2026 CANDIDATE SURVEY
Nithya Raman
Candidate for Los Angeles City Mayor
To help foster greater discussion about reforming City Hall, we asked City of LA candidates to participate in a six question survey. Half of the questions seek general feedback, and the rest are issue specific.
Please note survey responses, candidate information, and website links are provided for informational/educational purposes only. Fair Rep LA is presenting these responses as submitted without edit, evaluation, or commentary. Fair Rep LA does not endorse, support, or oppose candidates or their responses in any way.
Survey Info:
-
Answers: Respondents were told that questions could be answered in 1-2 sentences, and that while additional context was welcome, the form had a 1,250 character limit for each question (approximately 200 words).
-
Resource Document: Additional background information was provided via a resource document.
-
Participation: Surveys were sent to all City of LA candidates qualified to appear on the ballot. This is a very busy time for candidates, so we appreciate everyone who made time to respond. Please avoid reading too much into a candidate’s lack of participation. We respect the limited bandwidth campaigns have, and it's possible that our request(s) may have been lost in their inbox.
-
Background: The City of Los Angeles is undergoing the first comprehensive review of our city’s governance structure in 27 years. The Charter Reform Commission recently transmitted a report containing over 60 recommendations to the City Council, who will soon be deciding what will be sent to the November ballot for potential approval by voters.
I most strongly support the Charter Reform Commission’s recommendations that strengthen representation at City Hall, reduce corruption, and improve infrastructure planning and investment.
First, I strongly support expanding the City Council from 15 to 25 districts. Los Angeles is one of the most underrepresented major cities in America. Smaller districts would make local government more accessible, improve constituent services, and give communities that are currently politically diluted a stronger voice in City Hall.
Second, I support the changes that de-politicize City Hall decision-making. Angelenos have seen repeated corruption scandals undermine trust in our local government. Strengthening the Independent Redistricting Commission and increasing transparency in land use rulings are essential reforms to ensure key decisions are driven by communities and fairness, not political deals.
Third, I strongly support bolstering our City’s approach to infrastructure and long-term investments. This includes increasing the Charter’s budget appropriation for Recreation and Parks, codifying a Capital Improvement Program, and empowering the Director of Public Works to guarantee real leadership and service delivery.
While I support many of the Charter Reform Commission’s goals, I have concerns about reforms that could unintentionally weaken accountability or create structural changes without clear implementation plans.
Reforms that centralize too much power without sufficient checks and balances and efforts to consolidate authority in the Mayor’s office or reduce the independence of oversight bodies must be approached carefully. Los Angeles already struggles with public trust, and residents need confidence that reforms increase accountability.
Reforms not paired with adequate resources or operational planning, and structural changes only on paper that do not improve city services are concerns. I support expanding the City Council, but more seats alone will not solve governance challenges; department heads already describe answering to 16 bosses. Expansion should be paired with broader governance reforms that clarify roles, improve accountability, and make city government function more effectively.
Aside from this, the Charter Reform Commission advanced certain proposals that could be effectuated as an ordinance rather than as a Charter amendment. I strongly support exploring this pathway wherever possible to allow for future flexibility.
Yes, I believe the structure of our civil service system is important to consider for further reform. Designed for a very different era, the civil service system too often limits flexibility, slows implementation, and makes it unnecessarily difficult to recruit, retain, and deploy the talent needed to run a complex modern city. I support advancing reforms that increase the Charter’s limits on exempt positions and modernize the civil service system to improve hiring, recruitment, and retention for communities currently underrepresented in public sector jobs, including Black and Brown workers.
Yes, I support increasing the Los Angeles City Council from 15 to 25 districts, paired with strong independent redistricting and ethics reforms. Today, each councilmember represents roughly 265,000 residents—one of the highest representation ratios among major U.S. cities. Expanding to 25 districts would make local government more accessible and responsive.
The current structure was created in 1925, when Los Angeles had fewer than 600,000 residents. Today, the city has nearly 4 million people, far more diverse, and significantly more complex. Smaller districts would give communities a more realistic opportunity to elect representatives rooted in local concerns.
Expansion could also improve accountability. Smaller districts would make it easier for residents, businesses, and community groups to engage directly with elected officials. Timing matters, and a 2032 implementation allows time for public education and planning. I am also interested in alternative governance models, including the hybrid approach proposed by the Los Angeles Governance Reform Project, which combines district and regional representation. Public trust will be essential—this reform must deliver a more responsive government, not simply more bureaucracy.
I am open to supporting ranked-choice voting because our election system should make participation easier, reduce barriers to voting, and ensure more Angelenos feel their voices matter. A single November election could increase turnout and avoid the cost and low participation that often accompany separate runoff elections.
That said, any reform of this scale must be implemented thoughtfully. My biggest concern is execution. For ranked-choice voting to build public trust, the City and LAUSD would need a robust voter education campaign well in advance of 2032, including strong language access, clear ballot design, and culturally competent outreach to communities that already face barriers to participation, including young voters, immigrant communities, and infrequent voters. We must also make the necessary investments to the voting system itself, to properly run ranked-choice voting.
Election reform should not make voting feel more complicated or less accessible. If done well, this could create a system that is more representative, more efficient, and easier for working people to engage in. But success will depend less on the concept itself than on whether implementation is clear, inclusive, and well-resourced.
I am open to supporting this recommendation because our democracy should be more accessible, representative, and reflective of the people affected by local government decisions. Sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds are directly impacted by decisions about schools, transportation, public safety, parks, and neighborhood services, and many are already civically engaged in meaningful ways. Expanding participation in local elections could help foster lifelong civic engagement.
That said, implementation matters. Any reform should be paired with robust voter education, strong language access, and outreach through schools, community organizations, and trusted local institutions so young voters understand how to participate and why local elections matter.
My primary concern is equitable implementation. The goal should not simply be expanding eligibility on paper, but ensuring new voters can participate meaningfully and confidently. A phased approach, such as beginning with LAUSD School Board elections, also merits consideration. Other jurisdictions have taken similar steps in local elections, offering lessons Los Angeles should learn from to implement any reform thoughtfully.