# Measure E: Charter Amendment: County Ethics Commission and Community Investment Budget Allocation *measure · Los Angeles County measure* — November 3, 2026 General Election (2026-11-03), Los Angeles County, California Research pack generated 2026-10-30T23:52:30+00:00 by ballotscope. Summaries are LLM-generated from the linked originals and may contain errors; check the originals before relying on anything. Sources span 2020-11-17 to 2026-10-01. ## Overview (as of 2026-10-28, from 22 sources) Measure E is a Los Angeles County Charter amendment on the November 3, 2026 ballot. It joins two subjects in a single yes/no question [Measures Appearing on the Ballot, General Election November 3, 2026; Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)]. The first part adds Charter Sections 11.67.00-11.70.00, which set out the structure, powers and funding of the Ethics Commission and Office of Ethics Compliance that Measure G (2024) required by 2026 [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26); Motion by Supervisor Horvath: Implementing Los Angeles County's First Ethics Commission (May 19, 2026)]. Under these sections, a seven-member Commission names and can remove its own Ethics Compliance Officer, can issue subpoenas, can adopt rules with the force of law, and can fine violators up to $15,000 per violation, and it is guaranteed a minimum budget of $14.3 million a year from fiscal year 2027-28 [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26); LA County Charter Amendment Measure E: Boost independent ethics investigators]. The second part moves the 2020 Measure J set-aside, at least 10% of locally generated unrestricted general-fund revenue for community investment and alternatives to incarceration, into a new Article XII, Section 51-1/4. It also makes the future elected County Executive subject to the set-aside and bars that official from vetoing it [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26); Board resolution calling and consolidating the November 3, 2026 special election on the Charter amendment, with ordinance attached; Revised motion by Supervisors Mitchell and Horvath: Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box (July 7, 2026)]. According to County Counsel as reported by the Los Angeles Times in July 2025, Measure J was never written into the Charter after it passed, so Measure G's passage would repeal it effective December 2028 [Voters passed Measure G. They accidentally repealed Measure J]. The revised July 2026 motion by Supervisors Mitchell and Horvath says litigation over that effect is pending [Revised motion by Supervisors Mitchell and Horvath: Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box (July 7, 2026)]. The Board introduced the ordinance on July 21 and adopted it on July 28, 2026 [Board resolution calling and consolidating the November 3, 2026 special election on the Charter amendment, with ordinance attached]. The Los Angeles Times reported the placement vote as 3-0, with Supervisor Barger abstaining and Supervisor Mitchell absent [L.A. County supervisors approve ballot measure to restore funds for jail alternatives]. The Registrar lists the League of Women Voters of LA County, CA Clean Money, Supervisor Horvath, CA Common Cause and AAPI Equity Alliance as supporters and says no opponents were submitted [Measures Appearing on the Ballot, General Election November 3, 2026]. The Los Angeles Daily News editorial board urged a no vote in August 2026 because of the Measure J provisions [Endorsement: Vote no on Los Angeles County Measure E]. Several groups that support the ethics reforms, including the League, Common Cause and the Fiduciary Alliance for Los Angeles, asked the Board in July 2026 to present the two subjects as separate measures and to tighten parts of the draft [Public correspondence to the Board on agenda item 62 (Ethics Commission / Measure J charter amendment), July 2026]. The most recent sources are the October 1, 2026 voter guides from LAist and the Los Angeles Times [LA County Charter Amendment Measure E: Boost independent ethics investigators; Your guide to L.A. County Charter Amendment E: Jail alternatives]. ### Record highlights - November 2020: Los Angeles County voters approved Measure J, which dedicates no less than 10% of locally generated unrestricted funding to community investment and alternatives to incarceration. The Los Angeles Times reports it passed with 57% [S2, S21]. [Measure J background; Your guide to L.A. County Charter Amendment E: Jail alternatives] - July 2025: County Counsel stated that Measure J had never been placed in the Charter because of an administrative error, so Measure G's passage repealed it effective December 2028. A Governance Reform Task Force member discovered the error [S3]. [Voters passed Measure G. They accidentally repealed Measure J] - May 19, 2026: The Board approved Supervisor Horvath's amended motion to fund and recruit for the Ethics Commission, adopt an interim ordinance, and prepare a Charter amendment for the November 2026 ballot. Horvath's office describes the vote as unanimous [S7, S5, S6]. [LA County Establishes First-Ever Independent Ethics Commission (press release, May 19, 2026); Revised motion by Supervisor Horvath: Implementing Los Angeles County's First Ethics Commission (May 19, 2026); LA County's new ethics commission will serve as a corruption watchdog] - July 7, 2026: Supervisors Mitchell and Horvath moved to add language continuing Measure J to the pending Charter amendment, binding the County Executive to it and exempting it from a County Executive veto [S10, S11, S16]. [Motion by Supervisor Mitchell: Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box (July 7, 2026); Revised motion by Supervisors Mitchell and Horvath: Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box (July 7, 2026); Board resolution calling and consolidating the November 3, 2026 special election on the Charter amendment, with ordinance attached] - July 21 and 28, 2026: The Board introduced and then adopted the ordinance calling the special election and attached the 07/17/26 text (HOA.106035588.2) to its resolution [S16, S15, S14]. The Los Angeles Times reported a 3-0 vote, with Barger abstaining and Mitchell absent [S17]. [Board resolution calling and consolidating the November 3, 2026 special election on the Charter amendment, with ordinance attached; County Counsel transmittal letter: County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission Charter Amendment (July 21, 2026); Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26); L.A. County supervisors approve ballot measure to restore funds for jail alternatives] - September 22, 2026: The Registrar's final measures list designates the amendment Measure E and records no submitted opponents [S20]. [Measures Appearing on the Ballot, General Election November 3, 2026] ### Stated positions - Supervisor Horvath (May 2026) described establishing the Commission as delivering "on the will of the voters" and as a step toward accountability. She said the Charter amendment would "permanently enshrine the Commission's independence" [S7]. [LA County Establishes First-Ever Independent Ethics Commission (press release, May 19, 2026)] - Supervisors Mitchell and Horvath (July 2026) state that a Charter amendment would "remove any uncertainty" about whether Measure J survives Measure G [S11, S10]. [Revised motion by Supervisors Mitchell and Horvath: Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box (July 7, 2026); Motion by Supervisor Mitchell: Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box (July 7, 2026)] - Supervisor Barger (July 2026) abstained on placing the measure, saying the county should not "tie the hands of future Boards through mandated funding requirements" [S17]. [L.A. County supervisors approve ballot measure to restore funds for jail alternatives] - Supervisor Hahn (May 2026) supported creating the Commission but objected that too many members would be appointed by elected officials [S6, S8]. [LA County's new ethics commission will serve as a corruption watchdog; LA County Moves To Build Its First Ethics Commission] ### Where sources disagree - Commission nominations: Hoodline (May 20, 2026) reported that the Assessor, District Attorney, Sheriff, Task Force and Board Chair would each nominate a member, with those five choosing the remaining two [S8]. LAist's corrected May 19 report and Horvath's release describe three nominators (Board Chair, Assessor, Task Force) who choose the remaining four [S6, S7]. The adopted Charter text follows the 3+4 structure [S14]. The revised May motion's text, which has lost its strikeout formatting, contains Sheriff and District Attorney language [S5]. [LA County Moves To Build Its First Ethics Commission; LA County's new ethics commission will serve as a corruption watchdog; LA County Establishes First-Ever Independent Ethics Commission (press release, May 19, 2026); Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26); Revised motion by Supervisor Horvath: Implementing Los Angeles County's First Ethics Commission (May 19, 2026)] - Whether Measure G actually repealed Measure J: County Counsel (2025) said Measure G repealed it effective December 2028 [S3]. The revised Mitchell-Horvath motion says Measure G "would potentially" repeal it and notes pending litigation [S11]. LAist and the League's guide state flatly that Measure G undid or overturned Measure J [S22, S18]. [Voters passed Measure G. They accidentally repealed Measure J; Revised motion by Supervisors Mitchell and Horvath: Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box (July 7, 2026); LA County Charter Amendment Measure E: Boost independent ethics investigators; LA County Measure E: Ethics Commission and Community Investment Budget Allocation Charter Amendment] - Ballot title: the ordinance text reads "Community Investment Charter Amendment" [S14], while the Board resolution and Registrar list read "Community Investment Budget Allocation Charter Amendment" [S16, S20]. [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26); Board resolution calling and consolidating the November 3, 2026 special election on the Charter amendment, with ordinance attached; Measures Appearing on the Ballot, General Election November 3, 2026] - Supporter lists differ slightly. The Registrar lists CA Clean Money [S20], and the Los Angeles Times guide omits it while saying "some other supervisors" also back the measure [S21]. [Measures Appearing on the Ballot, General Election November 3, 2026; Your guide to L.A. County Charter Amendment E: Jail alternatives] ### Gaps - No official impartial analysis or fiscal analysis from County Counsel or the Auditor-Controller for the sample ballot was found. The only analysis found is County Counsel's one-page description attached to the ordinance [S14]. - No submitted ballot argument for or against was found. The Registrar lists no opponents, and the only opposition source found is a newspaper editorial [S20, S19]. - No dollar estimate of the 10% set-aside for future years was found. The only figure is about $288 million in fiscal year 2025, reported by the Los Angeles Times [S17]. - No source details the pending litigation over Measure G's effect on Measure J mentioned in the July 2026 motion [S11]. - No campaign finance records for committees supporting or opposing Measure E were found. - The Governance Reform Task Force's own report and its letter on the draft Charter language were not retrieved. Some pages, including a Haynes Foundation commentary and a county Measure J history page, returned 404 errors, and a Los Angeles Sentinel article was blocked. ### Arguments for / praise - The measure fulfills Measure G's mandate for an independent Ethics Commission and makes its independence, investigative and enforcement powers, and minimum budget hard for a future Board to weaken. — *Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, LAist (summarizing supporters), Governance Reform Task Force (as reported)* [LA County Establishes First-Ever Independent Ethics Commission (press release, May 19, 2026); LA County Charter Amendment Measure E: Boost independent ethics investigators; What measures will be on the LA County ballot in November?] - An ethics watchdog should not depend on the officials it may investigate. — *League of Women Voters of Los Angeles County, public commenters* [Your guide to L.A. County Charter Amendment E: Jail alternatives; Public correspondence to the Board on agenda item 62 (Ethics Commission / Measure J charter amendment), July 2026] - Voters approved Measure J in 2020, and it should not be undone by an administrative or drafting error. Restoring it honors the will of the voters. — *League of Women Voters of Los Angeles County, Supervisors Holly Mitchell and Lindsey Horvath, Reimagine LA Coalition (2025)* [Your guide to L.A. County Charter Amendment E: Jail alternatives; Revised motion by Supervisors Mitchell and Horvath: Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box (July 7, 2026); Voters passed Measure G. They accidentally repealed Measure J; Public correspondence to the Board on agenda item 62 (Ethics Commission / Measure J charter amendment), July 2026] - The Charter framework gives the Commission meaningful investigative and enforcement authority, an independent compliance office, rulemaking power and budget protections. — *California Common Cause* [Public correspondence to the Board on agenda item 62 (Ethics Commission / Measure J charter amendment), July 2026; California Common Cause letter on the proposed County Ethics Commission ordinance (July 6, 2026)] ### Arguments against / criticism - The Measure J set-aside is ballot-box budgeting that ties current and future supervisors' hands. Supervisors can fund such programs through the normal budget process. — *Los Angeles Daily News editorial board, Supervisor Kathryn Barger (abstention statement)* [Endorsement: Vote no on Los Angeles County Measure E; L.A. County supervisors approve ballot measure to restore funds for jail alternatives] - The measure bundles two distinct subjects, so voters who favor one but not the other must accept or reject both. The League of Women Voters and Fiduciary Alliance for Los Angeles (both supportive of the reforms) asked for separate questions, and California Common Cause cited single-subject litigation risk. — *Los Angeles Daily News editorial board, League of Women Voters of Los Angeles County, Fiduciary Alliance for Los Angeles, California Common Cause* [Endorsement: Vote no on Los Angeles County Measure E; Public correspondence to the Board on agenda item 62 (Ethics Commission / Measure J charter amendment), July 2026] - The Commission's independence is incomplete: every inaugural seat traces back to an elected official's nomination, the Board can reject any nominee by simple majority, and $250 per meeting is token pay. These criticisms come from groups seeking to strengthen the measure, not defeat it. — *Fiduciary Alliance for Los Angeles, California Common Cause* [Public correspondence to the Board on agenda item 62 (Ethics Commission / Measure J charter amendment), July 2026; California Common Cause letter on the proposed County Ethics Commission ordinance (July 6, 2026)] - The ballot wording does not name Measure J or explain that the amendment is meant to prevent Measure G's potential repeal of it. — *League of Women Voters of Los Angeles County* [Public correspondence to the Board on agenda item 62 (Ethics Commission / Measure J charter amendment), July 2026] ## Text analysis (as of 2026-10-28) Coverage: Read in full: S2, the Board of Supervisors' charter amendment ordinance (County Counsel draft HOA.106035588.2, revised 07/17/26), Sections 1-17, which includes the ballot label (Section 2), new Charter Sections 11.67.00, 11.67.50, 11.68.00, 11.68.50, 11.69.00, 11.69.50 and 11.70.00 (Sections 3-9), the renumbering of Article III, Section 11(8) (Measure J) to Article XII, Section 51-1/4 (Section 10), and the inoperability, severability and election clauses (Sections 11-17), plus County Counsel's one-page analysis. Also read the Measure E entry in S1, the Registrar's list of measures (ballot label and listed supporters and opponents only). The stored text has lost strikeout and underlining. In Sections 5, 9 and 10 the repealed text (old Sections 11.68 and 11.70, and old Article III, Section 11(8)) is printed next to the replacement text, and this reading treats the second version in each pair as the new law, as the section headings indicate. The text does not show the final adopted ordinance number or the Board's vote. S2 is the 07/17/26 revision. An earlier 07/14/26 draft differs only in cross-reference wording. Drafting quality: **adequate**. The ethics provisions are detailed and mostly precise. They set out seat-by-seat nominating authorities and background qualifications, staggered initial terms with exact end dates, two-year cooling-off and conflict disqualifications, for-cause removal by fellow commissioners, a dollar-specific funding floor with a defined escalator, defined enforcement powers, penalty caps, a civil-versus-administrative election rule, and a judicial-review route with a stated limitations period. Several provisions are less precise. Supermajority thresholds are stated as fractions ("two-thirds of all members", "four-fifths vote") without saying how they apply to a five-member or nine-member Board, and the funding section handles this explicitly while the Measure J section does not. The penalty cross-reference ("Subsections C through D") does not obviously reach every duty the Commission is given. Key standards such as "exigent circumstances" are left undefined. The Measure J text is carried over largely verbatim, including phase-in dates that have already passed, while adding the County Executive as a duty-holder in only some subsections. The ballot label still carries an "(XXXXX)" placeholder. None of these is a structural defect, but each leaves a question for implementers or courts. - **other** (medium, Section 2 (Form of Measure)): One yes/no question covers two distinct subjects: restructuring the Ethics Commission (Sections 3-9) and re-enacting the Measure J budget set-aside in a new Charter location (Section 10). A voter cannot approve one without the other. The ballot label does not name Measure J, the 10% figure, or the funding exclusions for law-enforcement agencies, so the scale of the budget provision is visible only in the full text. — "Ethics Commission, Office of Ethics Compliance, and Ethics Compliance Officer, including appointment processes, qualifications, term, duties, and responsibilities, and to continue uninterrupted the County's commitment to community investment and alternatives to incarceration" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **ambiguity** (medium, Section 10, Article XII, Section 51-1/4, Subsection F): The text does not say how "four-fifths" applies once the Board grows to nine members. The same ordinance spells out a nine-member equivalent elsewhere (Section 11.70.00(B): "four-fifths (seven-ninths after January 1, 2032)"), and that contrast makes the omission here more noticeable. Four-fifths of nine is 7.2 votes, so it is unclear whether 7 or 8 votes would be required. "Fiscal emergency" is not defined. The Board declares it, and the Board alone can then cut the set-aside. — "the Board of Supervisors may, by a four-fifths vote, reduce the set-aside in the event of a fiscal emergency, as declared by the Board of Supervisors" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **ambiguity** (medium, Section 6, 11.68.50(C)): The text does not say how to round two-thirds of the current five-member Board (3.33 members). Requiring 4 votes is the natural reading of a supermajority, but 3 votes is arguable. The answer decides whether a simple majority of the current Board can block Commission rules, which the text otherwise gives "the force of law" (11.68.50(A)). — "unless, before the expiration of this sixty (60) day period, two-thirds of all members of the Board of Supervisors vote to veto the rule or regulation" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **drafting error** (low, Section 7, 11.69.00(A)(6)): The penalty power points to Subsections C and D of 11.68.00. Subsection D concerns serving as filing officer under County Code Chapter 2.160, a chapter already listed in Subsection C(1). The cross-reference does not name the FPPC filings in Subsection E or the future Ethics Code in Subsection L. The catch-all in C(6) ("Other laws as provided by the County Charter or County Code") and the broader liability sentence at the head of 11.69.00 probably close the gap, but the narrow reference invites argument over which violations the Commission can fine. — "Impose penalties, remedies and fines for a violation of any law specified in Section 11.68.00, Subsections C through D, or any rule or regulation adopted to implement such law" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **expansive language** (medium, Section 9, 11.70.00(B)): The annual increase can be skipped if four-fifths of the Board (seven-ninths after January 1, 2032) finds that "exigent circumstances" exist. That term is not defined, and the text requires no written findings. The supermajority requirement limits how often this can be used. Only the annual increase can be suspended this way. The $14.3 million floor itself cannot. — "However, increases to the Commission's and Office of Ethics Compliance's annual operating budget is not required if four-fifths" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **duration** (medium, Section 9, 11.70.00(B)): The minimum budget is built on each prior year's actual appropriation, not on the $14.3 million base. Any ongoing increase the Board grants therefore becomes part of the permanent floor, and the floor grows each year by the greater of Los Angeles CPI or California per-capita personal income growth. Because it is a Charter provision, only voters can change it. This is the measure's ongoing fiscal commitment for the Commission. — "Each year, the minimum operating budget appropriation amount shall be increased from the amount appropriated in the prior fiscal year (excluding any one-time appropriations) based on the greater of either" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **enforcement** (medium, Section 3, 11.67.00(C)(3)): Every nominee, including the four nominated by the Commission itself, can be rejected by a simple Board majority. Elsewhere the text says the Commission is "free from the influence of the Board of Supervisors or the County Executive" (11.67.00(A)). Two things limit the Board's confirmation power: a nominee is deemed appointed if the Board does not act within 45 days, and after 120 days of failed nominations the seat falls to the Commission (11.67.00(H)(3)). — "the Board of Supervisors shall schedule a meeting to appoint or reject the nominee by a majority vote of the Board" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **gap** (low, Section 3, 11.67.00(J)(2) and (C)(1)(d)): The text sets up no separate process for filling the four Commission-nominated seats the first time. With the three officially nominated members seated (Task Force/County Executive, Board Chair, Assessor), those three can meet under the reduced quorum and nominate the other four, subject to Board confirmation. The text does not say what happens if fewer than three members are seated, or how long the reduced-quorum period may last. — "if the Commission has fewer than four (4) appointed members, quorum shall be reduced to a majority of appointed members. In such cases, the Commission may meet for the sole" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **gap** (low, Section 3, 11.67.00(H)(3)): The fallback that lets the Commission fill a seat its official nominator leaves empty lists the Board Chair, County Executive and Assessor. It does not list the Governance Reform Task Force, which nominates that seat until January 1, 2029 (11.67.00(C)(1)(a)). The fallback also takes effect only on January 1, 2027. — "If the Chair of the Board, County Executive, or Assessor fails to nominate a person to fill a vacancy they are responsible for filling within one hundred twenty (120) days" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **special clause** (medium, Section 7, 11.69.00(I)(2)): Once the Commission certifies itself, other County officials and bodies are barred from bringing administrative or civil enforcement actions under the certified laws, so the Commission's own vote shifts enforcement authority to it. Pending actions are preserved. Criminal enforcement is not mentioned, and "Notwithstanding any other law" does not say how the bar interacts with powers that elected County officers hold under state law. — "once the Commission by motion certifies that it is able to administratively and civilly enforce some or all of the laws under its jurisdiction, other County officials, agencies, boards, or commissions shall be precluded from bringing administrative or civil enforcement actions as to those laws" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **special clause** (low, Section 8, 11.69.50; Section 7, 11.69.00(A)(8) and (J)(1)): The Commission gets its own lawyers and its own power to sue, overriding the Charter section the text cites for County legal services. The Ethics Compliance Officer alone decides on outside counsel, and the text sets no spending limit beyond the Commission's budget. This is a deliberate independence provision, not an error. — "Notwithstanding Article VI, Section 21 of this Charter, the Office of Ethics Compliance shall appoint a Chief Counsel, and may appoint other attorneys or hire" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **special clause** (low, Section 5, 11.68.00(N)): Starting in 2030, an appointed body could put ethics, campaign-finance and lobbying ordinances directly on the ballot, limited to once per decade. The power depends on state law allowing it, and the text does not say what happens if state law does not. — "Commencing in 2030, and if permitted by State law, the Commission may, by a vote of at least five (5) members of the Commission, submit directly to the voters for consideration at the next general election any ordinance" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **enforcement** (low, Section 5, 11.68.00(M)): The Board must put Commission-proposed amendments on its agenda within 180 days but is not required to vote on them. — "shall be agendized for consideration and potential action by the full Board within one hundred eighty (180) days" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **enforcement** (low, Section 7, 11.69.00(F)(3)): The penalty is up to $15,000 per violation, indexed to inflation by the Commission itself, or three times the amount involved, whichever is greater. Penalties go to the County General Fund. Decisions can be appealed by writ of mandamus within 90 days (11.69.00(A)(6)), and the Commission must also set up a diversion program for minor violations (11.69.00(E)). — "Pay a monetary penalty to the General Fund of the County of up to fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) for each violation, adjusted annually by the Commission to reflect changes to the Consumer Price Index for the Los Angeles area, or three (3) times the amount" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **other** (low, Section 3, 11.67.00(F)): Commissioners and the Ethics Compliance Officer face broad restrictions on political activity, including a two-year post-service bar on running for County office. The whole subsection is qualified by "Unless preempted or prohibited by law", which leaves open how far the political-activity restrictions will be enforceable. — "Endorse, support, oppose, contribute to, or volunteer or work on behalf of, any candidate or ballot measure in a County election, or any County elected official running for any elected office, during the member's tenure" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **beneficiary** (medium, Section 10, Article XII, Section 51-1/4, Subsections A and B): The set-aside directs at least 10% of locally generated unrestricted general-fund revenue to listed community-investment and alternatives-to-incarceration programs. Subsection B bars the Sheriff, District Attorney, Superior Courts and Probation from receiving it. This is the measure's largest budget effect, and it re-enacts the existing Measure J text rather than creating a new allocation. — "Set aside a baseline minimum threshold of at least ten percent (10%) of the County's locally generated unrestricted revenues in the general fund (Net County Cost)" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **special clause** (medium, Section 10, Article XII, Section 51-1/4, Subsection G): This is new language, not part of the original Measure J text. It also adds "the County Executive" to the duty to allocate in the opening sentence. These are the substantive changes Section 10 makes, beyond moving the text to a new Charter location. The text does not say whether "veto" covers line-item action on individual allocations or only the overall set-aside amount. — "G. The set aside shall not be subject to veto by the County Executive." [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **ambiguity** (low, Section 10, Article XII, Section 51-1/4, Subsections C and E): The opening sentence makes allocation the duty of "the Board of Supervisors and the County Executive", but Subsection E gives the allocation process to the Board alone. The text does not say whether the Executive is bound by that process. Subsection C also keeps the original 2021-2024 phase-in schedule, which has already run, without saying it is historical. — "E. The Board of Supervisors shall establish an inclusive and transparent process on the allocation of funds set aside by this Section." [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - **drafting error** (low, Section 2 (Form of Measure)): This version of the ordinance still has a placeholder where the measure designation goes (the Registrar later assigned "E" in S1). The ballot label in S2 also reads "COMMUNITY INVESTMENT CHARTER AMENDMENT" while S1 reads "COMMUNITY INVESTMENT BUDGET ALLOCATION CHARTER AMENDMENT". These label differences have no legal effect, but they show that S2 may not be the final printed form. — "This measure (XXXXX) will become effective only if submitted to the voters" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - Beneficiary: Providers and recipients of the community-investment and alternatives-to-incarceration programs listed in the set-aside (youth development, job training, minority-owned small businesses with a focus on Black-owned businesses, rent assistance and housing, restorative justice, pretrial services, health and mental health, diversion and reentry): Keeps a guaranteed minimum of 10% of locally generated unrestricted general-fund revenue for these purposes after the governance changes, and adds protection from a County Executive veto. — "Access to capital for small minority-owned businesses, with a focus on Black-owned businesses." [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - Beneficiary: The Ethics Commission and Office of Ethics Compliance: Receive a Charter-guaranteed minimum budget that grows each year, exemption from hiring freezes, and spending without prior approval from other County offices. — "The Commission and Office of Ethics Compliance are not subject to hiring freezes when operating within the Commission and Office's budget." [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - Beneficiary: Represented County employees under investigation: Gain the right, on request, to have a union representative present at a formal investigatory interview when they reasonably believe discipline may result. — "A represented County employee may, upon request, have a union representative present during a formal investigatory interview" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] - Beneficiary: Persons who obtain a formal Commission opinion: Are protected from Commission enforcement for acting in good faith on that opinion, provided the material facts are as stated in the request. — "A person who acts in good faith based upon a formal opinion issued to that person by the Commission shall not be enforced against by the Commission for so acting" [Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26)] Limitations: This is a reading of the measure's text only. It does not assess the Commission's cost beyond the stated $14.3 million floor, the dollar size of the 10% set-aside, or how either provision would work in practice. The stored text lacks strikeout and underline formatting, so repealed and new language in Sections 5, 9 and 10 was told apart by position and section headings. The analysis relies on the 07/17/26 revision of the ordinance. The text itself does not confirm that this revision was adopted unchanged. ## Timeline (newest first) - **2028-12** — Scheduled effective date of Measure J repeal under Measure G (Los Angeles Times) - **2026-11-03** — Special election on the Charter amendment (Los Angeles County Counsel / Board of Supervisors) - **2026-11-03** — General Election including Measure E (Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk) - **2026-11-03** — Special election consolidated with General Election (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-10-01** — Published: Your guide to L.A. County Charter Amendment E: Jail alternatives (Los Angeles Times) - **2026-10-01** — LA Times publishes Charter Amendment E guide (Los Angeles Times) - **2026-10-01** — Published: LA County Charter Amendment Measure E: Boost independent ethics investigators (LAist) - **2026-10-01** — LAist publishes Measure E voter guide (LAist) - **2026-09-22** — Published: Measures Appearing on the Ballot, General Election November 3, 2026 (Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk) - **2026-08-31** — Published: Endorsement: Vote no on Los Angeles County Measure E (Los Angeles Daily News editorial board) - **2026-08-31** — Daily News editorial urges no on Measure E (Los Angeles Daily News editorial board) - **2026-08-27** — Published: LA County Measure E: Ethics Commission and Community Investment Budget Allocation Charter Amendment (League of Women Voters of Los Angeles County) - **2026-08-06** — Scheduled interim ordinance effective date (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-28** — Board adopts the ordinance (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-28** — Published: L.A. County supervisors approve ballot measure to restore funds for jail alternatives (Los Angeles Times) - **2026-07-28** — Board votes 3-0 to place the Charter amendment on the November ballot (Los Angeles Times) - **2026-07-22** — Published: Board resolution calling and consolidating the November 3, 2026 special election on the Charter amendment, with ordinance attached (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-21** — Published: County Counsel transmittal letter: County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission Charter Amendment (July 21, 2026) (Los Angeles County Counsel) - **2026-07-21** — County Counsel transmits ordinance and analysis to Board (Los Angeles County Counsel) - **2026-07-21** — Board meeting, Item 62 (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors (public comments)) - **2026-07-21** — Board approves ordinance for introduction (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-20** — League of Women Voters of LA County letter (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors (public comments)) - **2026-07-19** — Fiduciary Alliance for Los Angeles letter (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors (public comments)) - **2026-07-18** — California Common Cause letter on the Charter amendment (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors (public comments)) - **2026-07-17** — Published: Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26) (Los Angeles County Counsel / Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-17** — Ordinance draft revised (Los Angeles County Counsel / Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-15** — Published: Charter amendment ordinance, earlier draft (07/14/26), Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (Los Angeles County Counsel / Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-15** — Published: What measures will be on the LA County ballot in November? (LAist) - **2026-07-15** — LAist previews November County ballot measures (LAist) - **2026-07-14** — Draft ordinance prepared by County Counsel (Los Angeles County Counsel / Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-07** — Board gives further direction on the Charter amendment (Los Angeles County Counsel) - **2026-07-07** — Published: Motion by Supervisor Mitchell: Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box (July 7, 2026) (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-07** — Mitchell motion to continue Measure J via the Charter amendment (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-07** — Scheduled second reading of interim ordinance (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-07** — Board directs inclusion of Measure J continuation language (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-07** — Published: Revised motion by Supervisors Mitchell and Horvath: Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box (July 7, 2026) (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-07** — Revised Mitchell-Horvath motion on Measure J continuation (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-07-06** — Published: California Common Cause letter on the proposed County Ethics Commission ordinance (July 6, 2026) (California Common Cause (Board correspondence)) - **2026-07-06** — California Common Cause letter on the interim Ethics Commission ordinance (California Common Cause (Board correspondence)) - **2026-06-30** — Ordinance requested from County Counsel (Los Angeles County Counsel / Board of Supervisors) - **2026-06-30** — Scheduled first reading of interim ordinance (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-06-30** — Due date for County Counsel's draft interim ordinance (Office of Supervisor Lindsey P. Horvath) - **2026-05-20** — Published: LA County Moves To Build Its First Ethics Commission (Hoodline) - **2026-05-19** — Published: Motion by Supervisor Horvath: Implementing Los Angeles County's First Ethics Commission (May 19, 2026) (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-05-19** — Horvath motion on implementing the Ethics Commission (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-05-19** — Board directs County Counsel to draft election documents (Los Angeles County Counsel) - **2026-05-19** — Published: Revised motion by Supervisor Horvath: Implementing Los Angeles County's First Ethics Commission (May 19, 2026) (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-05-19** — Revised Horvath motion (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-05-19** — Board votes to start building the Ethics Commission (Hoodline) - **2026-05-19** — Board directs County Counsel to draft Charter amendment ordinance on Ethics Commission (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026-05-19** — Published: LA County's new ethics commission will serve as a corruption watchdog (LAist) - **2026-05-19** — Board votes to establish the County's first ethics commission (LAist) - **2026-05-19** — Published: LA County Establishes First-Ever Independent Ethics Commission (press release, May 19, 2026) (Office of Supervisor Lindsey P. Horvath) - **2026-05-19** — Board approves Horvath's amended Ethics Commission motion (Office of Supervisor Lindsey P. Horvath) - **2026-05-06** — Motion discussed at Operations Cluster (Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors) - **2026** — Board approves ordinance creating the Ethics Commission (League of Women Voters of Los Angeles County) - **2025-07-10** — Published: Voters passed Measure G. They accidentally repealed Measure J (Los Angeles Times) - **2025-07** — Measure G's repeal of Measure J discovered (Los Angeles Times) - **2025-06** — John Fasana first raises the issue with the county (Los Angeles Times) - **2024-11** — Voters approve Measure G (League of Women Voters of Los Angeles County) ## Sources ### Your guide to L.A. County Charter Amendment E: Jail alternatives - Los Angeles Times · voter guide · published 2026-10-01 · stance: neutral - This is the Los Angeles Times voter guide to County Charter Amendment E by Jon Regardie (October 1, 2026). It explains the measure's two parts: restoring Measure J's jail-alternatives funding, which Measure G inadvertently repealed, and enshrining the Ethics Commission and compliance office in the Charter. It also covers supporters and the Daily News opposition. - Measure J passed with 57% in November 2020 and requires at least 10% of locally generated unrestricted revenue for incarceration alternatives, which amounted to $288 million in fiscal year 2025. - The Measure G error was discovered in July 2025 by a Governance Reform Task Force member. - Measure G passed with 51.6%. It expands the Board from five to nine in 2032 and creates an elected county executive, with the first election in 2028. - Supporters named: Horvath and other supervisors, the League of Women Voters of L.A. County, California Common Cause and the AAPI Equity Alliance. No opposition was submitted to the Registrar, and the Daily News editorialized against the measure. - Reference: Mitchell-Horvath motion 'Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters' - Reference: Horvath statement on the Ethics Commission - Reference: L.A. Daily News editorial against Measure E - Reference: LA Times on $288 million Measure J funding ### LA County Charter Amendment Measure E: Boost independent ethics investigators - LAist · voter guide · published 2026-10-01 · stance: neutral - This is LAist's voter guide to Measure E by Nick Gerda (published October 1, updated October 14, 2026). It explains that the measure would write the new Ethics Commission's independence, powers and $14.3 million minimum budget into the Charter and restore Measure J's 10% set-aside, which Measure G accidentally undid. It summarizes the arguments of supporters and of the Daily News editorial board, which opposes the measure. - Says the Commission could investigate County officials, candidates, lobbyists and contractors, issue subpoenas, and fine violators up to $15,000 per offense. - Guaranteed minimum budget of $14.3 million a year for the Commission and a proposed 54-person staff. - A yes vote locks in Commission independence and the 10% set-aside. With a no vote, the Commission would still exist under Measure G but without locked-in independence, guaranteed funding, or the restored set-aside. - Lists supporters as the League of Women Voters of L.A. County, California Clean Money, Supervisor Horvath, California Common Cause and the AAPI Equity Alliance. Lists the L.A. Daily News editorial board as an opponent and notes that no opponents are listed in official ballot information. - Reference: Charter amendment ordinance text - Reference: Public correspondence cited for supporters' arguments - Reference: L.A. Daily News editorial urging a no vote - Reference: LA Times on Measure G accidentally repealing Measure J - Reference: Registrar's official ballot measure list ### Measures Appearing on the Ballot, General Election November 3, 2026 - Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk · official text · published 2026-09-22 · stance: not_applicable - The Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk's official list of every measure on the November 3, 2026 ballot in Los Angeles County. For Measure E it gives the ballot label, which mentions the Ethics Commission, Office of Ethics Compliance and Ethics Compliance Officer and continuing the County's commitment to community investment and alternatives to incarceration. It also lists supporters and opponents. Most of the document covers other measures. - Measure E is listed as a "Proposed County Charter Amendment. County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Budget Allocation Charter Amendment." - Listed supporters: League of Women Voters of LA County, CA Clean Money, Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, CA Common Cause, AAPI Equity Alliance. - Listed opponents: "None submitted." ### Endorsement: Vote no on Los Angeles County Measure E - Los Angeles Daily News editorial board · third party analysis · published 2026-08-31 · stance: oppose - This is the Los Angeles Daily News editorial board's August 31, 2026 endorsement urging a no vote on Measure E. It treats the ethics changes as "plausibly fine" but inconsequential to the vote, and it opposes restoring Measure J's spending mandate as ballot-box budgeting. - Describes Measure E as two buckets: the county's ethics bureaucracy, and continued funding of community investment and alternatives to incarceration. - Says the Measure J portion corrects a problem caused by rushing Measure G in 2024. - Argues Measure J was bad policy in 2020 (when the paper opposed it) and remains so. - Argues supervisors can fund such programs through the normal budget process. - Reference: Measure J (2020) text - Reference: Daily News 2020 editorial opposing Measure J ### LA County Measure E: Ethics Commission and Community Investment Budget Allocation Charter Amendment - League of Women Voters of Los Angeles County · voter guide · published 2026-08-27 · stance: neutral - This is a League of Women Voters voter-information sheet on Measure E. It gives background on Measure G and the Ethics Commission, explains the Measure J correction, says fiscal information is hard to find, quotes Supervisor Horvath for supporters, and reports that no opponents could be found. - Background: Measure G (2024) added an elected County Executive, expanded the Board from 5 to 9, and created an independent Ethics Commission. The Board approved an ordinance creating the Commission in 2026. - Describes a seven-member commission, with three members appointed by elected officials and the rest selected through a public application process. - Says the Board realized Measure G mistakenly overturned Measure J, and Measure E adds language to ensure that spending continues. - Fiscal impact: "Costs for County measures are very difficult to find". Changes were likely already accrued under Measure G. - Opponents: "No opponents can be found." ### L.A. County supervisors approve ballot measure to restore funds for jail alternatives - Los Angeles Times · news · published 2026-07-28 · stance: neutral - This is a Los Angeles Times report (Connor Sheets, July 28, 2026) that the Board voted to place the Charter amendment restoring Measure J funding on the November 3 ballot. It reports the vote breakdown and statements from Supervisors Horvath and Barger. - The Board voted 3-0 to place the Charter amendment on the ballot. Supervisor Barger abstained (her vote was first recorded incorrectly as a yes), and Supervisor Mitchell was absent. - Measure J's 10% set-aside amounted to about $288 million in fiscal year 2025, funding mental health treatment, housing support, youth development and other services. - The repeal under Measure G was slated for December 2028, and the amendment would avoid it. - The article focuses on the Measure J part and does not detail the ethics provisions. ### Board resolution calling and consolidating the November 3, 2026 special election on the Charter amendment, with ordinance attached - Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors · decision record · published 2026-07-22 · stance: not_applicable - This is the Board of Supervisors resolution calling the November 3, 2026 special election on the Charter amendment and consolidating it with the general election, with the ordinance (HOA.106035588.2) attached. Its recitals give the measure's procedural history: the May 19 and July 7, 2026 directions to County Counsel, introduction of the ordinance on July 21, and adoption on July 28, 2026. - Recites that on July 7, 2026 the Board directed that the Measure J provision be renumbered to Article XII, Section 51-1/4, made binding on both the Board and the County Executive, and protected from a County Executive veto. - Recites that the Board introduced the ordinance on July 21, 2026 and adopted it on July 28, 2026. - Ballot label: "County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Budget Allocation Charter Amendment." - The measure passes with a majority of votes cast. If a conflicting measure also passes, the one with more yes votes prevails (Elections Code section 9123). - Directs the Registrar to print the entire Ordinance in the sample ballot and finds the measure exempt from CEQA. ### County Counsel transmittal letter: County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission Charter Amendment (July 21, 2026) - Los Angeles County Counsel · other · published 2026-07-21 · stance: not_applicable - County Counsel Dawyn R. Harrison's cover letter to the Board, transmitting the analysis and ordinance for the Ethics Commission Charter amendment. It summarizes which Charter sections would be repealed and added, notes the Measure J renumbering, and sets out the procedure and deadline for placing the measure on the ballot. - If a majority approves, the amendment repeals Charter Sections 11.68 and 11.70 and adds Sections 11.67.00 through 11.70 on the Ethics Commission, Office of Ethics Compliance and Ethics Compliance Officer. - It renumbers Article III, Section 11, Subsection (8) (Measure J) to Article XII, Section 51-1/4 and amends it for the new governance structure. - The ordinance needs two readings and a Board majority, plus a resolution calling the election, by August 4, 2026. ### Charter amendment ordinance: special election on the County of Los Angeles Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment (final, revised 07/17/26) - Los Angeles County Counsel / Board of Supervisors · official text · published 2026-07-17 · stance: not_applicable - This is the full text of the Board of Supervisors ordinance that calls the November 3, 2026 special election on the Charter amendment voters will see as Measure E (County Counsel draft HOA.106035588.2, revised 07/17/26). It sets the ballot label and adds new Charter Sections 11.67.00-11.70.00, which structure, empower and fund an Ethics Commission and Office of Ethics Compliance. It also moves the 2020 Measure J budget set-aside into a new Article XII, Section 51-1/4, adds the County Executive to that provision, and bars the County Executive from vetoing it. A one-page County Counsel analysis is attached. - Seven-member Ethics Commission. The Governance Reform Task Force (the elected County Executive from 2029), the Board Chair and the Assessor nominate one member each, and the Commission nominates the other four after a public recruitment. The Board confirms or rejects nominees by majority vote within 45 days, and a nominee is deemed appointed if the Board does not act. - Staggered five-year terms with no reappointment after a full term. Two-year look-back disqualifications cover County elected officials, their relatives and staff, candidates, party officers, lobbyists and major donors. Members can be removed only for cause, by five votes of the other commissioners. - The Commission appoints and can remove the Ethics Compliance Officer, who heads the Office and has its own Chief Counsel and power to hire outside counsel. - Powers include investigations, audits, subpoenas, administrative hearings, rulemaking with the force of law (vetoable by two-thirds of the Board within 60 days), and fines up to $15,000 per violation (CPI-adjusted) or three times the amount involved. Penalty decisions are appealable by writ of mandamus. - Starting in fiscal year 2027-28, the Commission and Office get a minimum budget of $14.3 million a year, increased annually by the greater of CPI or California per-capita income growth unless four-fifths of the Board (seven-ninths after 2032) finds exigent circumstances. They are exempt from hiring freezes. - Measure J's set-aside of at least 10% of locally generated unrestricted general-fund revenue for community investment and alternatives to incarceration is carried into Article XII, Section 51-1/4, with the County Executive added as a duty-holder and protection from a County Executive veto. - Includes an inoperability clause (the Charter in effect on November 2, 2026 remains if the amendment is inoperative) and a severability clause. ### Charter amendment ordinance, earlier draft (07/14/26), Ethics Commission and Community Investment Charter Amendment - Los Angeles County Counsel / Board of Supervisors · other · published 2026-07-15 · stance: not_applicable - An earlier County Counsel draft (HOA.106013976.14, dated 07/14/26) of the charter amendment ordinance for what became Measure E. Its substance matches the 07/17/26 revision. A comparison of the stored texts finds differences only in draft numbers and dates and in a few internal cross-reference terms ("Subsection" versus "Subparagraph", "Section" versus "Subsection"). - Draft of the ordinance calling the November 3, 2026 special election on the Ethics Commission and Measure J Charter amendment. - Contains the same Charter Sections 11.67.00-11.70.00 and the Measure J renumbering to Article XII, Section 51-1/4. - Superseded by the 07/17/26 revision, which is the text attached to the Board's adopting resolution. ### What measures will be on the LA County ballot in November? - LAist · news · published 2026-07-15 · stance: neutral - This is LAist's July 15, 2026 preview of measures expected on the November ballot in Los Angeles County and the City of Los Angeles. Its first section covers the then-pending Ethics Commission Charter amendment and the plan to add Measure J language. Most of the article covers other measures. - Says the seven-member commission would enforce ethics laws, investigate and levy penalties, with three members appointed by elected officials and the rest from a public application process. - Says the Governance Reform Task Force recommended enshrining the commission's autonomy in the Charter, which requires voter approval. - Notes the Board was adding language to lock in Measure J spending after Measure G's error, and that the measure still awaited Board approval. ### Motion by Supervisor Mitchell: Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box (July 7, 2026) - Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors · decision record · published 2026-07-07 · stance: support - This is Supervisor Holly Mitchell's July 7, 2026 motion, "Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box." It directs County Counsel to add language to the pending Ethics Commission Charter amendment so that the Measure J set-aside continues under Measure G's new governance structure. - States that administrative errors left Measure J out of the Charter version presented to voters, so approving Measure G in 2024 would repeal Measure J in 2028. - Notes that Measure G is silent on the County Executive's duty to uphold Measure J. - Directs renumbering the Measure J provision to Article XII, Section 51-1/4, making both the Board and the County Executive subject to it, and exempting it from a County Executive veto. ### Revised motion by Supervisors Mitchell and Horvath: Restoring the Will of Los Angeles County Voters at the Ballot Box (July 7, 2026) - Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors · decision record · published 2026-07-07 · stance: support - This is the revised July 7, 2026 motion by Supervisors Holly Mitchell and Lindsey Horvath to continue Measure J through the Ethics Commission Charter amendment. The stored text has lost strikeout formatting. The revision adds Horvath as co-author, says Measure G "would potentially" repeal Measure J, and notes that litigation over Measure G's effect on Measure J is pending. - Same directives as the original: renumber Measure J to Article XII, Section 51-1/4, bind both the Board and the County Executive, and exempt the set-aside from a County Executive veto. - Adds that "litigation is pending regarding the effect of Measure G on Measure J" and that a Charter amendment would remove any uncertainty. - Describes the Ethics Commission ballot measure as the appropriate vehicle to correct Measure G's "potential unintended effect" on Measure J. ### California Common Cause letter on the proposed County Ethics Commission ordinance (July 6, 2026) - California Common Cause (Board correspondence) · third party analysis · published 2026-07-06 · stance: neutral - This is California Common Cause's July 6, 2026 letter to the Board on the proposed interim County ordinance establishing the Ethics Commission (Agenda Item 23). The letter concerns the ordinance, not the Charter amendment itself. It praises the framework and urges several changes, and it asks that any it cannot get in the ordinance be made in the forthcoming Charter amendment. - Common Cause says the ordinance creates "a strong framework for an independent ethics commission." - Recommends removing Board approval of the four Commission-nominated appointees. - Urges, citing the Fiduciary Alliance for Los Angeles, that the Commission have sole power to appoint and remove the Ethics Compliance Officer, and that the Charter amendment explicitly provide this. - Recommends requiring the Board to act on, not just agendize, Commission recommendations, rounding the two-thirds rule-veto threshold up, and tightening the budget's "exigent circumstances" exception. ### LA County Moves To Build Its First Ethics Commission - Hoodline · news · published 2026-05-20 · stance: neutral - This is a Hoodline item on the Board's unanimous May 2026 vote to begin building the County's Ethics Commission and Office of Ethics Compliance and to prepare a Charter amendment for November. Its account of how commissioners are chosen differs from other sources. - Reports a unanimous vote directing funding, recruitment, an interim ordinance due June 30, and a Charter amendment for the November ballot. - States that the Assessor, District Attorney, Sheriff, Governance Reform Task Force and Board chair would each nominate a commissioner, and those five would nominate the remaining two. - Reports Supervisor Hahn's objection that letting elected officials name commissioners "compromises" independence. ### Motion by Supervisor Horvath: Implementing Los Angeles County's First Ethics Commission (May 19, 2026) - Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors · decision record · published 2026-05-19 · stance: support - This is Supervisor Lindsey Horvath's original May 19, 2026 motion, "Implementing Los Angeles County's First Ethics Commission." It directs funding, recruitment and two ordinances: an interim ordinance launching the Commission and an ordinance placing a Charter amendment on the November 2026 ballot, as recommended by the Governance Reform Task Force (GRTF). - Notes that Measure G (2024) requires an independent Ethics Commission and Ethics Compliance Officer in 2026. - Directs departments to identify existing ethics-related positions and funding, and the Acting CEO to fund the first phase in the FY 2026-27 budget. - Directs County Counsel to draft an interim ordinance within 90 days and a Charter amendment ordinance for the November 2026 ballot. - Proposes that the Board Chair nominate one member, a role that would pass to the elected County Executive beginning January 1, 2029. ### Revised motion by Supervisor Horvath: Implementing Los Angeles County's First Ethics Commission (May 19, 2026) - Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors · decision record · published 2026-05-19 · stance: support - This is the revised version of Supervisor Horvath's May 19, 2026 Ethics Commission motion, reflecting feedback from the May 6 Operations Cluster meeting. The stored text has lost its strikeout formatting, so deleted and added wording appear together. It changes the nomination structure and sets deadlines for the interim ordinance, and it includes a timeline for that ordinance. - Reports feedback from GRTF members asking for a Task Force-nominated seat, and from the California Contract Cities Association, which was concerned that other countywide elected officials had no appointments. - Directs County Counsel to bring an interim ordinance to the June 30, 2026 agenda, consistent with GRTF best practices while complying with the current Charter. - The text includes proposed nomination language giving the Sheriff and District Attorney one nominee each and having the Commission nominate the remaining two members. Because strikeout was lost, it is unclear which version was final. - Interim ordinance timeline: first reading June 30, second reading July 7, effective August 6, nominees due September 20, Board approval deadline November 4, 2026. ### LA County's new ethics commission will serve as a corruption watchdog - LAist · news · published 2026-05-19 · stance: neutral - This is LAist's May 19, 2026 report that the Board established the County's first ethics commission and directed staff to prepare a Charter amendment for the November ballot. It describes the commission's composition, Supervisor Hahn's objection, and a planned 54-member ethics office. - The plan calls for a seven-member commission. The Board chair, assessor and Governance Reform Task Force each appoint one commissioner, and those three select the remaining four from applicants. - Supervisor Janice Hahn supported the motion but opposed the composition, saying too many members would be appointed by elected officials. - A 54-member ethics office would enforce county campaign, lobbying and ethics laws, and the commission would impose fines. - A correction notes an earlier version misstated the commission's composition based on incorrect information from a county official. ### LA County Establishes First-Ever Independent Ethics Commission (press release, May 19, 2026) - Office of Supervisor Lindsey P. Horvath · position statement · published 2026-05-19 · stance: support - This is Supervisor Lindsey Horvath's press release announcing the Board's unanimous May 19, 2026 approval of her amended motion to establish the County's first independent Ethics Commission and Office of Ethics Compliance, including preparation of a Charter amendment for the November 2026 ballot. - Horvath calls the action "a historic step toward stronger ethics, accountability, and public trust." - The motion funds the Commission in the FY 2026-27 budget, starts recruitment, calls for an interim ordinance, and prepares a Charter amendment to formalize the Commission's long-term independence. - Describes the approved appointment structure as one commissioner each from the Assessor, the Board Chair and the GRTF (until a County Executive is elected in 2028), with those three nominating the remaining four, and all appointees requiring Board approval. - Says LA County would be the third California county with an ethics commission, after San Francisco and Orange County. ### Voters passed Measure G. They accidentally repealed Measure J - Los Angeles Times · news · published 2025-07-10 · stance: neutral - This is a Los Angeles Times report (Rebecca Ellis, July 10, 2025) that the 2024 Measure G Charter overhaul inadvertently repealed Measure J, effective December 2028, because Measure J was never codified into the Charter. It is the background to Measure E's Measure J provisions. - County Counsel says a prior Executive Officer administration failed to place Measure J in the Charter after 2020, so Measure G's passage repealed it effective December 2028. - The error was discovered by Governance Reform Task Force member John Fasana. - Measure J requires 10% of locally generated unrestricted county money for social services such as housing, mental health and jail diversion, and bars spending it on the carceral system. - The article gives supervisors' differing reactions and those of advocates and the deputies' union. - Reference: Measure J background (County CEO) - Reference: Governance Reform Task Force - Reference: County Care First Community Investment program - Reference: LA Times guide to Charter Amendment E ### Measure J background - Los Angeles County Chief Executive Office · other · published 2020-11-17 · stance: not_applicable - This is a Los Angeles County Chief Executive Office page giving background on Measure J (2020), the community-investment and alternatives-to-incarceration set-aside that Measure E would carry into the restructured Charter. It does not mention Measure E. - Voters approved Measure J on November 3, 2020, dedicating no less than 10% of locally generated unrestricted funding to community investment and alternatives to incarceration. - On November 10, 2020 the Board adopted a revenue allocation process and created a 17-member Measure J Reimagine LA Advisory Committee. - Lists funding categories: youth development, workforce development, minority-owned small businesses, rental assistance, capital funding for housing, restorative justice, pretrial services, community health, and diversion and reentry. - Reference: Care First Community Investment (Measure J) - Reference: Measure J history ### From Measure J to Care First and Community Investment - LA County Justice, Care and Opportunities Department · other · published undated · stance: unknown - ### Supervisors to take up ethics proposal - Haynes Foundation (Robert Greene) · third party analysis · published undated · stance: unknown - ### Public correspondence to the Board on agenda item 62 (Ethics Commission / Measure J charter amendment), July 2026 - Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors (public comments) · other · published undated · stance: mixed - This is the public correspondence the Board received on Item 62 (the Ethics Commission Charter amendment, including Measure J continuation), compiled July 22, 2026. It contains individual comments in favor, many in a shared template, plus letters from the League of Women Voters of Los Angeles County, California Common Cause, and the Fiduciary Alliance for Los Angeles (FALA). All three organizations support the ethics reforms and raise concerns about specific drafting. - Individual commenters favor the item. Several use the same template urging the Board to "be accountable to voters of Measures G & J." - The League of Women Voters supports continuing Measure J, binding the County Executive, and barring a County Executive veto. It urges presenting the Ethics Commission and Measure J as separate ballot questions, and says the ballot wording should name Measure J. - California Common Cause (July 18) supports the Charter amendment and recommends a four-fifths (later seven-ninths) Board vote to reject Commission-nominated members, a required Board vote on Commission proposals, rounding the two-thirds veto threshold up, budget formula changes, written findings for "exigent circumstances," a standalone ballot measure, and a severability and future-operability clause. - FALA (July 19) credits improvements, including Commission control of the Ethics Compliance Officer. It objects that all seven inaugural seats trace back to elected officials' nominations and calls $250 per meeting token pay. It urges separating the ethics and Measure J provisions, and calls the County Executive veto exemption substantive. - Reference: Draft Charter amendment cited by Common Cause (July 14 version) ### https://lasentinel.net/?p=303933 - Los Angeles Sentinel · news · published undated · stance: unknown - ## Suggested use Ask me neutral questions about this subject using the material above. Distinguish what the sources say from your own background knowledge, cite the source titles you rely on, and say when information may be out of date given the dates shown.