Beverly Hills Approves Vote Of No Confidence Against Gascon

BEVERLY HILLS, CA — The Beverly Hills City Council approved 3-2 Tuesday a vote of no confidence against L.A. District Attorney George Gascon. The resolution argued that Gascon’s controversial directives "may be viewed as placing the safety of the general public at risk."

“I asked Mayor Friedman to put this on the agenda because I thought this was urgent - probably among the most urgent issues we need to face,” said Councilmember Lili Bosse. “When there’s no consequence to crime, then we are living in the Wild, Wild West. People move to Beverly Hills because of safety...we are living in a time when our residents and our businesses don’t feel safe, and if we don’t act now, we could be part of the reason Beverly Hills could fail.”

Bosse and Friedman took particular issue with three directives issued by Gascon in December that would:

• Eliminate cash bail for misdemeanors and non-violent felonies
• Decline or dismiss a number of misdemeanor charges before arraignment, including trespassing, public intoxication, driving on a suspended license, loitering, resisting arrest, and more
• Eliminate enhancements that increase prison terms like the Three Strikes Law, bail violations, and firearm allegations to pending litigation for certain crimes

The district attorney, who is facing a growing recall effort, has defended these directives, saying that they are what he campaigned to do, and that his changes are “based on data and science that will enhance the safety of our community while reducing racial disparities and misuse of incarceration. Gascon has also cited research suggesting that excessive sentences exacerbate recidivism, which in turn leads to more crime.

Those views were shared by the 19 members of the public who voiced opposition to the resolution. According to a summary prepared by the city, callers opposed to the resolution said that Gascon was fulfilling transparent campaign promises endorsed by the majority of LA County voters, that “tough on crime” policies have not deterred crime, and that there is also no evidence that Gascson’s policies have led to any increases in crime.

But those comments were dwarfed by the 116 comments, as of Tuesday, in support of the resolution. According to a summary of city comments, Gascon’s policies allow criminals to get away with harmful crimes classified as misdemeanors, contradict the laws he was elected to enforce, and are indeed increasing crime and making Beverly Hillers feel less safe in their own city.

Councilmember John Mirisch pointed to conflicting data on the effects of the directives as one of the reasons he voted against the resolution. “We hear that Gascon’s policies are not causing crime, others say that it is, we really need to get into the down and dirty about the scientific data and do an analysis of that,” he said. “We can’t just fly by the seat of our pants and our guts.”

Mirisch also said that while he disagrees with many of Gascon’s directives, he worries that the resolution would “politicize” the Council and undermine its credibility. “I don’t think personalizing it is the right solution - I don’t think it’s democratic,” he said.

Vice Mayor Robert Wunderlich, the other vote against the resolution, also said that he felt the Council should vote against Gascon’s policies, rather than Gascon himself. “Safety of course is the prime responsibility of the City Council, and I absolutely support that, but we can achieve that safety by addressing the policies we oppose and the policies we support, rather than an individual,” he said, also noting that he disapproved of most of Gascon’s directives and did not vote for him in November.

“If it was about the policies, I would have voted yes,” he said.

Wunderlich also noted that the resolution only cited three of Gascon’s directives, while asking him to rescind all of them. Wunderlich said he would need to see further analysis of all of Gascon’s directives before he could vote in favor of making such a demand.

Friedman argued that the resolution should be against Gascon himself because he was the one issuing the directives. “While the directives were the items that were objectionable, the common thread is the fact that one individual is the one who issued them,” he said. “The laws DA Gascon is ignoring were also democratically passed, but they are being ignored by a democratically elected official.” Friedman joined other councilmembers in suggesting appointing a city prosecutor, but said it was “repugnant” that the city might have to spend taxpayer money to create another bureaucracy because the current DA is “not doing his job.”

Councilmember Julian Gold joined Mirisch and Friedman in acknowledging wide-ranging inequities in the criminal justice system, but said he would vote in favor of it because he felt Gascon’s policies threaten public safety and he shows no signs of changing them. “While there are clear needs within the criminal justice for reform...we know that the answer to the question is not, we’re gonna put the criminals back on the street,” he said. “We debated whether it’s just his policies or it’s the person. I think this district attorney has said both through his campaign and after he was elected through his actions that he will continue to do these sorts of things in order to achieve the goals that he has elucidated. Candidly, I don’t think that they are in our residents’ best interests, and he doesn’t seem to be willing to negotiate them.”

The resolution demands that Gascon rescind all his special directives and “uphold the laws of the state.” Earlier this month, the city of Santa Clarita approved a similar vote of no confidence in Gascon.

Related coverage:

Beverly Hills May File No-Confidence Resolution Against Gascon | Beverly Hills, CA Patch