The personalities that characterize neighborhood councils are as varied as the community challenges that face them. But when the councils were formed over seven years ago as part of the Los Angeles City Charter, they were envisioned as precisely this kind of participatory democracy where myriad points of view would conjoin. . . .

Some councils have been more successful than others at recruiting members that represent their diverse neighborhoods.

Mark Lewis, director of field operations for DONE, said the lack of income-range diversity on many councils is problematic. Unlike people with middle and higher incomes, working people and low-income residents don’t have as much disposable time for local involvement.

“It doesn’t necessarily mean they wouldn’t want to be more involved,” Lewis said. “But if you’re working two or more jobs, it makes it tougher.”

Also, community leaders haven’t yet developed an affinity for their councils because some come from homeowners groups with a single-issue focus.

“A culture hasn’t quite developed in which people have their first allegiance, so to speak, with their neighborhood-council system,” Lewis said. “Therein lies the challenge.”

Homeowners associations are comprised of property owners, but neighborhood councils are formed by stakeholders – broadly defined as anyone who rents, works, owns property or a business, or belongs to a religious institution within a council area. Because homeowner groups are superseded by city-certified neighborhood councils, those elected to councils from the narrower framework of homeowner associations might have trouble adjusting.

Some feel that insufficient board orientation is given to newly elected neighborhood council members, who receive information about laws that pertain to neighborhood councils – such as the Brown Act – but not guidance in handling power.

“It’s a legitimate criticism,” [Bong-Hwan] Kim [new general manager of the city's Department of Neighborhood Empowerment] agreed. . . .