than doing their job and still have an affirmative vote cast on issues that are critical to Angelenos. I think these council rules are deeply flawed and we should reform them.
“YES / NO / DEPENDS” POLICY QUESTIONS
(If you would like to provide additional context you are welcome to provide a max of 1 sentence w/ more info on your answer)
7. Charter Commission Powers: The City Council is currently considering the potential creation of a charter commission to undertake the first comprehensive review of our charter in nearly a quarter century. The proposal recently floated at committee would not grant any authority to this commission, and it would merely be advisory. Some cities, like Portland, give their charter review commission the power, if necessary, to place a measure on the ballot if it secures the support of 15 out of 20 commissioners. In the 90s, Council was forced to negotiate with the unified charter commission in good faith because the elected commission retained the power to put a measure on the ballot.
Would you support giving the charter commission the power to place a measure on the ballot, if necessary, so long as it receives the support of 75% of the commission?
● Yes/No/Depends: Yes. The people should always have the final say
● Additional context:
8. 2024 Charter Ethics Reform: The City Council has had varying levels of discussions about enhancing the independence and authority of the City Ethics Commission. It is currently unclear if council will be undertaking the work necessary to refine those proposals and place them on the November 2024 ballot, or if these proposals will be sent to the previously mentioned charter commission for further consideration and placement on the 2026 ballot.
Do you believe these Charter Ethics Reforms should be on the November 2024 Ballot?
● Yes/No/Depends: Yes, only if the community has been able to have input, and there has been a substantial assessment done before it is put to a vote.
● Additional context:
9. Ballot Qualification: LA City Council candidates are required to secure at least 500 valid in-district signatures to appear on the ballot, significantly more than required by most other jurisdictions.
Would you support cutting this threshold in half to 250 valid in-district signatures?
● Yes/No/Depends: Yes. I would absolutely be in favor of cutting the signature gathering down to 250 or even less to be more in line with other offices around the state.
● Additional context:
10. Remote Comment: When LA City Council resumed in-person committee meetings last year, they ended remote public comment at committees. Will you advocate for the restoration of remote public comment at committees?
● Yes/No/Depends: Yes. I would. If we are going to be an equitable council then working people should not have to take time off of work to participate in their government.
● Additional context: