Comments
PERSPECTIVE - Last summer, Angelenos citywide supported the Los Angeles City Controller, Kenneth Mejia’s August 20, 2025 Letter, directed to the LA City Charter Reform Commission. About 80 letters from taxpayers, professionals, members of labor unions, professors from local universities, and colleges including students submitted comments to the LA Council File. The group responded to the Controller’s call because, “the Controller’s Office has the Charter-mandated responsibility to be the City’s Chief Accountant, Auditor, and Paymaster overseeing over $35 Billion in taxpayer dollars distributed across more than 40 departments (including airports, harbor, and DWP)”, per the description in the letter.
“As one of three Citywide elected officials, the Controller is tasked with a critical oversight function, providing independent accountability and transparency across Los Angeles.”
However, the Controller’s letter states that his office has nowhere near the level of resources and tools (such as the authority to conduct performance audits) to carry out the Charter’s intention of providing proper oversight over the City’s funds and Angelenos’ tax dollars.
Kenneth Mejia further states in his letter that to fulfill his role as the City’s independent watchdog, his office presents the following Charter Reform recommendations:
1. Give the controller an independent budget
2. Designate the Controller as the City’s Chief Financial Officer
3. Require minimum qualifications for the Controller
4. Clarify the Controller’s audit authority including performance audits of All City Programs that are sourced from, or use City tax dollars (including those under elected offices)
5. Allow the Controller to hire outside counsel when necessary, and
6. Enshrine the Controller’s Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Function
Specifically, the Controller recommends amending Charter 263 as stated below:
o The Office of the Controller shall receive an annual appropriation from the Council in an amount not less than a fixed percentage of the General Fund for next fiscal year (Currently, Controller’s Office Operating Budget is 0.29% of the General Fund);
o Specify that the Controller’s expenses and budget requests are not subject to approval by any other city office or position when the Controller operates within its budget; and
o Specify that the Controller is not subject to hiring freezes when it operates within its budget.
“Before the 2008 Great Recession, the Controller’s Office had 185 authorized regular positions. Today that number is 142. Since then, the number of departments, employees, programs, payments, and financial transactions have only increased,” Mejia wrote. “Last fiscal year (FY2025), our already understaffed Office had 27 positions cut (15% of our positions).”
Moreover, the Controller states that his office only has two accountants to review and approve all Citywide vendor payments. Also. Office has seven auditors for the entire City. Each audit team consists of two to three auditors and can take up to a year to complete one audit.
In order to carry out the Controller’s-mandated audits for every department on a regular cycle, Office would need 23 additional auditors, Mejia wrote. In addition, the Office has five fraud, waste, and abuse investigators for the entire City. Our Office received over 700 Fraud-Waste-Abuse Claims last year, but had to refer a majority of them back to their departments to investigate for themselves due to our shortage of investigators. “In order to effectively and proactively address fraud, waste, and abuse, we would need 15 additional investigators,” wrote Mejia.
According to Mejia, due to chronic understaffing, his office and the City at large have faced severe impacts resulting in fiscal liabilities, such as:
o Delays in payments to vendors and employees
o Lawsuits and labor grievances due to delays in fixing payroll issues and implementing labor contract provisions
o Delays in closing the books at year-end and implementing the City’s budget
o Delays in effectuating Council instructions for appropriating funds including quarterly instructions from Financial Status Reports
o Elimination of the City’s Annual Preliminary Financial Report
o Incurring penalties for noncompliance with tax laws
o Inability to train and assist Citywide accountants
o Inability to investigate hundreds of Fraud, Waste, and Abuse claims, as well as the
o Inability to audit and provide reliable oversight over all City payments, departments, and programs as mandated by the Charter
Lastly, charterreform.lacontroller.app, lists six charter reform recommendations that will ensure that the Controller can fulfill his role as the City’s independent watchdog. The first recommendation listed is to give the controller an independent budget of no less than 0.42% of the City’s General Fund. “If the Controller’s watchdog functions include watching over spending by the Mayor and City Council and oversight over departments and programs then the Mayor and City Council should not be the ones who decide on the Controllers Budget, as in many other major cities.”
(Connie Acosta is writing as an individual, though she is a board member of the Los Angeles City Neighborhood Council System, Treasurer of a Neighborhood Council, and a board member of the Neighborhood Council Budget Advocates.)
