Consider giving non-citizens the right to vote in LA elections heading into the Nov. 3 election.

The Los Angeles City Council on Wednesday moved forward with a number of potential revisions to the city’s charter, including taking the first step to give non-citizens the right to vote in city elections.

The non-resident ballot measure was part of a package of proposed city charter changes to be put before voters on the Nov. 3 ballot. The package also includes a measure that would allow the council to impose policy on the Los Angeles Police Department.

A motion to allow non-citizens to vote was proposed by Council Member Hugo Soto-Martínez and approved by a 10-5 vote.

“I believe it is a simple principle that we should guide: If you live in the city, contribute to the city, raise your family in the city and are affected by the decisions made in the city, you deserve to have a voice in the city,” said Soto-Martínez.

At the same time, the majority of the council set aside other measures recommended by the Charter Reform Commission, including the expansion of the City Council from 15 to 25 seats and moving to selective voting, where voters list candidates in order.

“I would have liked to see a comprehensive charter review. But that’s where we are,” Council Member Tim McOsker said in an interview Wednesday evening.

Still, McOsker said important steps have been taken.

Under the council’s action on Wednesday, city attorneys will write ballot measures related to a number of other topics – establishing a director of public works, switching to a two-year budget cycle (instead of annual), establishing a capital infrastructure plan, increasing fines for behavioral violations and other changes.

The council will still need to cast another vote for the measures to appear on the ballot.

What has yet to be decided is how the proposals will be put to the vote. The city attorney’s office submitted a proposal on Tuesday to dissolve the charter with several amendments.

If approved by voters this fall, the non-resident voting system would allow the council to pass legislation allowing non-residents of Los Angeles to vote in citywide and Los Angeles Unified school board elections. Council members McOsker, Bob Blumenfield, John Lee, Adrin Nazarian and Monica Rodriguez voted no.

Rodriguez said the city needs more information about whether Los Angeles County, which oversees city elections, will be able to handle the change. He also questioned whether, during the crackdown on immigration, the city would end up putting non-citizens at greater risk by adding them to the voter database.

“Given the power we currently have, what we are creating is a list of people who are likely to be targeted.” [of] the other could be the management of the organization,” he said.

Regarding police oversight, the council voted 10 to 5 to put a measure before voters that would allow the council to set policy for the Police Department. Currently, the five-member Board of Police Commissioners, appointed by the mayor, has that job.

Soto-Martínez said a move like this would have given the council more power over the police during last year’s immigration crackdown. The council would already be able to eliminate the stops if it had the authority to set its own goals, he said.

“If the council had the power to do this, we would have made great changes in this city,” Soto-Martínez said earlier this week at a meeting of the House Rules, Elections and Intergovernmental Relations Committee.

Some members of the council stressed caution about this proposed change.

“I think the city should be careful to evaluate whether this proposal solves the problem presented or changes the mandate,” Lee said during the rules committee meeting. “This may inadvertently politicize policy decisions and create instability as policy priorities change with each election cycle.”

The city’s police union said Wednesday the city failed to meet and negotiate with them on any of the LAPD’s proposals, as required under the bargaining process. The union asked the council to stop the consideration of amendments to the charter affecting its members.

The council also supported the proposal to double the amount of money set aside for the Department of Recreation and Parks, which has been struggling for years due to staff reductions and aging.

Under the city charter, the agency receives a small share equal to 0.0325% of the assessed value of all property assessed for taxes within the city limits. The council voted 14 to 1 to write a constitutional amendment doubling that quota.

The increase was sought by the parks advocacy group, which says the agency has never recovered from cuts that began during the recession. A council committee recommended a small fee increase earlier this week, saying the city would not be able to afford such a large fee over the course of four years.

In the compromise, Rodriguez forced that the share of the parks be doubled, to 0.065% but for a period of 10 years, instead of the four that were considered before. Parks advocacy organizations welcomed the deal, saying it would make it easier to access parks, recreation areas and senior centers.

“Children, seniors and families across LA will get what they need and deserve,” said Sarah K. Friedman, special programs manager for the advocacy group Trust for Public Land.

Blumenfield cast the lone dissenting vote, warning his colleagues that the proposal would tie the hands of future councils, making it more difficult for them to balance budgets in tough financial times.

“The more things we combine, the more difficult it becomes [of balancing the budget] it will be for all of you,” said Blumenfield.

The Department of Recreation and Parks received an estimated appropriation of $292 million this year, out of a budget of $359 million. On Wednesday, the council asked the budget committee to report on the amount of money that will be released as a result of Rodriguez’s proposal.

The last time the city undertook a major charter revision was in 1999, during an effort by San Fernando Valley community leaders to secede from Los Angeles.

For some advocacy groups, this latest effort came as a major disappointment. Some of the long-sought reforms, such as council expansion and selective voting, were recommended by the Charter Reform Commission. The council’s five-member rules committee presented those ideas, saying they needed further study.

Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson said it would be better for the city to “do it right rather than fast” when changing the charter. He suggested that a committee be established to evaluate the results of adding ten council seats.

“The great council makes the mayor more powerful than the mayor may have now,” he said earlier this week. “In all cities with a large council, the mayor has more power than we have in LA today.”

Mike Bonin, a former councilman who is now executive director of the Pat Brown Institute at Cal State LA, said he hoped that after four years, the City Council would approve at least one major change, such as council expansion.

“It’s a big punt for 2026,” he said. “It’s a poor result for a lot of effort.”

The call for a grand council was renewed four years ago after the leak of secretly recorded conversations between three council members and a labor leader that contained racist and derogatory remarks. An ad hoc reform committee spent several months debating the issue, then referred it to the 13-member Charter Review Commission.

The commission passed a proposal to add 10 council members, a move that would reduce the size of each council district to an estimated 159,000 residents from 265,000.

The council’s decision to halt so many changes will fuel public apathy and mistrust, said Ross Weistroffer, organizer of the Fair Rep LA Coalition, a group of nonprofits seeking good government and fair representation.

“We don’t need to learn more,” he told the council. “We need more courage from our elected officials.”