Dr. Nadine Diaz - LA City Council District 14
BACKGROUND & PERSPECTIVE
1. Experience: Please explain your past work on addressing corruption and advancing a more representative government.
Answer: I am a third-generation constituent of Boyle Heights who has been a grassroots community activist for the past 35 years, organizing, strategizing, and mobilizing people impacted by land use issues that pertain to health and human services, labor, housing, transportation, and education. There are several instances where I addressed corruption in my community and the City of Los Angeles. Before NAFTA took effect in 1994, I worked at the International Ladies Garment Workers Union in Los Angeles, organizing garment workers who worked in sweatshops, earning debt peonage wages, and living in deplorable housing conditions. This was a grassroots movement to empower, improve, and strengthen the garment workers with the tools and resources to resist the conditions they experienced and faced daily in sweatshops that contracted with companies such as Levi’s and Jordache.
From 1995 to 2005, the MTA attempted use eminent domain against the Boyle Heights residents and small business owners to acquire the land to build the “Red Line Subway aka as the Gold Line.” Many of us received letters from the MTA indicating the residents and business owners had two months to relocate without a relocation plan, relocation funding, and/or due process. During this time, I began to document on film the egregious tactics the MTA inflicted upon the people and started collaborating with other community leaders to fight against the MTA. Unfortunately, the MTA Board Members who were former Los Angeles City Councilman Richard Alatorre of District 14 and former LA County Board of Supervisor Gloria Molina of District 1 did not have the best interest of the constituents until we started demanding a Relocation Plan in both English and Spanish. It took months of advocating and demanding a relocation plan, but eventually it was produced by the MTA.
These are a couple of examples of addressing corruption and advancing a more representative government that I have experienced in the past 35 years.
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: As a City Councilmember of CD 14, my top three policy priorities for addressing corruption or advancing government reform would be:
Implementing Transparent and Accountable Governance
1) Implementing measures to increase transparency in government operations, including public disclosure of campaign finance contributions, lobbying activities, and contracts awarded by the city.
2) Implement regular audits of city departments and agencies to ensure accountability in the use of public funds and adherence to regulations.
3) Establish an independent ethics commission with oversight powers to investigate allegations of corruption and enforce compliance with ethical standards among public officials.
Strengthening Whistleblowing Protections:
1) Establish a mechanism for anonymous reporting of corruption internally and externally for unethical behavior, coupled with a robust mechanism to investigate and address reported concerns. As a Doctor of Social Worker, it is
important to me to protect the person reporting the corruption to prevent fear of retaliation.
2) Provide support and legal assistance to whistle blowers who report corruption and protect them from reprisals.
Advocating, Enacting, and Implementing Campaign Finance Reform:
1) Create and implement policy for stricter regulations on campaign contributions, including caps on donation amounts from individuals, corporations, and special interest groups.
2) Explore, create, and implement public financing options for political campaigns to level the playing field and diminish the undue influence of wealthy donors on the electoral process.
By focusing on these policy priorities, I aim to foster a culture of transparency and integrity with the Los Angeles City Council, ultimately restoring public trust in our government institutions and ensuring that elected officials serve the best interest of the constituents they represent.
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:
The bottom line is I will not except any campaign contributions from special interests, corporations, and developers. I accept campaign contributions are from people who cannot be bought and sold a bill of goods. They represent voters of all ages who are small business owners, homeowners, tenants, health care professionals, educators and working-class people who are tired of the corruption that has existed for the past 50+ years.
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 last time the LA City Council was expanded to 15 members was in the 1930s. I will advocate for 21 members to start with a reduction in salary of $19,000 per council member to either half and/or a third. The City of Los Angeles council members are the highest paid in the country. By reducing salaries, elected officials may be less motivated by financial gain and more focused on serving their constituents effectively. This could also alleviate some of the burden on taxpayers and demonstrate a commitment to fiscal responsibility within city government.
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: Limiting campaign contributions to $25,000 is a significant step towards reducing the influence of special interests and corporations in the electoral process. By capping contributions at this level, my aim is to level the playing field and prioritize grassroots support over large donations from powerful entities. Overall, capping campaign contributions at $25,000 reflects a commitment to promoting fairness, transparency, and accountability in the electoral system, foster a political environment where candidates are beholden to the interests of their constituents rather than developers and wealthy donors.
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: The LA City Council Rules allowing members to be counted as a present even while off the council floor and permitting private meetings with lobbyists during meetings raise significant concerns about transparency, integrity, accountability, and ethical conduct in government proceedings. Here are my thoughts on theses rules and the appropriate approach:
1) Transparency and Accountability: Allowing LA City Council members to be counted as present while conducting private meetings with lobbyists undermines transparency in government decision-making. It creates the perception, if not the reality, of backroom deals and undue influence on council members’ votes. It is crucial that council members are physically present during meetings and actively engaged in deliberations rather than conduct private discussions that could influence their decisions.
2) Reform and Ethical Standards: I will address these concerns, reforming Council Rules to require members to be physically present and actively engaged in during the meetings is essential. Implementing stricter guidelines regarding interactions with lobbyists and ensuring that council members’ votes accurately reflect their positions on agenda items are crucial steps toward upholding ethical standards and restoring public confidence in the council’s integrity.
3) Inclusive Standards: It is important to me to ensure and include constituents in the meetings with the lobbyists and the council members.
“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:
No, it is important that measures be place on the ballot and decided upon by the voters.
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:
No, the LA City Council is untrustworthy at this point.
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:
Yes. It is unfair that candidates for the California Assembly for example, need to obtain 40 valid signatures from registered voters to qualify to be on the ballot, whereas the LA City Council candidates needs 500 to 1000 valid in-district signatures from registered voters. I support reducing the number to 250 valid in-district signatures. This will help foster a more inclusive and democratic electoral system in the City of Los Angeles.
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