CITY HALL - Los Angeles has one mayor, one City Hall, one city budget, one police department and, supposedly, one government. So why does Los Angeles increasingly feel like 15 separate cities run by 15 mini mayors?
The recent City Council vote involving Municipal Code Section 41.18 in Council District 13 exposed a problem far bigger than one homelessness ordinance. The Council voted to rescind specific 41.18 restrictions at designated locations in CD13. The action did not repeal 41.18 citywide, but it highlighted something deeply troubling about how Los Angeles governs itself.
Councilmembers often defer to the wishes of the member representing a particular district. It is commonly known as councilmanic courtesy. But when that courtesy begins determining how major public policies are applied across Los Angeles, it raises a fundamental question: Are we governing one city or 15 political fiefdoms?
There are legitimate reasons for councilmembers to have substantial influence over their districts. Los Angeles is enormous and diverse. The needs of Hollywood are not identical to those of San Pedro, the Westside, South Los Angeles, or the San Fernando Valley. Local representation matters.
But there is a major difference between representing neighborhoods and allowing separate governing philosophies to develop across the city. Homelessness does not stop at a council district boundary. Neither do crime, traffic, illegal dumping, deteriorating infrastructure, or economic decline. Yet Los Angeles increasingly approaches these problems as though political boundaries somehow change reality.
One councilmember may favor stronger enforcement. Another may oppose it. One district may remove restrictions while another preserves them. Cross a street into another council district and the political philosophy governing the same city can suddenly change. That is not a citywide strategy. It is government by ZIP code.
There is, of course, a legitimate policy debate over 41.18. Supporters argue that restrictions are necessary to keep sidewalks, schools, and other sensitive public spaces accessible. Critics argue that repeatedly moving unhoused people does not solve homelessness and can undermine outreach and placement into housing.
Both arguments deserve consideration. But the larger question is what Los Angeles intends its citywide policy to be. If 41.18 is bad policy, reform it or repeal it citywide. If it is good policy, defend it citywide. If parts of it are ineffective, rewrite them. But stop pretending Los Angeles has a unified strategy when major policies can effectively change from district to district.
LOS ANGELES DOES NOT NEED 15 MINI-MAYORS
This brings us to the uncomfortable reality of Los Angeles politics. We spend enormous amounts of money, attention and political energy electing a mayor. Mayoral candidates campaign across the entire city promising solutions to homelessness, crime, housing, transportation, infrastructure, and economic development. They tell voters they have a vision for Los Angeles.
But how meaningful is a citywide vision when 15 councilmembers can effectively establish different priorities within their own political territories? At some point, councilmanic courtesy stops looking like respect for local representation and starts looking like 15 mini mayors protecting 15 mini cities.
Councilmembers are elected by districts, but they sit on the Los Angeles City Council. Their decisions can affect taxpayers, businesses, and residents throughout Los Angeles. They have a responsibility to their districts, but they also have a responsibility to the city as a whole.
Los Angeles residents deserve to know what their government actually stands for. What is the citywide policy on homelessness? What is the standard for keeping sidewalks accessible? What is the strategy for public safety? What is the plan for deteriorating streets, illegal dumping, and failing infrastructure?
Too often, the answer seems to depend upon which council district you happen to be standing in. That is how public confidence in government collapses. Residents see billions of dollars spent while basic problems remain unresolved. They see encampments disappear from one block only to appear somewhere else. They see different enforcement priorities in different neighborhoods and different political standards depending upon who represents the district.
Los Angeles does not suffer from a shortage of government. It suffers from a shortage of coherent government.
IN 2028, THE WORLD WILL SEE ONE LOS ANGELES
This dysfunction would be troubling at any time. With the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games approaching, it becomes impossible to ignore.
In less than two years, Los Angeles will welcome visitors from around the world. Those visitors will not know where Council District 3 ends and Council District 4 begins. They will not know which councilmember controls which neighborhood, and they will not care which office supported or opposed a particular homelessness policy.
They will see Los Angeles. They will see our streets, ride our transportation system, encounter our homelessness crisis, and experience our public spaces, infrastructure, neighborhoods, and commercial corridors.
If they see dirty streets, deteriorating infrastructure, sprawling encampments or government dysfunction, Los Angeles will not be able to explain those conditions away by pointing to council district boundaries. The world will not see 15 districts. It will see one city.
That is why this debate is ultimately much bigger than 41.18. It is about whether Los Angeles still possesses the ability to govern itself as one city.
Councilmembers should fight for their neighborhoods. They should understand their communities and challenge City Hall when citywide policies fail their constituents. But when the problems are citywide, the solutions must ultimately be citywide as well.
Los Angeles cannot solve homelessness with 15 competing strategies. It cannot restore public safety with 15 different standards. It cannot rebuild infrastructure through 15 separate political agendas. And it cannot prepare for the world's biggest sporting stage while behaving like a federation of independent council districts.
If every district gets its own rules, its own enforcement philosophy, and its own definition of acceptable conditions, then Los Angeles should stop pretending it has a unified government.
Los Angeles does not need 15 mini mayors. It needs 15 councilmembers willing to represent their districts while accepting responsibility for the entire city.
One city. One government. One standard of accountability. One vision.
In 2028, the world will not see 15 council districts. It will see Los Angeles. And if City Hall cannot govern Los Angeles as one city, the world will see that too.
(Jay Handal is a veteran community advocate and longtime CityWatch contributor who plays a central role in holding Los Angeles City Hall accountable. He serves as treasurer of the West LA–Sawtelle Neighborhood Council. With decades of grassroots organizing and civic leadership, Jay is a relentless voice for transparency, fiscal reform, and empowering neighborhoods to challenge waste, mismanagement, and backroom decision-making at City Hall.)
(Mihran Kalaydjian is a seasoned public affairs and government relations professional with more than twenty years of experience in legislative affairs, public policy, community relations, and strategic communications. A respected civic leader and education advocate, he has spearheaded numerous academic and community initiatives, shaping dialogue and driving reform in local and regional political forums. His career reflects a steadfast commitment to transparency, accountability, and public service across Los Angeles and beyond.)
