Grace Yoo - LA City Council District 10
BACKGROUND & PERSPECTIVE
1. Experience: Please explain your past work on addressing corruption and advancing a more representative government.
Answer:
During the 2011-12 L.A. City redistricting process, I served as a DOT City commissioner and I fought for fair representation from within City Hall and as an advocate. I resigned my DOT V{ commissioner position when I saw that City Hall did not follow due process and basic fairness rules. I am passionate about enacting change and reform throughout Los Angeles and within City Hall. Angelenos deserve civic leaders who will work on behalf of our families, business owners, and communities that call Los Angeles home. I have always been a doer, willing to
stand up and lead. And I will continue prioritizing the needs of my fellow Angelenos and our collective good.
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:
Over the past several years I have seen the people of CD 10 be poorly represented. First, disgraced, convicted, former Council Member Mark Ridley-Thomas betrayed the trust of his constituency by engaging in corruption. Secondly, in the aftermath of Ridley-Thomas’ expulsion, the city appointed a new council member for the district in Heather Hutt. It has been far too long since CD 10 has had a properly elected leader and I firmly believe that my
decades of community experience make me the most qualified and motivated candidate to effectively serve the people of District 10.
We need an independent City Ethics Commission, an independent redistricting process similar
to the State of California’s Independent Redistricting Commission, and for the Controller’s office budget to be set similarly to the LA Public Libraries, with set funds instead of being dependent on the City Council to apportion funds.
I want the people of Los Angeles to trust their elected officials, yet the sad reality is that trust is established over decades but broken in a moment. One person, no matter how trustworthy and transparent, cannot transform the culture of a City Council mired by scandals overnight. However, I can begin to help usher in an era that begins to bridge the gap between City Hall and local communities to bring about transparency and accountability. I would also like to see the city do more performance audits. Talking with city workers and learning where there are challenges and opportunities can help leaders make effective changes. These audits (or reviews) must also include community leaders and the public at large. The city also needs to do a much better job of informing the community of work that is being done by city departments. The challenge seems to be that the city likes to work in silos so each council district, or department, decides how and when to inform the public which leaves gaps and allows for misinformation to spread.
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:
I do not accept money from fossil fuel companies, big pharma, gun manufacturers, nor any developers who are precluded from giving in the City of Los Angeles.
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:
I am in favor of increasing the number of LA City Council Members to 21 or perhaps 25 but with the caveat that the budget for Council offices should remain the same for the amount spent for the current 15 council offices- not including COLA increases. I believe that having smaller districts with less constituents will help councilmembers be more responsive to the needs of their constituents.
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 would support a system of public financing for city elections, such as the democracy voucher system that’s been implemented in Seattle. I would like to see more details on how it will be implemented here. We need to ensure that such a program is not “hijacked” by powerful incumbents and their chosen successors.
In order for public financing to be effective, we also need to reform the City Ethics Commission. Currently the Commissioners are appointed by the very elected officials they are supposed to monitor. The reviews and audits of elections are started and completed years after an election is over which means that campaigns, including Independent Expenditure campaigns, can flaunt the rules and not worry about consequences for years. We need the Ethics Commission to be able to call out rule breaking at the time it happens so the voters are better informed. This would also make it more likely that campaigns and political players will actually follow the rules.
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 think the Council Rules that allow for councilmembers to be counted as present when off the council floor is terrible. This policy needs to be changed to reflect the true status of the councilmember. The current rule of automatically voting as an affirmative vote is counter to democracy and is appalling. A Councilmember should not be allowed to vote when they are not at their seat to vote.
“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:
● Additional context:
Yes, the Commission needs real power. The City’s Charter needs to be reviewed and updated. It just depends on how the commissioners for the Charter Commission are selected. It is important that the Commission be run by Commissioners who are appointed through an independent process.
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:
● Additional context:
Yes. We urgently need significant reforms to our Ethics laws and the Commission. I would strongly support the Commissioners being appointed by an independent body. I would like to see an independent funding stream (with a COLA) be part of the Charter change so the Commission isn’t beholden to the City Council for their budget like they are now.
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:
● Additional context:
I would like to see an analysis of how many signatures candidates who did not qualify for the ballot actually submitted. This would help us understand if the 500 valid in-district signatures are too arduous. Many candidates pay for signature collection which makes it easier for wealthy candidates to qualify. The three times I qualified for the ballot, my volunteers and I collected all of my signatures so I know that candidates who are well known in their community can reach the threshold without paying for signature gatherers. I really appreciated the option of receiving 1,000 valid signatures and having matching funds come in at twice the rate so that the total matching is the same but if the candidate was able to get the 1,000 signatures then the monies came in at 2x the rate. [i.e. Currently matching funds is set at 6x the total up to $129, at double the rate it would 12x up to $129 with matching maxed at $174,000] Lowering the threshold makes sense, but I would like more information before making a final decision.
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:
● Additional context:
Yes, absolutely. We need to make our government much more accessible to the public. Once elected, I will also push for meetings to be held in the evenings, on weekends, and in different parts of the city. Information about committee meetings, council meetings and other government actions must be made more accessible to the regular person so that more people can be engaged in local government.