City Council is poised to implement term limits for appointed officials and enforcing background checks. The Council will revise the bylaws for the City’s Commissions and Advisory Boards, and they will require residency and proof of residency for all City Commissions.
The changes follow the controversy over former Public Safety Commissioner Nika Soon-Shiong, who hid the details of her residency while pushing measures that destabilized WeHo’s public safety.
On October 18, 2021, approved term limits for appointed officials, limiting them to four two-year terms.
Councilmember John Heilman disapproved of term limits, while Councilmember Chelsea Byers stated that they are necessary for maintaining democracy.
“I support the idea of term limits and believe we need to find ways to actively engage a broader electorate,” Byers said. “A democratic lottery or other methods could be explored to keep the revolving doors active. I am in favor of a four-year, two-term limit, and I am also open to alternative options. However, if the term limits apply only to one commission or board, then I would be okay with the eight-year limit, which is four terms of two years each per commissioner or board.”
The purpose of the background check, which includes a Live Scan, is to increase public participation and transparency, and ensure that appointed individuals represent the City’s core values. The background check would disqualify applicants convicted of Part 1 crimes within the last ten years, but minor infractions or arrests without conviction would not disqualify an applicant. City Manager Melissa Crowder noted that conducting background checks on every possible commission member could be a chore.
The public seems all for background checks.
“Why there would only be background checks on commissioners and not on advisory board members?” asked Stephanie Harper. “Particularly since it’s not required for them to live in the city, we hear too many things about things going wrong. If something goes wrong and you hadn’t done the background check. I think the city could be liable.”
“Because then it turns into a political opportunity to change things, and then that leads to other political office, which then they can serve up to 12 years or more depending on how long they served,” said Jamie Francis. “You cannot be selecting your successors or people thinking they have political pull because that’s what happens every national night out. They think that they have positions to jockey for political office. It’s not correct. They’re unelected. They shouldn’t have more pull and more sway over us, the general public, who have lived here.
Other recommended changes include parental leave as part of the ordinance codifying the changes to the City’s Commission, and a resolution to include parental leave for the City’s Advisory Boards, among others. The City Clerk, City Manager, and the Director of Administrative Services reviewed the city’s Commissions and made recommendations to the City Council subcommittee composed of Mayor Pro Tempore Erickson and Councilmember Meister.
I think it is a good idea to require all commission and advisory board members to be residents of West Hollywood.You want people who have a stake in the area where they live.They would more likely to make better decisions for their neighborhoods.There should be no exceptions.
Whatever watered-down measures are ultimately adopted on this go-around, we cannot stop the push for residency requirements, and we cannot let them adopt any measures that fall short of proof of residency requirements that fail to match those required to get a basic parking permit.
What people seem to miss is that for most commissions residency is not going to be a requirement. That means the City Council can empower their out-of-town allies and friends at the expense of people whose “lived experience” is within this community. Hard to reconcile this with democracy. If we wanted people who don’t live in West Hollywood making decisions for us, we could have remained a part of the County of Los Angeles.
What many people are missing is the stealth campaign in recent years to redefine community to include visitors. Some even refer to visitors as stakeholders! I can think of no other city that gives such deference to visitors. We want visitors, of course, and we want them to spend their money. In return we owe them public safety–that’s it. Byers’ comment suggesting that giving outsiders a seat at the table is important to democracy is particularly insidious hogwash. Was she a proven resident during her entire tenure as a commissioner?
Heilman is totally against term limits because he thinks he’s the city father a father’s. He’s been in the developer’s hands. Like Lindsay Horvath. Who was brought a board by Heilman to vote for the Townscape disasters and other developers projects. She was the streetwalker for developers. Her middle-aged boy toy, Erickson, is also going to get a lot of money from developers. Especially that group where Horvath’s poster was at the corner of Delaney and Santa Monica boulevard.
Chelsea Byers has no credibility whatsoever. It’s painful to even read her comments, let alone hear her spit them out.
It’s about time that residency, term limits, & background checks should be a requirement for any of these boards or commissions. I also think it it important to live here at least 2 years plus and have voted in our elections Hmmmmmm, I wonder if Byers would vote for that & call it democracy.
All of the WH staff are WAY over paid. This is a tiny city that should be very easy to run with a small staff.
Cut the staff in half…….and the residents will never feel it. Provide just the basics and cut out the silly people nonsense.
YES to term limits, background checks AND maximum income trquirements. This is West HOLLYWOOD NOT East BEVERLY HILLS.
Heaven forbid that City Manager Melissa Crowder should be burdened with a “chore”. All city rules & regulations should be tailored to lighten her workload.
Please note that City Clerk Melissa Crowder is an alert and industrious individual who is always witting to provide prompt, factual information. Her staff is equally equipped.
So True. Like a lot of what is right about the City, you never read about Melissa or her staff.
There should be a maximum income requirement. The super wealthy have no place on any of these boards since capitalism has ensured that they are already represented and heard.
Many folks of upper income also maintain a duty to public service where they can share their expertise. It is not always obvious as some members of advisory boards and commissions are able to fool the public with their supposed “academic intellect” to deflect from their disingenuous/ real purpose. They can be requested to resign and have been.
No thanks, “folks with upper income” (whatever that means) are already “sharing their expertise” by running corporations, having access to politicians through large donations (remember Ed Buck?) and owning everything. They have enough control, and don’t need any more.
Ed Buck rented a run down apartment. He wasn’t wealthy. Just another WH creep.
Apparently you haven’t met the right people and have a rather jaded opinion. There are folks with integrity around and about.
You’re missing the point. The “right people”, privileged people, super wealthy people, or whatever you want to call them already have a loud voice in our community. For that reason, they don’t need to be on any of these commissions or boards. This has nothing to do with whether someone has integrity or not.
You could use a much more discriminating eye and are purposely missing the point.
A huge thanks to Alan and all the people who raised this issue, despite pushback from City Council (and even Nika, Horvath and Shyne using their dais to suggest it was harassment to seek answers)