Ysabel Jurado - LA City Council District 14
BACKGROUND & PERSPECTIVE
1. Experience: Please explain your past work on addressing corruption and advancing a more representative government.
Answer: As a lawyer, much of my community activism has taken place in the form of representation. During the height of the pandemic, I served low-income tenants across Los Angeles as an eviction defense attorney. I spent countless hours supporting vulnerable families, and putting my body on the line to prevent my client’s evictions. As a community lawyer, I am engaged in building the solidarity economy – forming housing cooperatives, envisioning land without landlords, and giving land back to indigenous people. I design strategies to decommodify land, take it off the speculative market, and keep community resources affordable. My legal practice includes efforts to form more worker-owned cooperatives – building workplaces without a ‘boss.’ Within the district, I have provided legal support to the Reclaimers to form the El Sereno Housing Justice Cooperative, worked with the El Sereno Community Land Trust, and serve on the board of the Fideicomiso Tierra Libre in Boyle Heights. I have held the line on countless strikes, defended truck drivers against wage theft, and, as a former ASFCME member, fought for better working conditions for myself and my colleagues. My journey from a single teen mom to a housing rights advocate and community lawyer has provided me with both the professional and lived experience one needs to serve this district.
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: It’s time to end corruption in City Council. District 14, in particular, has seen councilmember after councilmember embroiled in scandal and corruption. We need to increase efforts to allow for reliable, transparent, and efficient local government. It’s time to restore residents’ trust in their local government. My top three policy priorities are: 1) Expanding the size of City Council, 2) Championing an independent redistricting commission, and 3) Reforming the Ethics Commission.
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: Unlike my opponents, I have not (and never will) accept a dime from corporate Super PACs, the fossil fuel industry, police unions, the real estate industry, Big Pharma, and developers. Accepting donations from harmful, exploitative industries and entities like these that perpetuate injustice within my community contradicts my mission to strengthen, protect, and uplift CD-14. My allegiance lies solely with the people I aim to represent. I am accountable to my future constituents and their needs, not special interest groups or powerful lobbies, which is why our campaign is fueled by small dollar grassroots donations from everyday working Angelenos.
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 bottom line is: 15 council members are simply not enough to represent the over 4 million people living in the city of LA. I definitely support the expansion of the LA City Council. With over 200 neighborhoods within the city boundaries, I think we’ve got to expand our City Council to at least 25 districts.
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: Our democracy should be driven by the voices and needs of the people, not by corporate interests. I absolutely believe we need to build upon our current public matching funds program and expand its scope. I propose increasing the matching funds ratio to further amplify the impact of small donations and encourage community engagement.
I also support the concept of democracy vouchers – something that puts the power directly in the hands of the voters. By providing every eligible voter with vouchers that they can contribute to the candidates of their choice, we can level the playing field and ensure that all Angelenos, regardless of their income, have a meaningful say in our electoral process.
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: As decision makers, it’s imperative that the city council is present and vocal on the floor. We bear a responsibility to show up for our constituents and for our community members who elected us to represent their interests and concerns. We should first schedule votes to occur when full council is available to attend and unequivocally give their vote. If this cannot happen, we should look to a different approach and instead of considering an absent councilmember’s vote as an automatic “yes,” their vote should be taken and recorded before the scheduled vote to ensure their decision is taken into the tabulation of the final 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: YES
● Additional context: I support empowering the charter commission with the authority to place a measure on the ballot if it secures the support of 75% of its members. Angelenos should have a direct say in the changes to our charter. By empowering the charter commission with the ability to place measures on the ballot, we can break away from the traditional power structures that hinder progressive reform.
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
● Additional context: It’s time for government reform. Residents have been let down time and time again due to unethical, corrupt councilmembers misusing funds and betraying their own constituents for their own personal gain and profit. Reforming the Ethics Commission is a good first step to ensuring we promote a corruption-free government.
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
● Additional context: Cutting the threshold means allowing the opportunity for more grassroots, in-district candidates to qualify for a race. People from the community who are organizers, small business owners, etc should be given the chance to represent their own communities.
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
● Additional context: Not every resident has the ability to attend public comment in person. We should make public comment more accessible and giving people the option to join remotely will ensure we are granting wider access to residents to be able to speak up.