Los Angeles County finds itself navigating a significant administrative snafu after discovering that a key voter-approved initiative, Measure J, was accidentally repealed due to a governmental oversight. The blunder, which has left county officials scrambling and community advocates concerned, centers on a failure to properly codify the measure into the county charter.
Measure J, passed by a decisive 57% of voters in November 2020, represented a landmark commitment to reallocating county resources. It mandated that at least 10% of Los Angeles County’s locally generated, unrestricted revenue—estimated to be between $360 million and $900 million annually—be dedicated to community investments and alternatives to incarceration. This funding was specifically earmarked to address the disproportionate impact of racial injustice, bolster youth development programs, expand job training, support small businesses, provide affordable housing, and enhance mental health services. Crucially, the measure prohibited the use of these funds for carceral systems or law enforcement agencies, embodying a “Care First” vision championed by community organizations.
The Unintended Consequence: Measure G’s Shadow
The accidental repeal occurred in the wake of Measure G, a comprehensive ballot proposition approved by voters in November 2024. Measure G aimed to modernize Los Angeles County’s governance structure, including expanding the Board of Supervisors from five to nine members and establishing an elected County Executive. However, in the process of drafting and implementing Measure G, county lawyers failed to incorporate the language of Measure J into the updated County Charter. This critical oversight means that Measure J, a measure with substantial community backing, is slated for repeal once Measure G’s structural changes fully take effect in December 2028.
Unraveling the Error and Assigning Blame
The administrative lapse was first brought to light by John Fasana, a former Duarte City Council member and current member of the Governance Reform Task Force overseeing Measure G’s implementation. Fasana reportedly discovered the issue in early June and alerted relevant parties, describing the situation as a “colossal fiasco” and an “inexcusable administrative failing.” County Counsel has attributed the error to a “prior Executive Officer administration,” citing a failure to update the County Charter promptly after Measure J’s passage. However, some critics, including community organizers and advocates, suggest that county lawyers, who drafted both ballot measures, should also bear responsibility for not recognizing the conflict.
Supervisors have expressed dismay over the situation. Supervisors Lindsey Horvath and Janice Hahn, who spearheaded Measure G, acknowledged the error, with Horvath stating that it “makes clear why Measure G is so urgently needed” and that “when five people are in charge, no one is in charge.” The county’s efforts to address the issue have been swift, with Supervisors unanimously voting to direct their legal counsel to find a way to restore Measure J to the charter and ensure its continued implementation.
The Ripple Effect: Funding, Trust, and Shifting Sands
The accidental repeal threatens to undermine years of community advocacy and the vital funding streams Measure J promised. Organizations that have built their capacity around the “Care First” initiative, such as the Reimagine LA Coalition, have voiced serious concerns about the potential “deep economic fallout” for critical community resources. The confidence of the public in the county’s administrative processes has also been tested.
Adding another layer of complexity, a poll commissioned by the sheriff’s deputies union, which had previously opposed Measure J, suggests that public sentiment may have shifted. While Measure J passed with 57% of the vote in 2020, the poll indicates that if put to voters again today, it might not secure a majority, with only 43% expressing support versus 44% opposition. This potential shift reflects broader changes in the political climate, with a recent trend towards tougher-on-crime measures.
The Arduous Path to Rectification
In response to the discovery, Los Angeles County supervisors have initiated a multi-pronged approach to rectify the situation. They have directed County Counsel to explore various avenues for reinstating Measure J permanently. These options include pursuing a change in state law, seeking a court judgment for declaratory relief to affirm voter intent, or placing Measure J back on the ballot, potentially in 2026.
Simultaneously, the county is committed to implementing new policies and procedures to ensure that future charter amendments are accurately and promptly codified, preventing such administrative blunders from recurring. The goal is to not only restore Measure J but also to fortify public trust and demonstrate a commitment to honoring the will of the voters.
The current news surrounding this oversight highlights the intricate and sometimes precarious nature of legislative and administrative processes. As Los Angeles County navigates the complex task of undoing this significant error, the focus remains on restoring the integrity of Measure J and ensuring that the critical community investments it championed are safeguarded for the future. The trending discussion in Los Angeles circles underscores the urgency and public interest in resolving this matter promptly.
